Traveller-digest      Sunday, December 29 1996      Volume 1996 : Number 796



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE:Fleet Repair Ship
Starship Construction Figures
IG Pricing
Re: IG Pricing
Re: Ship construction... my bad!
Tax collections (kinda long)
Forerunner Artifacts & Other Matters
RE: IG Pricing 
RE: IG Pricing 
Load of Weapons (long)
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)
Re: Tech and Starports

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 96 07:57:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: RE:Fleet Repair Ship

> Following soon after will be the "Kenneth McCoy" Marine patrol ship

    One of the more interesting characters in W.E.B. Griffen's "The Corps" saga
of books.

Stephen

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 96 07:57:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Starship Construction Figures

    I have that most dangerous of questions to insert into the midst of this
debate... an intelligent one. ;)

    Has anyone looked at the construction times of the US Navy for submarine
construction?

    Though the elements in which they move are vastly dissimilar: a starship
moves through the Vacuum of Space, while a submarine moves through the
increasing pressure of water.  The Requirements of both vessels in terms of
supporting their crews and maintaining themselves as a viable weapons platform
are rather similar enough for the comparison to be worthwhile.  More to the
point let's put some RW values onto our speculations. ;)

Stephen

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 03:34:16 -0500
From: Rick Baumhauer <sennafan@rust.net>
Subject: IG Pricing

At the risk of incurring a "piling on" penalty, I'm going to chime in on
the pricing question.

I feel that the prices on the original rulebooks for T4 were reasonable,
though I would, of course, have preferred a less-rushed end product.  
Starships was overpriced, though I think this was because IG so totally
missed the mark with the book, rather than because there wasn't enough
in the book to justify the cost.  If there had been even a little of
what made SOM so great, I could have overlooked the awful deckplans and
been happy with the book.

I took a look at both CSC and Aliens Archive at my FLGS, and while they
represent a step in the right direction, content-wise, the pricing *IS*
way out-of-line, especially in the case of Aliens, which only makes it
to 96 pages by using an oversized font throughout.

While using TSR or WW as examples isn't really fair, it's hard to ignore
the fact that the new supplement for Fading Suns is ~120 pages, and
costs $15US.

WEG, while a "mid-size" company, does have to pay a pretty substantial
licensing fee to Lucasfilm for the Star Wars products, and this has
caused the SW line to be a bit overpriced for much of its life.  Even
taking all of that into account, however, most of the current SW
supplements run ~96 pages, and are typically $18US.

Based on the above, and the fact that I am more of a collector than a
player when it comes to Traveller, I passed on both CSC and Aliens - I
simply could not justify spending that much money on either product.  I
could have swallowed $18, maybe $20, but not $22.95 per book.

It seems to me that there are a few things seriously amiss at IG/AP,
primarily in the areas of pricing, editing, and simple good business
practices, and I am honestly having a hard time giving them financial
support until I am reasonably certain that the problems have been
solved.  Heck, I'd feel a LOT better if the problems were truly
acknowledged by IG.

Unfortunately, each week seems to bring a new problem at IG, with the
JTAS shipping charge fiasco merely the latest in what is becoming a
disturbingly long list of difficulties.   

I hope that IG gets its act together in the very near future, because I
honestly don't think that the game can survive for very long when each
product has a major flaw (Rulebook - editing, Starships - content, CSC
and Alien Archive - pricing).

Rick
- -- 
"If they think you're crude, go technical; 
if they think you're technical, go crude.  
I'm a very technical boy.  
So I decided to get as crude as possible."
					             
		William Gibson, "Johnny Mnemonic", 1981

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 04:18:56 -0700 (MST)
From: Bill Hutchinson <hbill@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: IG Pricing

$22.95 a book!
Maybe for a full set of rules for a game.
 

