From owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM  Wed Dec 11 12:55:24 1996
Return-Path: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Received: from phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (Phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.5]) by emin34.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA08860; Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:55:04 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA12011; Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:53:30 -0500
Received: by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:48:52 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) id MAA11838 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:48:51 -0500
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:48:51 -0500
Message-Id: <199612111748.MAA11838@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller-digest V1996 #741
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com


Traveller-digest    Wednesday, December 11 1996    Volume 1996 : Number 741



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Handwaving: Starports and UWPs. 
Props, etc. - was Traveller on IRC
schott
RE: Roller Coasters in the 57th Century
Re: Bruce Who?
RE: Mechs in Traveller
RE: Bitter Starships Review
Re: Damper Booby Traps
Large starship hulls
ROM artifacts and early Third Imperium technology (LONGISH)
Mechs
Re: Bitter Starships Review
Re: Strength of Aslans and Domain (Long)
Questions on Starships...
Concussion in dense atmospheres
re: Bitter Starships Review
SSDS and Drives
ship suggestions

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

Date: 11 Dec 96 19:24:13 +1100
From: Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
Subject: Handwaving: Starports and UWPs. 

     Here are some suggestions for explaining some 'unusual' starport/UWP 
     combinations: 
     
     Port A/B; Size 0  = port asteroid-based, no orbital port necessary
     Port A/B; Atm B/C = orbital port, possibly nil or minimal ground 
     installation 
     Port A/B; Hyd A = waterworld, floating or island downport; possibly no 
     downport 
     Port A/B/C; low Pop = starport highly or entirely automated/robotic 
     Port A/B; tech 9- = starport operated by offworld owners 
     Any port, Atm 0/1 = ground installation can accept unstreamlined 
     ships. 
     Port A/B/C, Atm B/C = special precautions (anti-corrosion etc) may be 
     necessary if attempting surface landing. Specially equipped orbital 
     shuttles usually available to ferry passengers/cargo to surface. 
     Port D/E/X, Tech 9+ = inhabitants capable of building a starbase, but 
     poor or no base present; possibilities include: xenophobia, existing 
     port recently damaged/destroyed, planet interdicted from interstellar 
     contact, space technology lags behind other tech levels for some 
     reason. 
     
     Does anybody else have any interesting explanations for weird UWPs? 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 09:15:06 GMT
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Props, etc. - was Traveller on IRC

Hi there

To follow up on Kenneth's comments on the Traveller Adventure, I've
just finished running that with my players, and you *have* to have
props - there is the wallet Kenneth mentioned, but also some of the
important happenings in the adventure are presented through the news,
so you need other news items to make the important ones less obvious.
I also have "ship's in port" at each stop, so that the PCs can look up
old friends, expect problems with old enemies, and actively search for
rumours from arriving vessels.  There are other props such as computer
data acquired, forms needing filling in and signatures affixed.  All
these are essential to the progress of the adventure.

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 96 10:16:56 -0800
From: Timothy Collinson <tc@library.solent.ac.uk>
Subject: schott

Harald explained neatly:

>"Hals" means "neck". Even if this sounds strange to you, this is a way >of wishing luck ("Break your neck and leg!"). Some sarcasm here...
>As sailors wish "Mast- und Schottbruch", which means "break your mast >and your ????" (don't know the word for "Schott").

Schott = bulkhead (a nautical term for a watertight wall)

tc
"I knew two years on a ship with 30 something Germans (and 40 other 
nationalities) would come in useful one day."



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


<snipped chat about handouts etc>

And while I'm here - thanks to the IRC folk for the report on the chat 
night.  Sounds fun.

tc

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 03:39:09 -0800
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: RE: Roller Coasters in the 57th Century

At 09:17 PM 12/10/96 -0600, you wrote:
>>What would be the proper number for "X" in "X Flags Over Sylea?"
>
>	Although I do catch the reference, does anyone want to clue in this poor, 
>cold, isolated resident of Flin Flon (just a stone's throw away from 
>Santa's workshop, its so far north) what the number of flags refers to on 
>Earth?

