Subj:	TRAVELLER digest 351
Date:	95-07-18 21:40:22 EDT
From:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com

From:	traveller@mpgn.com
Sender:	traveller@mpgn.com
Reply-to:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com (Multiple recipients of list)
			    TRAVELLER Digest 351

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: Walkers
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
  2) weapon damage
	by rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)
  3) Re: Microjumps (Td#350)
	by Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
  4) Re: Walkers
	by "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
  5) Re: How Nasty Nukes Are (Td#350)
	by Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
  6) Jump Fuel Use Formula
	by lhowie@dilbert.lrmi.com (Les Howie)
  7) Help with RICE statistics, please?
	by Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 20:12:22 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Walkers
Message-ID: <49@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

:From the message dated Monday 17, July 1995 :

> >As suggested, reducing weight  will, if anything, slow the walker
> >down. This is because the walker can only  move its legs so fast
> >before the foot slips, this maximum speed is determined by  the amount
> >of friction with the ground. The more weight, the more friction, so  the
> >higher speed you can reach. 
> 
>    Would this mean then, that the more legs you have, the slower you
> go?  Or the opposite?  I don't think it would matter as long as the
> transmissions were equally efficient.
> 
More legs would mean that you had more contact with the ground, so more 
friction, so you can go faster (it'd be more stable too). The less you make
the 
thing weigh, the more ground contact you need, roughly speaking for constant 
sized legs, N * W = k  where N=number of legs, W=weight and k=a constant for
a 
given speed. The only reason why you can't have millions of legs and an
almost 
weightless robot is the cost and size of all those legs. Ideally, you would
only 
run contra grav when jumping, the rest of the time you may as well have all
the 
ground pressure you can get.
> >Apart from jumping, contra grav would have one  other use, it would
> >make it easier to build a stable structure for the walker,  by reducing
> >stress on the legs from the weight of the upper body.
> 
>    But how would you incorporate that fact into the design rules?  My
> suggestion would be that transmissions, etc. could be smaller and
> lighter on a contra grav equipped walker.
> 

I'd go with this, but there would be a point of compromise between structural

weight savings with contra grav, and the larger transmission you would need
to 
maintain enough friction to go fast. You could probably save 10-30% on 
transmission weight for a contra grav walker. 

> 
>    The more robotic looking mechs in Battletech are able to move so well
> because they incorporate a neural interface (as someone else pointed
> out).  They are to a degree aesthetically pleasing--I object to them
> because there are more efficient, cost effective ways to arm a walker.

If you strapped really heavy weights to the end of someones limbs their
balance 
would be thrown off pretty badly, you'd need some major hydralics to give
robot 
limbs a similar response to human limbs, but I suppose by TL12 that's not
such a 
problem.

> 
>    The Star Wars AT-ST makes a better model IMHO.  Though it has a
> rather high profile, it would nevertheless be excellent for use in areas
> where it could take advantage of cover and concealment (such as
> the deep woods, jungles, and urban areas.  I would of course paint it
> *anything* other than white (I guess the GALACTIC EMPIRE felt like they
> didn't need to worry such trivial matters as camouflage).  The people 
> who make Battletech miniatures make less robotic looking walkers in
> addition to the high tech samurai types.  These also might serve as
> design inspirations.
> 
I remember a game called VGA planets where the federation (Star Trek clones),

who painted their ships white got a bonus in combat because the enemy thought

that anyone who would do that must be extremely confident of themselves, or
have 
some sort of secret weapon :)
The AT-ST wasn't just a scout walker though, it was a terror weapon, and as
such 
you'd want the people you are trying to scare to notice you. After all, an
Ewok 
in a forest clearing doesn't do too well against an AT-ST even if it does see

it. 
> 
> --Harold
> 
> 

-- 
Brendan 


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 Jul 95 21:57:56 EDT
From: rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: weapon damage
Message-ID: <9507180157.AA02591@dallas.med.unc.edu>


I am a new Traveller TNE GM and I was helping my new players pick
equipment.  When we got to weapons, it started looking like none of them
were very good, except heavy weapons.  Almost all pistols do 1d6 damage,
which means that it takes a half dozen maximum damage shots to the chest
to hurt the average person.  At least that is the way that my
inexperienced self reads it.  Am I missing something important?