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hbill                                     __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
hbill@primenet.com                       /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
                                        /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, Rick Baumhauer wrote:

> At the risk of incurring a "piling on" penalty, I'm going to chime in on
> the pricing question.
> 
> I feel that the prices on the original rulebooks for T4 were reasonable,
> though I would, of course, have preferred a less-rushed end product.  
> Starships was overpriced, though I think this was because IG so totally
> missed the mark with the book, rather than because there wasn't enough
> in the book to justify the cost.  If there had been even a little of
> what made SOM so great, I could have overlooked the awful deckplans and
> been happy with the book.
> 
> I took a look at both CSC and Aliens Archive at my FLGS, and while they
> represent a step in the right direction, content-wise, the pricing *IS*
> way out-of-line, especially in the case of Aliens, which only makes it
> to 96 pages by using an oversized font throughout.
> 
> While using TSR or WW as examples isn't really fair, it's hard to ignore
> the fact that the new supplement for Fading Suns is ~120 pages, and
> costs $15US.
> 
> WEG, while a "mid-size" company, does have to pay a pretty substantial
> licensing fee to Lucasfilm for the Star Wars products, and this has
> caused the SW line to be a bit overpriced for much of its life.  Even
> taking all of that into account, however, most of the current SW
> supplements run ~96 pages, and are typically $18US.
> 
> Based on the above, and the fact that I am more of a collector than a
> player when it comes to Traveller, I passed on both CSC and Aliens - I
> simply could not justify spending that much money on either product.  I
> could have swallowed $18, maybe $20, but not $22.95 per book.
> 
> It seems to me that there are a few things seriously amiss at IG/AP,
> primarily in the areas of pricing, editing, and simple good business
> practices, and I am honestly having a hard time giving them financial
> support until I am reasonably certain that the problems have been
> solved.  Heck, I'd feel a LOT better if the problems were truly
> acknowledged by IG.
> 
> Unfortunately, each week seems to bring a new problem at IG, with the
> JTAS shipping charge fiasco merely the latest in what is becoming a
> disturbingly long list of difficulties.   
> 
> I hope that IG gets its act together in the very near future, because I
> honestly don't think that the game can survive for very long when each
> product has a major flaw (Rulebook - editing, Starships - content, CSC
> and Alien Archive - pricing).
> 
> Rick
> -- 
> "If they think you're crude, go technical; 
> if they think you're technical, go crude.  
> I'm a very technical boy.  
> So I decided to get as crude as possible."
> 					             
> 		William Gibson, "Johnny Mnemonic", 1981
> 

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 06:34:36 EST
From: Michael Nutt <misha@crossrds.com>
Subject: Re: Ship construction... my bad!

Hans Rancke-Madsen writes:

>Michael Nutt writes:

>>My comment above about "fiddling with the cost" was meant to reflect on the
>>fact that, if you get 1.8 weeks worth of  work done in each week, while only
>>*paying* for 1.0 weeks worth, you're getting a big price break... your total
>>price paid drops to around 56% of list cost for the ship. *That* big a break
>>would bother me, as a referee.
>
>I can't make out whether you think that this is the way the TCS rules work
>or not. If you do think so, then you're mistaken. Familiarity with a ship
>type (what you would call better scheduling) will allow you to do 1.4 weeks
>work per week, but it will also cost you 1.4 weeks cost per week. And if
>you increase the speed by paying 1.2 times the basic cost, you do 1.2 weeks
>work in 1 week, but at the cost of 1.2*1.2 times the basic cost per week.

Ergh. My mistake. It's been some time since I actively used the TCS
construction rules, and my quick review of them obviously wasn't thorough
enough. Hans is right, and I was wrong. On a vaguely related note, Hans, do
you have any comments on the back-and-forth between me and Thad about basing
yard capacity on yard workers as opposed to displacement tonnage?

Michael

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 06:34:41 EST
From: Michael Nutt <misha@crossrds.com>
Subject: Tax collections (kinda long)

Chris Cox wrote:
>Hans Rancke wrote:
>> You're making a perfectly natural mistake here, but a mistake
>>nonetheless.
>> Taxes can't be sent from one planet to another unless you have lots
>>of  cargo ships to carry valuable stuff between them. 
>
>and later says:
>> When Mikesh "pays" umpteen
>> million credits to the Imperium it dosen't actually send anything
>>more than 
>> a message saying "We'll do umpteen billion credits worth of work
>>for you for  free". 
>
>So are you saying that Mikesh never pays taxes but only agrees to do
>work at a later date for the Imperium?  If so who ends up paying the
>salaries for the Imperial Navy?  I don't know how things work in the
>rest of the world, but here in the U.S. taxes are deducted from my
>paycheck and electronically transferred to the government. Then
>government budgets out these funds and then government employees,
>contractors, etc. receive checks.  At no time is it necessary to
>transfer valuable stuff, and is actually impractical to do so.  I
>don't see why this won't work on an interstellar basis.  