The original park was Six Flags over Texas.  For a time, a right wing fundie
christian park was referred to as Six Flags over Jesus...

+----------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net  |
|     Professional Driver - Traveller Guru     |
|        http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|**********************************************|
| "Life's a journey, not a destination."       |
|                                   -Aerosmith |
+----------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 07:05:17 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Re: Bruce Who?

On Tue, 10 Dec 1996, Stuart L. Dollar wrote:

> Joe, how dare you confuse a fine institution with that little second 
> rate college down south.  :-)
> 
> Mr. Johnson is at University of Arizona's Department of Pharmacology.  

Oop.  I most humbly beg pardon!


- -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: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 08:07:18 -0500
From: Clint Fishback <C-Fishback@mail.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Mechs in Traveller

Everyone's arguements are based on the history of Earth.  This Earth. 
 Does anyone watch Sliders?  Is it not possible for societies to grow 
in diverse ways thus creating different social attitudes.  With the 
size of the universe, it is possible that a planet or system would 
deal with their problems differently.  I can see that mass use of 
mechs might not be effective.  Think of some possible worlds where 
you'd have no choice.  Ion storms that block sensors thus making 
flying dangerous.  High cross winds.  Government does not allow 
citizens to fly private vehicles.  I can also see a mech as heavy duty 
hostile environ suit.  It allows the user to have arms and mobility. 

As I said, there may not be huge demand for them, but somewhere 
somebody probably uses them.  The original question just asked how 
would one go about designing them and gave a few suggestions for using 
them.

- ----------
From: 	Daniel Poulin[SMTP:pould@netcom.ca]
Sent: 	Tuesday, December 10, 1996 9:55 PM
To: 	traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: 	Re: Mechs in Traveller

Clint Fishback wrote:
>
> But the thing about the original question that I think everyone has
> strayed from is what the purpose the mechs were designed for.
>
> Not large scale warfare.  As people have pointed out, they would be
> handicapped.  The purpose was for duelling or grudge matches.  Mech
> against mech.  Like in Robojox.  A champion from the contesting 
worlds
> brought their mechs to an arena to battle.  In this form, the mechs
> would be feasible.
>
> "Let's see.  We can spend millions of MCr on an army to settle our
> desputes or we could spend a couple of hundred on a champion to 
fight
> their champion."
>
> Which makes more sense economically and humanly?
>
> ----------
> From:   Antti Lahtinen[SMTP:lahtinen@ee.tut.fi]
> Sent:   Tuesday, December 10, 1996 5:47 AM
> To:     traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
> Subject:        Re: Mechs in Traveller
>
>
The problem I see is that you seem to suggest that there is a humanly
way to figth wars.  War is hell (W.T. Sherman).  It is, sadly, one of
the things we humans are best at and, ultimately, the one thing that
distinguishes us (higher primates which includes some other primates)
from other animals (ants do not wage war in the sense of organized
violence).

The suggestion of champions would mean that a society would accept to
submit to a judgement of champions.  This is unthinkable in a 
democracy
and even more in a dictatorship based on violence.  A leader that 
would
have failed would simply be killed by his own side.

The closest thing to the type of world that you are describing in 
earth
history would be 'la guerre en dentelles' (the period that includes
Frederick the Great and Louis XIV) where professional armies of 
soldiers
would go out of their way to battle one another and would limit the
devastation.

This went away with total war under Napoleon.  An entire country got
drafted into the war effort, making it total.  We cannot go back to 
the
time of champions.

A democratic leader that would submit to a judgement of champions 
would
be taken out of office and the democracy would simply ignore the
decision and (if they decide to do so) fight.  A dictator would 
simply
be taken out and replaced by another one.

My ranting for tonight.  What a great subject to actually pass on my
frustration on my keyboard...

