Traveller-digest     Thursday, November 28 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 702



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Copyright Violation
Re: hi-tech
Re: Imperium Games Followup
CORE web site
Re: Alien Builder's Charts v1.1 ( not so Long anymore)
Re: hi-tech
CORE Web Page
Dragons! (was: Uplift-flyers)
Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #701
RE: zero point energy fluctuations?
Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #701
Re: senior subordinates
Re: Re, MT weapons & equipment for T4
Happy Thanksgiving!
re Rodge
Wolverine uplift
Re: zero point energy fluctuations?
Re: re Rodge
Re: Re, MT weapons & equipment for T4
The Rebellion
Re: Wolverine uplift
Re: Happy Thanksgiving!
Re: The Rebellion
re: Thanksgiving
RE: The Rebellion

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 09:48:20 -0500
From: HDHale@aol.com
Subject: Re: Copyright Violation

Roderick Darroch Elliott writes:

>What I find even more amazing is that a bunch of literate,
>intelligent people, i.e. most of the TML, are taking this even 
>vaguely seriously.

   "A.Friend" is probably hoping that the victim will become panic stricken
and try to work out some kind of "license" agreement to use the word.
 A.Friend makes some bucks, and you are out needless cash.  Unfortunately for
A.Friend, he picked on the wrong people.

>Furthermore, I'm certain it's being perpetrated by one of us.  
>I suggest looking at TML regulars' posting patterns since 
>the first troll.  Is there anyone really, really prominent on the 
>TML who has been unnaturally silent since this all began?  Go 
>have a look.

   I was taking a nap, after which I hit some golf balls in my backyard.  I
don't know how I got this cut on my hand and don't know where the blood
stains in the Bronco came from, but I suspect that they were planted there by
the cops.

Regards,

Harold

P.S. Coming soon, the Children of Earth Writing Contest

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 09:53:37 -0500 (EST)
From: pierre-louis constantin <Pierre-Louis.Constantin@DMI.USherb.CA>
Subject: Re: hi-tech

Speaking of hi/alternative tech,  I'm thinking of introducing 'soft
tanks' in my campaigns.  These would be tanks with a soft, malleable 
shell that hardens/absorbs the energy when hit by shells and such
from
the outside.   The tank basically looks like a blob or one of those
sillicon breast implants and just plops along... :)  Does anybody
in materials science know if this would be possible?  I was thinking
of nanomanufactured layers of hull...


- -- 
Pierre-Louis Constantin, ift. a. 	"He whose name was writ in E-mail."
(: "I hate fanatics with a passion; all extremists should be shot." :)
	    How's my surfing? http://www.dmi.usherb.ca/~constanp/

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 09:13:25 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Re: Imperium Games Followup

On Thu, 28 Nov 1996 FKiesche@concentric.net wrote:

> So, once again I warn you all: If you've placed credit card orders with 
> IG, keep careful track of what they've charged you and what you receive 
> in terms of product. It would appear that things got severly scrambled 
> during their move and it would appear that the one person in charge of 
> customer relations is still not up to speed.

These credit charges all occurred under the previous management - Ken 
Whitman and the folks who are now Authority Publishing.  A lot of us 
were charged for the Journal in July, and Starships in October - 
including me.  Yet, nothing was shipped.  That was unethical.

Those who placed orders for Starships within the last week or so (since 
Sweet Pea took over the business) have not been charged until their 
books are shipping, from what I've been told.  If that's not the case, 
let me know.

Ann and the folks at IG are trying to repair the mistakes made by the 
previous management.  They're hampered by the poor recordkeeping done 
from July through October.

IG is aware of the fact that customer patience has been worn to the 
bone by the previous management, and they're attempting to avoid trying 
the patience of customers any further.

As for your credit charge being corrected, I was told earlier this week 
that the credit card charge machine wasn't hooked up to the credit 
network until this week - it had to be transferred from Lake Geneva to 
California in the credit company's network.  So, although the physical 
device was in California, it was non-operational for a while.