Rick


------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 12:54:23 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Microjumps (Td#350)
Message-ID: <9507181654.AA04263@qrc.com>

> lhowie@dilbert.lrmi.com (Les Howie) writes:
> > While greasing up my ship design spreadsheet, I ran some numbers on fuel
> > consumption for sub-parsec jumps, and got some very interesting results.
> > For example, for a 1000 D-Ton Jump 4 ship, the fuel consumed per light
> > second is only .00085 litres.

This is _much_ too low, and seriously disrupts the way that in-system
travel works.  It is reasonable to assume that there is some minimum
amount of energy required to initiate a jump of any distance, and a
corresponding minimum amount of jump fuel required.

"Upton, Django" <DUpton@vtrnntov.telecom.com.au> wrote:
> I thought that the jump drive fuel requirements followed the following:
> fuel = TL factor x mass of ship x ( jump Number +1 )
> This being the case a micro-jump ( jump 0 ) would require half the fuel a 
> jump 1 would no matter what the distance is within the system.
> This would be the case because much of the fuel is used to create the hole 
> in spacetime as opposed to travelling through the hole.

Back when BL and FF&S were still being written, members of the GDW-Beta list
(myself included) suggested to GDW that microjumps be made official, with
exactly the parameters suggested (fuel consumption equal to half that of a
Jump-1 for the same drive and ship).

For one reason or another, microjump rules were not included in T:TNE, BL,
or FF&S - I assume because GDW did not wish microjumps to officially exist
in the New Era Traveller universe.  As a VARIANT, I recommend allowing
microjumps, with the fuel consumption as detailed by Django above.

Note that in Classic Traveller, microjumps are part of the established
background history, although rules for conducting them were never provided.
Fuel consumption equal to half of a jump-1 is probably also reasonable,
however.

wildstar@quark.qrc.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   "A shining New Era is tiptoeing nearer
..."
                                                "... and where do we
feature?"

------------------------------

Date:          Tue, 18 Jul 1995 10:39:50 MST7
From: "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Walkers
Message-ID: <2ADD6FD7E86@tonic.pharm.Arizona.EDU>

Forgive my ignorance, but lots of people have referred to the 'Star 
Wars AT-ST' walker.  I remember two different ones from the 
movies...the big four legged ones, and a much smaller, two legged 
one.  Which are you referring to or are these what you're talking 
about at all?



Bruce Johnson
Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
The University of Arizona
johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu 


As if this place HAD any opinions...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 13:37:40 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: How Nasty Nukes Are (Td#350)
Message-ID: <9507181737.AA04752@qrc.com>

lhowie@dilbert.lrmi.com (Les Howie) asks:
> > (( useful tables omittedd ))

One more Nifty Thing.  The values in the tables I gave previously can be
adjusted for different sized nukes.  The general formula is:

	Multiplier = sqrt(Desired Yield / Table Yield)

In other words, if you want values for a 20KT warhead, multiply the 10KT
penetration, damage value, and area hits by sqrt(20/10), or 1.4142.
Here's a table to help you out; instead of saying "* .333333",
I've given it as "/ 3", indicating division by three.

Yeild    Table and Mult
  2.5KT  10KT / 2
 40KT    10KT * 2
 90KT    10KT * 3
111KT    1MT / 3
250KT    1MT / 2
  4MT    1MT * 2
  9MT    1MT * 3
 11MT    100MT / 3
 25MT    100MT / 2

Round all fractions to the nearest (in other words .5 and above rounds up,
less than .5 rounds down).  The only exceptions are that penetrations less
than 2 round down to one, and penetrations or damage values less than one
indicate no effect.  Area hits work the same way as long as you are working
with major hits; less than 1 major hit (but at least a half of a major hit)
becoems two minor hits; less than half a major hit (or half of two minor
hits) becomes one minor hit.

> These are excellent rules, and I will use them.  The only thing needed for
> space combat use now is a set of rules for getting a missile inside this
> sort of range.