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 08:11:57 -0500
From: Clint Fishback <C-Fishback@mail.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Bitter Starships Review

It may just be me, but the campaigns I've played in and enjoyed the 
most we flew ships under 1000tons.  The PCs were the crew.  Maybe we 
had to hire an extra engineer or two.  The only ships we saw even 
close to that size were military war vessels, and we steered clear of 
them.  Do that many people play games were PCs are in charge of 
vessels larger than 5000tons?

- ----------
From: 	Stuart L. Dollar[SMTP:sdollar@goodnet.com]
Sent: 	Wednesday, December 11, 1996 1:56 AM
To: 	traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: 	Re: Bitter Starships Review

On 10 Dec 96 at 19:27, BrianMays@aol.com spewed:

> My previously posted fear regarding ship design limitations proved
> true.
>  5000 tons, no more.  The ship design sequence is fabulous, but

Not to pick on you specifically Brian, but to everybody whining about 
the
5000 ton limit for SSDS, when did you subscribe to TML, last week?
If not, then you, I and everybody else should have known since June
that this was the limit to which SSDS was going up to.  Except for
new subscribers, this should have come as no great surprise.  The
system was fan designed, after all.

Stu


Stuart L. Dollar               sdollar@goodnet.com
Traveller referee since 1978, Official USENet
spokesperson for Imperium Games
- ---------------------------------------------------
"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God."
- -Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 05:07:54 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Damper Booby Traps

In mail you write:

>>> As an example, take a standard shipping container, place some *simple*
> detectors in it, along with a bunch of subcritical masses of  fissionable
> material, all damped. If an *external* damper field  appears, the subcritical
> masses are brought together and surrounding  explosive charges armed. <<

> It's a nice nasty idea, but what happens when the carrying ship turns it's 
> _own_ nuclear dampers on to stop all those incoming missiles?

Since you aiom them at the missiles, not at your own ship, I don't see
a problem. Safety interlocks are possible too.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 15:23:38 +0100 (MET)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Large starship hulls

Brian Mays writes:
>My previously posted fear regarding ship design limitations proved true.
>5000 tons, no more.  The ship design sequence is fabulous, but should have
>been extended.  

That reminds me of something I've wanted to ask. If you take one of the
listed starship hulls and multiply all figures by some factor, how much
would one be off on the average? If, say, you take 

Wedge U    4    20    5000    4745.3    1365.6    208.2    10396.0    28

and turn it into

Wedge U    4    20   50000    47453     13656     2082     103960    280

how wrong will it be? (I realize that the surface area and the structure
will be wrong, but what about the other stuff?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: 12 Dec 96 01:48:55 +1100
From: Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
Subject: ROM artifacts and early Third Imperium technology (LONGISH)

     I've been thinking about the technological level of the late Sylean 
     Federation/early Third Imperium (SF/3I). From what I've seen in the T4 
     book, it seems that around Year Zero, the SF/3I has *early* TL12 
     technology. Why do I say this? Because certain developments known to 
     be TL12 are not available! 
     
     A notable example is the PGMP-12 (plasma gun, man portable, TL12), 
     which I suggest probably develops from the kind of technology that 
     allows mini-fusion reactors (aka Fusion Plus), which has only recently 
     been discovered in Year Zero. 
     
     The SF achieved TL12 in about -150 (AFAIK), and we know the 3I didn't 
     reach TL13 until around 300. I guess this means that around Year Zero, 
     the tech level would be approximately TL 12.4 or so. 
     
     However, the 3rd Imperium is expanding into the space that was 
     occupied by the 2nd Imperium/Rule of Man (ROM), which possessed TL12 
     for some time before its collapse (500+ years?)
     
     For gaming purposes, I think it would be nice to have ROM technology 
     peaking at about 12.9 (late TL12, borderline TL13), giving the 
     potential for SF/3I adventurers to 'discover' Second Empire 
     *artifacts* that are more sophisticated than existing technology! 
     
     Such artifacts wouldn't be super-technology like Ancient relics, but 
     they *could* be a century or two beyond currently available items - 
     and therefore quite valuable! The SF/3I are probably putting a major 
     effort into 'rediscovering' these technologies, as a way of giving 
     themselves a lead on their competitors; in fact, rediscovered ROM 
     artifacts might have helped the SF get to TL12 in the first place. 
     Another possibility is that the SF discovered an old ROM library 
     holding technological data. 
     