> And on an even more sour note: My Friendly Local Game Store (The Compleat 
> Strategist in New York City) told me yesterday that they don't expect 
> Starships until around Christmas. This I got directly from the gent who 
> has managed the store since I first started going there--in 1977! He 
> quite candidly stated that IG is having major startup problems...

Your FLGS may not be getting them until Christmas - I don't know about 
that.  But those who ordered them directly should be getting them shortly.  
Unless, by "around Christmas" he meant early December?

Anyway, time will tell about that one...


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)
       .....Official Reporter of Imperium Games Product Info.....

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

Date: 28 Nov 96 15:13:58 EST
From: Jo Grant/DUB/Lotus <Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus.LOTUSINT@crd.lotus.com>
Subject: CORE web site

Greetings,
    For those of you who missed the first announcement, yes, the
CORE website is down. The service providers have still not got
it working again. I'm begining to look for my money back. This
is a pity because we just added a visual walk-through of the product,
price lists and ordering info for the paper products and are now
taking submissions for an artist's gallery.
    If anyone has a web site with 3 or so meg free that can accept
commercial pages (Ie. a non-academic site), I'd be very keen on
looking for a temporary home.
      Cheers,
              Jo

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 16:30:44 -0800
From: Harald Budschedl <Harald.Budschedl@mag.linz.at>
Subject: Re: Alien Builder's Charts v1.1 ( not so Long anymore)

Jeff Kazmierski wrote:
> 
> This is the first rewrite of my original Alien Design System article.[snip]
> If anyone has any further comments or additions, please let me know.[snipped the rest]

Ehm --
For which gamesystem did you make this? Rolls like "99" or "1d20+1" 
aren't quite possible with six sided dice, are they?
Maybe I have overseen something ...

Buddy
- -- 
# Disclaimer: All opinions stated are only MY OWN.
# Harald.Budschedl@mag.linz.at 
# ADV - Anwendungsentwicklung
# Graphisch Technischer Bereich

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 16:43:22 +0100
From: anders.backman@macademic.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: hi-tech

>Speaking of hi/alternative tech,  I'm thinking of introducing 'soft
>tanks' in my campaigns.  These would be tanks with a soft, malleable
>shell that hardens/absorbs the energy when hit by shells and such
>from
>the outside.   The tank basically looks like a blob or one of those
>sillicon breast implants and just plops along... :)  Does anybody
>in materials science know if this would be possible?  I was thinking
>of nanomanufactured layers of hull...

The reaction speed of the material would be limited by speed of sound in
the boob=8A I mean tank and its ability to react to plasma shots or worse;
lasers seems unrealistic. Why a culture capable of nanotech bothers to
build tanks that can only protect themselves against low tech shells is
beyound me but they would probably scare the players a lot:
"The tank came crawling over the crest, and I DO mean crawling."


/Backman

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 16:32:00 +0000
From: Andy Lilly <a.s.lilly@nortel.co.uk>
Subject: CORE Web Page

Harald Budschedl <Harald.Budschedl@mag.linz.at> asks:

>I tried to contact http://members.nova.org/~sol/core/ a few time lately 
>without success.
>
>Does anybody know what happened? I always get a "File Not Found".

The service provider had some form of problem. The main nova site appears to
be up and running but our pages haven't been restored. We're moaning at them
but I don't know what's wrong. I'll notify the TML as soon as it's up again.

And to "Jeff Kazmierski" <odysseus@novia.net> for his Alien Builder's Charts
v1.1...

THANK YOU. Good stuff.

Andy :-)

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 17:59:10 GMT
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Dragons! (was: Uplift-flyers)

Sometime ago, concerning the thread of Solomani geneered critters, I wrote:

>> At least one of the species should be capable of flying, because of  the
utility criterion. Since there are not living flying creatures on Earth  with
*big* brains, probably the Solomani would pick some from another  planet. A
dinosaur-like flying critter would be a wonderful scout. <<

Hugh Foster answered:

>A dinosaur-like flying critter would be - a dragon! Shades of Pern! Actually,
>there's a world in the supposedly-discredited Beyond called Drachenfels which
>has dragons I believe.