I think I've posted rules for that before.  :-)  Check the back issues of
TML, or use the following quick summary:

To qualify for a "short range" attack, a missile must:
  1) end it's flight in the same hex as it's target
  2) have remaining maneuver G's to match the target's evasion G's
  3) survive any point-defense fire

Roll a normal missile "to-hit" roll, with the following diff mods:

"Impact" = 3 levels harder
"Near"   = 2 levels harder
"Far"    = 1 level harder

MFDs can be used to offset those difficulty mods.  Once a hit is acheived,
roll 1d6 on one of the following tables to determine the exact distance from
the explosion to the target vessel.  Apply a -1 DM to this roll if the
target ship did not evade at all.

	Impact 		Near 		Far 
Die	Distance	Distance	Distance
0	0		10		 100
1	0		10		 250
2	1		25		 500
3	1		25		 500
4	2		50		 500
5	2		50		1000
6	5		100		2000

> question: how should armour protect against the "rad" hit?

Not at all; invest in radiation-hardened electronics and computers if you
want to survive radiation hits (ie: "fib" fiber-optic computers).

wildstar@quark.qrc.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   "A shining New Era is tiptoeing nearer
..."
                                                "... and where do we
feature?"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 15:25:51 -0300
From: lhowie@dilbert.lrmi.com (Les Howie)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Jump Fuel Use Formula
Message-ID: <9507181833.AA25231@lrmi.com>

"Upton, Django" <DUpton@vtrnntov.telecom.com.au> wrote
>I thought that the jump drive fuel requirements followed the following:
>fuel = TL factor x mass of ship x ( jump Number +1 )
>This being the case a micro-jump ( jump 0 ) would require half the fuel a 
>jump 1 would no matter what the distance is within the system.
>This would be the case because much of the fuel is used to create the hole 
>in spacetime as opposed to travelling through the hole.
>

Actually, I can't find the *%*&#@} fuel use formula in the main TNE book (if
anyone has a page reference, please let me know. The couldn't have left it
out! Could they?)  FF&S  (p42) gives

Fpc = (Vjd *5) / Jmax

where Fpc is Volume of Fuel required for 1 parsec jump
      Vjd is Volume of the jump drive
      Jmax is maximum jump number of the ship

nothing states that the number of parsecs jumped must be an integer.  The
formula for calculating the percentage of a ship allocated to jump drive for
a given Jmax is very like the one you quote.

Les Howie
Senior Software Developer
Atlantic LRMI


------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 12:25:11 -0700
From: Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Help with RICE statistics, please?
Message-ID: <00c0ab30@MailXFER.DMCWAVE.COM>

     Can anyone tell me what the second line of stats represents from the 
     RICE submissions?
     
     Observe the following from Alvin Plummera's Menorb submission:
     
     Menorb (Regina: Spinward Marches/1803)
     C652998-8   Hi Po    310  Re   M5II
     C7D-6 A10-9YA0-38 Re3
     g=.72, day=1d 5:06:00.51, year = 174,506d 9:10:07.38/143,922d 
     2:07:37.37
     atmo= .66, natural weather
     temp= +31 (5/lat +45 to -4) (season +11 to -44, 79 deg lat)
     daily temp range 53.5
     Agricultual, Radioactives, Compounds; Agroproducts, Non-Metals; 
     Consumables,
          Record, Documents
     Conservative/Enterprising, Competitive/Neutral, Discordant/Aloof
     Legal 8-A8CA8    Tech  86-876A8-8674-D8-E
     
     
     My question is, what does "C7D-6 A10-9YA0-38 Re3" represent?  I can't 
     seem to find it anywhere in the World Builder's Handbook.  I'm 
     preparing a RICE paper on Rhylanor and would like to emulate the 
     established format as much as possible.
     
     Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance.
     
     --Chris

------------------------------

End of TRAVELLER Digest 351
***************************


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Tue Jul 18 21:39:32 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by mail03.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA062947972; Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:39:32 -0400
Return-Path: <traveller@mpgn.com>
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ambassador.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9)
with SMTP id VAA06001; Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:35:20 -0400
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:35:20 -0400
Message-Id: <199507190135.VAA06001@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>
Errors-To: traveller-request@mpgn.com
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Originator: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: traveller@mpgn.com
Precedence: bulk
From: traveller@mpgn.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@mpgn.com>
Subject: TRAVELLER digest 351
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List