     Ideas for adventures can then be drawn from Traveller: The Next 
     Generation (Sorry! Traveller: The New Error). 
     
     Mind you, few actual ROM artifacts would be in working order. 1700 
     years is a very long time for a device to be sitting there doing 
     nothing...
     
     Another possibility: the Terrans were known to be masters of genetic 
     and robotic technologies. It is quite possible that ROM artifacts of 
     TL13 or TL14 might exist in these fields! 
     
     Thoughts? Flames? Cries of "shut up! why don't you rant about Foss 
     art instead?!?" 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 96 09:53:53 -0500
From: lewis@slipher.chara.gsu.edu.chara.gsu.edu (Lewis Roberts)
Subject: Mechs

Rich Ostorero wrote:
>Lewis Roberts wrote:

>> I was thinking about making up a planet where the nobles used combat
>> mechs in ritual duels, and occasionally formed up mercenary bands. I

>Were you going to call it "Solaris VII" by any chance?? -:)

No, that's somesort of Battletech gladiator planet right?  Also to
those who asked I never saw Robojox, so I don't know what its about.  I
was thinking about putting the culture down in the Rimward portion of
the Spinward Marches. I had a planet in mind, Bender I think.  

>If there is a demand for this material, I'll post it to the list . . .
else, >I'll find it a home on the Trav Fan-Web(tm).

I'd love to see these.  

Lewis Roberts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Q:What did Noah use to light up the Ark? 
A:Floodlights!        
       
lewis@chara.gsu.edu
http://www.chara.gsu.edu/~lewis/roberts.html
- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 10:24:31 -0500
From: BrianMays@aol.com
Subject: Re: Bitter Starships Review

In a message dated 96-12-11 08:26:26 EST, you write:

<< Do that many people play games were PCs are in charge of 
 vessels larger than 5000tons? >>

Absolutely not.  The largest ship my players' characters have ever piloted
was @ 1,000 tons.  (And it didn't really belong to them . . . ; ) )  However,
we do occassionally do some non-role-playing "Trillion Credit" kind of
playing, where the Capital Ships are needed.

But my point really is that all of the previous incarnations of Traveller
have allowed for over 5,000 tons.  To call a book "Starships" and stop the
sequence at 5,000 and waste space with expensive color plates that serve no
purpose AND charge $20.00 for it - that's what irks me.

Brian

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 16:36:54 +0100 (MET)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Strength of Aslans and Domain (Long)

Tim Peter writes:
>>And why a stalemate? Crew quality is
>>propably equivalent; the Domain seems to have the advantage in TL and
>>numbers. How do you manage to give the Aslans even a stalemate?
> 
>Unfortunately, unless someone has data of which I'm unaware, there aren't
>numbers to prove this.  

We have UPP listings of all Aslan worlds in Trojan Reaches, Riftspan Reaches 
and several other sectors. Rob Dean once posted the following figures (Note
that I haven't checked them):

>Gvurrdon, Spinward Marches, and Trojan Reaches
>
>Prewar
>
>       Imperial    Aslan       Florian     Strend
>TL15   28 billion    -         6 billion  80 billion
>TL14   20 billion   55 billion    -          -
>TL13   10 billion  170 billion    -          -
>TL12     -           -         20 billion    -

I once asked Steve Higginbotham about relative strength due to TL
differences. Here's what he said:

>Using MY notion of good ship design (ship design has a LOT to do with
>relative capability), and keeping in mind the following size limits:
>
>TL9 - 4000
>TL10 - 10000
>TL11 - 50000
>TL12 - 100000
>TL13+ - 1000000
>
>        TL 10   TL 11   TL 12   TL 13   TL 14   TL 15
>TL 9     2/1     5/1    12/1   100/1      *       *
>TL 10     -      3/2     6/1    50/1  1000/1      *
>TL 11     -       -      2/1     5/1    12/1   500/1
>TL 12     -       -       -      3/1    10/1    20/1
>TL 13     -       -       -       -      3/2     5/1
>TL 14     -       -       -       -       -      3/1
>
>* - can defeat any number of foes of the lower TL

Thus one TL 15 ship should be the equal of 3 TL 14 ships or 5 TL 13 or
20 TL 12 ships of the same size.