        I did not know that. In fact, I would like to know the source and
some details (Hugh...?). Btw, why "supposedly discredited Beyond"?.
        There is also a world called St.George (of course...) in Vland
sector (I think) with apparently "fire-breathing" creatures which resemble
the mythic creatures, but I think they were not flyers. Source: V&V (?)
        I recall a wonderful story by Jack Vance which won the Hugo, called
"Men and Dragons" (can be wrong: I am translating back the spanish title)
where alien descendents were primitively "geneered"  and converted into war
machines by humans for centuries after a failed invasion. Later, the aliens
return... with human descendents "geneered" and converted into war machines.
        Anyway, hmmmmmm... at least for no high-G, dense atm. worlds, flying
creatures based on the mythic idea of a dragon could have been geneered as
scouts, but probably not created from scratch. Anyone knows of non-sentient,
dragon-like creatures suitable for this purpose. Both The Beyond and Vland
are very far away from the Solomani.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Alos-Ferrer                          E-mail: Alos@merlin.fae.ua.es
Dpt. Fundamentos del Analisis Economico     Phn: (34) 6 5903400, Ext. 3226
Universidad de Alicante                          (34) 6 5903614
03071-Alicante (Spain)                      Fax: (34) 6 5903685
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 11:32:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #701

> From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@CompuServe.COM>
> >> Sorry, no tractor beams.  Repulsors work, though. (Ever try to board   a ship
> that has a working repulsor battery?)   <<
> 
> I could never accept this. Repulsors are thingies which generate a field wot
> pushes remote objects; a directed force field. If you wire it up backwards,
> surely it should _pull_ instead. Isn't it the same technology?

Oh yeah, like rope. It pulls, shouldn't it push too? The forces
of compression and tension are different for physical materials,
maybe they're different for gravity too. I mean, natural gravity
is all pull. Maybe artifical gravity is all push.

Someone once explained gravity to me like this: imagine if space
was 2-dimensional. You could model it in our 3d would with a
big sheet. Now, imagine that the sheet is made of rubber. Masses
sit on top of the sheet, pulling it "down" in the third dimension.
Well, except that the sheet-dewllers don't see it, they just sort
of perceive that things move towards other big things... The sun
is sort of like a big ball bearing curving the rubber sheet. A lot
of cool things like gravity bending of light can then be explained
by analogies in the curved sheet universe. Anyways, for artifical
gravity, imagine that we can only poke the sheet "up", thus pushing
things away from our AG source. This could nullify gravity, provide
thrusters, repulsor beams, etc. You could repulse things in any direction,
but, technically, you'd never have a "tractor beam", as it
would imply pulling ie. curving the sheet "down". 

The effect of point sources of gravity vs. lines, planes, discs, etc.
is left as an exercise for those who dig calculus. (ie. similar to
point/line/planar objects with an electrical or magnetic charge).

Ethan

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 11:39:31 -0500
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: RE: zero point energy fluctuations?

Anders Backman wrote:

>They CANNOT interact with other particles. They do NOT break the
>conservation of energy constraint. 

I didn't make my self clear in the paragraph preceding the one you 
quoted.  I know that they can't interact with other particles, however
there seems to be a widespread opinion that the EM fields they
create do interact with other particles.  Supposedly the Cassimir (sp?)
Effect proves that these fields do interact with other particles.  
Whether or not this is the case, this entire line of reasoning is a 
great way to explain gravitics in the Traveller Universe (IMHO).

>onservation of momentum, charge and energy will prevail "forever" in
>hysics but other laws of nature will probably "change" as new discoveries
>re made IMHO.

Oh sure this will prevail because it is true.  However you might still be able
to find ways of achieving (apparent) FTL effects in ways that don't disagree
with relativity.  I think we are agreeing here, but I'm just saying it in a
different way.

Eric Freitas

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

Date: 28 Nov 1996 16:45:14 GMT
From: ajpursell@babylon.montreal.qc.ca (Alan Pursell)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #701

Hey there,

gone south to get some sun and recover from the snow that just keeps on
coming... back next tuesday. 

see ya...

alan j

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 96 18:01 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: senior subordinates

In-Reply-To: <9611270912.AA09042@sumer.astro.keele.ac.uk>

<< For an idea of the problems caused when a junior officer has high
social rank, take a look at Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan series. >>

If anybody out there hasn't read these yet, DO SO IMMEDIATELY! Well 
written and very Traveller.