As an aside, heres what Rob Dean and I have to say about one very strange
aspect of the strength distribution in Trojan Reaches:

Rob:
>>Also, note the existence of Strend in subsector A of the Trojan Reaches. I've
>>never combed the Trojan Reaches data before, but this single world has TWICE
>>the combined population of Mora, Trin, Glisten and Rhylanor combined, and
>>therefore twice the potential military strength. I suddenly realize that the
>>diplomatic maneuvering by EVERYONE centered around this world must be the 
>>real driving force behind all diplomatic efforts in the Domain and the 
>>surrounding regions.

Me:
>Very true. And since we've never hear of Strend being of the slightest
>importance to the politics of the Marches we've obviously got a major
>contradiction that must be resolved by either deciding retroactively that
>Strend has always been of paramount importance in the politics of the
>Marches or that Strend isn't really that powerful. In my universe I've
>chosen the second option as the least disruptive. Oh, Strend is the
>center of a small trade association called the Strend Economic Orbit,
>but Strend has 8, not 80, billion inhabitants. (Which still would earn
>them an active spot if I ever decide to run a FFW style game).

>I'm going more on perception, which, of course, is nothing but a Humble 
>Opinion.  Though as an insight into why I feel this way, I offer the 
>following:
> 
>According to the Regency Sourcebook, Aslan ihatei have captured several
>worlds in the Glisten and Trin's Shroud (Formerly Trin's Veil) subsectors,
>and could not be displaced prior to the sealing of Regency borders.  This
>despite the fact that the 100th and 207th Fleets (Active, not Reserve) are
>headquartered in those subsectors.  Now, these fleets probably didn't do too
>much to help, but possibly (and I admit it's only possibly) because they did
>not wish to become involved in a war of attrition with the ihatei.  That
>leads me to believe (and again, I admit this isn't the strongest evidence)
>that some ihatei are trained and equipped enough to defeat reserve or system
>forces.  (OK, it's a little weak, but I'm trying to make a point, and it's
>all we're given to work with).

No, that's just precisely not all we're given to work with. If it was, I
wouldn't be claiming that there is a major discrepancy between recorded
Taveller history and the Traveller rules. But we have a lot more: We have
population figures, we have rules for estimating fleet sizes based on
population figures, we have rules about TL differences and we have 
information about TL differences. 

Based on those the Aslans can't hope to make any progress in the face of
even the Domain reserves alone; and even if Norris strips Reft an Trojan
Reaches of the reserve forces, the planetary defense forces can make things
tough provided as little as 15% of planetary forces are jump capable (and
while we don't know what percentage of planetary forces are jump capable,
we do know from the Character Generation System that some of them are).
And even if Norris strips the rimward subsectors of _every_ jump-capable
ship (which I for one thinks is a totally unlikely thing for him to do;
it would certainly earn him a nomination for the Worst Leader of the
Century Award (present contenders: Dulinor, Lucan, and Strephon)) Tobia
and Glisten is STILL too much for the Aslans to handle (Though Glisten
may be vulnerable to raids; a belt is an awfully large area to guard).

We also have information about Aslan psycology and politics that makes it
likely that any halfway competent diplomat could turn the Aslan tide even 
with forces inferior to their combined might. (Of course he'll need _some_
clout, but not nearly as much as you may imagine. The ability to soundly
trounce any single clan in Trojan Reach is propably enough).

Of course, we can postulate that the Domain dosen't have any half-way decent 
diplomats...