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 13:16:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Flammang <FLAMMANG@vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: Re, MT weapons & equipment for T4

Hi.

From: sam thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>:

> Rob,
> I must have forgotten but what conversion formula(e) did you use for the MT
> to T4 conversions? Remember that Greg Porter uses a different armor layering
> method than Striker/MT. have you had a chance to look a the gamma version of
> the Vehicle construction rules that he posted?

I converted Striker penetration to its equivalent thickness of steel
plate. Then I converted steel-plate thicknesses to T4 armor. In Striker,
there is a one-to-one equivalence between armor and penetration; it
doesn't seem too unreasonable to postulate a one-to-one mapping of armor
and damage in T4.

The formula for Striker to steel plate is, for penetrations less than
10, 1 pen = 1/10th of an inch of steel plate. So a pentration of 10
will punch thru one-inch-thick steel plate. A pen of 5 will punch thru
half an inch, and so on.

For penetrations greater than 10, the scale becomes logarithmic, with
doubling every 8 steps. Pen 10 = 1 inch of steel. Pen 18 = 2 inches,
pen 26 = 4 inches, pen 34 = 8 inches, pen 42 = 16 inches, and so on.

So now I convert from thickness of steel to T4 armor. What's the
formula? Here's the one I used. To quote:

>    To convert T4 personal-scale or vehicle-scale armor ratings to the
>    equivalent in centimeters of steel, divide the armor value by 6, and
>    cube the result.  The following table summarizes a variety of useful
>    armor values:

> T4       cm
> Armor    Steel
>  1         0.005
>  2         0.04
>  3         0.13
>  4         0.30
>  5         0.58
>  6         1.00
>  7         1.59
>  8         2.37
>  9         3.38
> 10         4.63
> 15        15.6
> 20        37.0
> 25        72.3
> 30       125
> 35       198
> 40       296

That's from a message that Guy Garnett (wildstar) mailed me a while
back. I don't recall whether he posted it to the list or not.

From that, I get 
		Armor = (Thickness in cm)^(1/3) * 6 .

In Striker, Frank Chadwick used the conversion 1 inch = 2.5 cm (rather
than the canonical 1 inch = 2.54 cm), which is close enough for game
purposes. I used the same conversion.

- -Rob

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 13:28:26 -0500
From: GoldRushG@aol.com
Subject: Happy Thanksgiving!

  On behalf of everyone at Gold Rush Games, we wish all of our business
associates, customers, fans and friends a wonderful Thanksgiving and a
fabulous holiday weekend!

  Cheers from the land of Lincoln,

  Mark Arsenault
  Gold Rush Games

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 96 18:38:39 GMT
From: tc@library.solent.ac.uk (Timothy Collinson)
Subject: re Rodge

~EXTERNALFROM  : tc@library.solent.ac.uk
TO       : traveller@mpgn.com
SUBJECT  : re Rodge
DATE     :  Thu Nov 28 18:36:40 GMT 1996
ADDRESS  : Mountbatten Library, Southampton Institute,
         : East Park Terrace, Southampton, SO14 OYN
         : UK
TELEPHONE: 01703 319248

Message is as follows:


If it's any help Rodge was e-mailing just 2 or 3 weeks ago.
I've also had a parcel arrive from him, what, 10 days (maybe
a couple of weeks) ago.

Is it possible he's just taking a vacation or some such?
Can't say he's run off with any of my three previous money
orders, so I wouldn't panic just yet.

tc

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

Date: 28 Nov 96 13:52:45 EST
From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Wolverine uplift

>> I'd suggest that wolverines are bright enough for uplift, but probably  *way*
too independent and agressive. <<

Yeah? Sounds like perfect assassin/commando material. I bet where you get
gene-genies controlled by the military, someone would view that  as a good idea.
The Solomani would if anyone would!

[------------------------------oOo-----------------------------] | Hugh Foster
100326,446       | | If you're going to do something wrong, at least enjoy it.
| [------------------------------oOo-----------------------------]

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 13:55:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Flammang <FLAMMANG@vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: zero point energy fluctuations?