As for the Wargr, what we know of their strengths and politics tells us
that they aren't even the threat that the Aslans are and that the total
overrun of Corridor and the intrusions into Deneb and Spinward Marches
is equally bogus. They may be able to disrupt trade in Corridor if Lucan
strips it of every jump-capable ship including those from the planetary
forces (which is quite likely what he did), but they are not going to
disrupt military communications and they are not going to take over worlds
like Khouth, Mikesh, Shushaka, Durima, Kaasu, Khukish, Inarli, or Plunge. 
Indeed, about 3 and a half years after the Corridor fleets leave for Core,
Mikesh alone will have over 500 jump-capable 20,000 T cruisers in commision
and 50-100 heavy cruisers and battleships being built and sceduled to be
finished within another year (TCS construction rules). In 1120 the Vargr 
are on their way out of Corridor even if the Corridor worlds have to do it 
on their own (What is much more likely, of course, is that the Domain of 
Deneb and Vland will send ships into Corridor to cover for the absent 
fleets and meet in the middle).

>>1) A significant coalition of Aslans is strange enough. A significant
>>   coalition of Vargr is even stranger. And a coalition of Aslans AND 
>>   Vargr is strange beyond belief.
> 
>Agreed.  Though as I stated above, the Aslan may be able to coalesce enough
>to gain minor victories (i.e., a world here, or there).  

Maybe, but what happens then? An Imperial task force appears, blockades the
world, and either kicks them off the world or (more likely) makes them
swear fealthy to Norris. In the latter case they are no longer part of the
problem; if they have any warships they become part of the solution.

A couple of alternate solutions if the clan in question is violently anti-
imperial:

1) The Imperial Admiral threantens to take his task force back to the world
   the _ihatei_ came from and kick the hell out of its defenses unless the
   _ihatei_ leaves. Since this would make their clan lord vulnerable to his
   neighbours, the _ihatei_, who still owes him fealthy, will have to do
   what is best for him and leave.
2) The Imperial Admiral cfontacts a rival clan and offers them land in
   exchange for fealthy. He then escorts them to the world and helps deal
   with the defenses. Again the new Aslans become part of the solution.

>Allow me to rephrase the point:  The Regency, and the Imperium, may be better
>served by his failing to respond.  

Ah, but what about his oath of fealthy? He owes it to Strephon to make any
reasonable attempt to help him (And even to stretch the definition of
reasonable a bit). Keeping guard against the Zhodani is a reasonable choice
to make, but it is not the only reasonable choice. And it becomes less so
with every passing day that the Zhodani keeps quiet.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 11:00:47 -0500
From: Michael Nutt <misha@crossrds.com>
Subject: Questions on Starships...

Well, it made it to Memphis by Monday, 9 December, and I snapped up a copy,
but I've run across a few questions so far, and maybe someone out there can
bring me up to speed... sorry if these questions have been covered already,
but I'm fairly new to the list here.

1)  What's the difference between "Stealth" and "EMM"? I found the reference
to the -3 DM  for EMM on p.117 of T4, but I can't find a reference anywhere
that tells me what the effect of just plain "Stealth" is.

2) What's up with the Sandcasters table? What's this "Beam Reduction" thing,
and *why does it mention a d10*??? This is *Traveller*, for gosh sakes...
:)  And why is there a USD number? My reading of the Basic Combat rules says
that each sandcaster reduces laser/PA damage by 1 for each sandcaster, or
eliminates 1 missile. And does Fire Control make any difference with a
sandcaster?

3) How much do missiles cost? I could understand counting the initial
loadout as included in the building cost, but I'm planning on expending them
sometime, and I'd rather not have to replace the entire mount.  :)  And
shouldn't there be some differences in the effects of  contact nukes and
nuke-pumped lasers? Maybe allow laser heads to attack at Short range,
instead? Can you shoot at a missile salvo with a sandcaster each turn until
it reaches you (once at Long range, once at Short range, and then once at
Very Short, just before impact)?

4) When using various point-defense weapons, can we safely assume that they
don't target weapons already killed? In other words, will my sandcasters
affect only missiles that got through my nuclear dampers, or should the
missile-kills from each defense be distributed randomly throughout the salvo?