Hi.

From: anders.backman@macademic.se (Anders Backman)

[Wild speculation about virtual particles by a previous poster
deleted.]

> They CANNOT interact with other particles. They do NOT break the

They do interact with other particles; that's how we can tell that they
are there. Virtual-photon exchange, for instance, is how electric charges
attract or repell each other. The electric force is made out of virtual
particles. Virtual-meson exchange makes up a large part of what we call
the strong nuclear force. These virtual mesons keep our nuclei from
flying apart!

> conservation of energy constraint. These spontaneous particle
> generation/destruction occurs within the limits of Heisenbergs uncertainty
> principle and are therefore undetectable. Hawking postulates that such

They are detectable. That's how we know they exist.

> Conservation of momentum, charge and energy will prevail "forever" in
> physics but other laws of nature will probably "change" as new discoveries
> are made IMHO.

That's been the testimony history. Conservation laws are just too
valuable to abandon (regardless of what reality says 8^).

> /Backman

- -Rob

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 14:13:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Flammang <FLAMMANG@vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: re Rodge

From: tc@library.solent.ac.uk (Timothy Collinson)

> Is it possible he's just taking a vacation or some such?
> Can't say he's run off with any of my three previous money
> orders, so I wouldn't panic just yet.

I'll second that. Rodge has never been cavalier with my money in the
past. This last month, we (Rodge and I) have been having some minor
problems with the Post (very slow mail). If the trouble source has been
the Seattle post office (and not just the Pittsburgh one) that could
explain alot.

> tc

- -Rob

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 15:55:20 -0600
From: sam thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Re, MT weapons & equipment for T4

At 01:16 PM 11/28/96 -0400, Robert Flammang <FLAMMANG@vms.cis.pitt.edu> wrote:
<snip>
>I converted Striker penetration to its equivalent thickness of steel
>plate. Then I converted steel-plate thicknesses to T4 armor. In Striker,
>there is a one-to-one equivalence between armor and penetration; it
>doesn't seem too unreasonable to postulate a one-to-one mapping of armor
>and damage in T4.
>
>The formula for Striker to steel plate is, for penetrations less than
>10, 1 pen = 1/10th of an inch of steel plate. So a pentration of 10
>will punch thru one-inch-thick steel plate. A pen of 5 will punch thru
>half an inch, and so on.
>
>For penetrations greater than 10, the scale becomes logarithmic, with
>doubling every 8 steps. Pen 10 = 1 inch of steel. Pen 18 = 2 inches,
>pen 26 = 4 inches, pen 34 = 8 inches, pen 42 = 16 inches, and so on.
>
>So now I convert from thickness of steel to T4 armor. What's the
>formula? Here's the one I used. To quote:
>
>>    To convert T4 personal-scale or vehicle-scale armor ratings to the
>>    equivalent in centimeters of steel, divide the armor value by 6, and
>>    cube the result.  The following table summarizes a variety of useful
>>    armor values:
>
>> T4       cm
>> Armor    Steel
>>  1         0.005
>>  2         0.04
>>  3         0.13
>>  4         0.30
>>  5         0.58
>>  6         1.00
>>  7         1.59
>>  8         2.37
>>  9         3.38
>> 10         4.63
>> 15        15.6
>> 20        37.0
>> 25        72.3
>> 30       125
>> 35       198
>> 40       296
>
>That's from a message that Guy Garnett (wildstar) mailed me a while
>back. I don't recall whether he posted it to the list or not.
>
>>From that, I get 
>		Armor = (Thickness in cm)^(1/3) * 6 .
>
>In Striker, Frank Chadwick used the conversion 1 inch = 2.5 cm (rather
>than the canonical 1 inch = 2.54 cm), which is close enough for game
>purposes. I used the same conversion.
>

Rob,

From the "Vehicle Design Rules" gamma version posted by Grep Porter I get
the following:

((Thickness in Cm)^.33)*Thougness (results rounded down) same as yours
except the rounding down.

Your figures above are only off at most by one, probably not rounding down.
Your T4 table of values is close, but the MT to T4 is the one that appears
to be off. Also be aware that Greg uses different toughness values than used
in MT, ie superdense is a toughness of 11 not 14 in MT. This will have a
great effect upon some weapons in conversions.

Sinbad Sam
sinbad@dfw.net
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2
mQCNAy/neZgAAAEEALdbtUFkL1kkqT35tHGc2IRnnCtcWj1n0qzH2yA8NPTJb2DI
UGoZGO4FOo623oqiA0/k6vYSQGOGa9sq1nLdf8EgyMmB5Hbeqh9nHKj8wL46u9gT
8PPCiawmhEmnp517Bzma2t0E8uml4x5AvTUjhK2iAooHHIQJtMzEhqYItUlNAAUR
tCBzaW5iYWQgc2FtIDxzaW5iYWRAbWV0cm9uZXQuY29tPg==
=V+w2
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 17:18:14 -0500
From: sturm <sturm@tiac.net>
Subject: The Rebellion

I must say that I really disliked the whole Virus concept, I would have
much rather seen the shattered Imperium united again (my personal
favorite would have been Duke Norris...)

Any thoughts...

sturm

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 18:25:10 -0500
From: Daniel Poulin <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: Re: Wolverine uplift

Hugh Foster wrote:
> 
> >> I'd suggest that wolverines are bright enough for uplift, but probably  *way*
> too independent and agressive. <<
> 
> Yeah? Sounds like perfect assassin/commando material. I bet where you get
> gene-genies controlled by the military, someone would view that  as a good idea.
> The Solomani would if anyone would!
> 
>

I think this is starting too much like Albedo for my own taste... :-)

Joking aside, I think it is important to remember that only some species
were uplifter.  While I think this might be easy for Dolphins and Chimps
(or even Gorillas), I don't think this would be possible for other
species that would have to climb too high on the evolutionnary ladder. 
I think a limit has to be in placed that only species with near human
intelligence can be uplifted.  While dogs are great companions (and
wolverines show a lot of resourcefulness), they do not (IMHO) answer to
this criteria.

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 19:14:16 +0000
From: Mused <marz@hotstar.net>
Subject: Re: Happy Thanksgiving!

GoldRushG@aol.com wrote:
> 
>   On behalf of everyone at Gold Rush Games, we wish all of our business
> associates, customers, fans and friends a wonderful Thanksgiving and a
> fabulous holiday weekend!
> 
>   Cheers from the land of Lincoln,

Well intentioned, but a bit late (for Canadians anyway...)

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 19:19:18 +0000
From: Mused <marz@hotstar.net>
Subject: Re: The Rebellion

sturm wrote:
> 
> I must say that I really disliked the whole Virus concept, I would have
> much rather seen the shattered Imperium united again (my personal
> favorite would have been Duke Norris...)
> 
> Any thoughts...


Norris fighting for the old ideals versus a united Dulinor and Margaret, with Lucan being the 
spoiler and vicious little brute he always was

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

Date: 29 Nov 96 11:19:20 +1100
From: Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
Subject: re: Thanksgiving

     What the hell is a thanksgiving? Is it some kind of post-Election 
     ritual? 

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

Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 18:29:08 -0600
From: "K.C. Komosky" <kc@mb.sympatico.ca>
Subject: RE: The Rebellion

> I must say that I really disliked the whole Virus concept, I would have
> much rather seen the shattered Imperium united again (my personal
> favorite would have been Duke Norris...)
>

What I really wonder about is:

what exactly is different between the TNE setting and Meilleiu 0? 
Essentially nothing from what I can tell. Both are settings where humanity 
rebuilds after a collapse into a new empire.

So since the two settings are essentially identical, why did they bother 
coming up with a new setting? If Mark Miller really wanted to get back to 
Classic Traveller, why didn't he set things back in 1115, or whenever.

By the way, no one is holding a gun up against your head forcing you to use 
the Virus. If you want a united empire under Norris, JUST DO IT!

K.C. Komosky
who's now expecting a cease and decist order from Nike for violating their 
copyright...
kc@mb.sympatico.ca

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #702
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