More questions later, as I come up with them...  :)

Michael

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

Date: 12 Dec 96 02:47:25 +1100
From: Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
Subject: Concussion in dense atmospheres

     ...grenade fishing. Nuff said. 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 10:34:05 -0600 (CST)
From: granthh@anubis.network.com (Harley Grantham)
Subject: re: Bitter Starships Review

Just a comment on Brian's post on starships.  You are absolutely right.
I have delayed posting anything on this but this book is simply awful.
And unlike the others who have posted concerns on this and "bought it
anyway", I did not buy it.  I bought the T4 hardback on faith, and was
disappointed, I won't buy anything else from IG without reviewing it
first.  And if it isn't any better than starships I will just have to
be happy with my old stuff.

The art is reused, except for the new ships and takes up far too much
space for the quality, and who really needs a full page deckplan for a
fighter or a lifepod?  

The deck plans are poor and the personalities sections, two pages of
3 characters each as far as I can tell had no artwork at all!  Even
the adventures in Challange and Traveller's Digest would have portrait
shots of the NPC's they introduced, you would think a $22 book could do
the same.

As for the ship descriptions themselves there was no color, no details
given.  The entire thing looked like someone had thrown it together in
a few hours and rushed it off to the printer.

Contrast this with any of the DGP offerings and it suffers badly, how then
can it compete with the current crop of RPG books?

I really miss Joe Fugate.

- -- 
Harley Grantham					granthh@anubis.network.com

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 11:18:58 -0600 (CST)
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@itlabs.umn.edu>
Subject: SSDS and Drives

"Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au> wrote:

> In other words, why don't Imperial Carriers carry most of their fighters in
> *external* racks rather than all internally. Also, with Thruster plates
> (rather than HePlaR), which go to full speed and (as I understand it) don't
> have accel (they do 6G as a *speed* rather than as an accel) and a zero-G
> environment, there's no real need for a steam catapult equivalent, you can
> launch directly from the hull with little adverse effect. Internal Hangar
> space is for maintenance and repairs.

The list has already pointed out that this is a misinterpretation; six
gee is shorthand for an acceleration (change in velocity) of about sixty
meters per second every second.  This builds up fast -- in one 30 minute
turn, a six gee ship can change velocity by about 106 km/s.

SSDS does raise some interesting drive-related questions.  For instance,
thruster plates now fail to operate efficiently if they are not within
about 1000 diameters of a mass.  Is this a sudden cut-off, or does the
drive efficiency gradually drop?  How gradually?  Linear?  Inverse-square?
Inverse-cube?  The rules seem to imply it's a sudden change, but they
aren't clear.  

The same question goes for the new thrust-and-lift contragrav drives.
They have an efficiency limit as well ("within ten diameters of a planet"
is the way it's put, as I recall).  The wording here suggests a gradual
drop-off ("the given accelerations can only be achieved in a one gee
field", and the odd "only nullifies gravity" comment).  Do they get more 
thrust, say, in a two gee field?  Less in a half-gee field?  For the
same energy inputs?

Incidentally, the thruster plate 1000 diameter limit applied to our
solar system implies that thruster plates can be continuously used out
to the Sun's 1000 diameter limit, just short of Saturn (and Saturn's
own 1000 diameter limit allows continuous thruster travel all the way 
there).  Beyond that, you begin to depend on coasting mid-course.  

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonnevil@itlabs.umn.edu>

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:47:17 -0500
From: Dedly@aol.com
Subject: ship suggestions

Up until I began to hit everyone's Trav pages, my source for new ship designs
would be (and still is), sci-fi artwork. If I saw something that looked like
it would fit in with Trav, I incorporated it. Movies too. The most familiar
example: Imperial Star Destroyers from Star Wars. The pc's loved it. It was a
vessel they were familiar with in image and message ("You're in trouble").

A good source of artwork and stories is "Science Fiction Age" magazine. It
contains several short stories per issue and has an artist spotlight where
the works of a particular artist are featured. It might offer you guys some
ideas too.

\_/
DED

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #741
**********************************

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".