Well, the "electronic transfer" you speak of isn't possible in the Third
Imperium, at least not on an interstellar scale *with the degree of
immediacy we are used to thinking of* (critical emphasis there). It's all
bookkeeping, really. At some point, the Mikesh planetary government will
send a data transmission off to the Imperial Treasury (I like to call it the
"Fisc"... sounds neater than "Treasury"), saying, "credit account number
such-and-such with X bajillion credits of tax collections, and we are
debiting our accounts to reflect this payment."  Later, the Imperial Fisc
will issue a message to the Navy Finances division, saying  "credit account
number so-and-so with Y bajillion credits, as your yearly budget allotment,
which is listed in Imperial Budget number Z".

Then come the rampaging Vargr (at least, so the published history says).

The courier from Mikesh won't be able to get through to send the message to
the Fisc. The courier from Capital can't get through with the yearly budget,
or with the message transferring the money to the Navy. Here's where things
get dicey. There are probably some kind of intermediary collection points,
on the sector or subsector level. These fiscal officials can either say,
"Well, we've not gotten any messages from Capital, so we'll just let the
money accumulate in these tax collection accounts, and work on sharpening up
our Vargr language skills", or... they can go ahead and allocate funds back
to the Navy.

 Of course, they'll keep records, and it'll be mentioned as an "emergency
measure"... nobody wants to get executed for peculation if/when contact is
reliably reestablished with Capital, although *some* of the money will
surely stick to the fingers of some officials. Still, the allocations will
be about the same as regular wartime monies will be, since taxes are
(conveniently) all the same rate everywhere, and based strictly on
population... i.e., a citizen of the Spinward Marches doesn't have higher
taxes than a citizen in Ilelish, for example. So, 56th Fleet HQ suddenly has
a budget... and no ships to maintain. Nobody's there needing repairs.
Nobody's drawing salaries (well, obviously there's *some* skeleton of the
Fleet left, running bases and such... but not nearly as many as there used
to be). So... the Admiral in charge will start construction programs in a
hellacious hurry, because he *knows* that the Vargr could make a big ol'
mess of the sector if he doesn't have any ships to fight them with. The
reserve Fleets are nice, yes... but he needs a regular Fleet, and he needs
it *bad*.

><snippage>

>> And even if he is such a chump surely the Mikesh 
>> government will find good use for the available starship
>construction 
>> capacity (Come to think of it, they will HAVE to build more ships
>unless they want a major recession).
>
>I think that a either a recession or maybe just an economic downturn
>is what will happen (depending on how much of the economy is based on
>ship maintenance).  Those workers would become unemployed and would
>then need to seek employment elsewhere.  This is how it worked for me
>when I went from building missiles to my current job at an investment
>bank.  Your suggestion that the government switches ship maintenance
>capacity to ship building capacity despite a lack of funds would
>cause inflation, which in turn could lead to the recession that you
>were trying to avoid in the fist place (I'm not an expert on
>economics, so if someone who is would care to comment it would be
>appreciated)

<chuckle> Avoiding a recession is secondary to "not getting overrun by the
Vargr". Oh, sure, the interruption in trade and communications with the core
regions of the Imperium will cause an economic slump, and there's not much
to be done about it except go kick Vargr butts. Still, proper bookkeeping
will ease a lot of the financial worries of the region. If there ever *had*
been a resumption of contact, then things would have been hairy to figure
out, but nobody in charge of an invaded sector is going to let his critical
defense industries go down the tubes just out of a pollyannaish desire to
play by the *previous* rules of the tax game.

Essentially, Hans' earlier point seems to be that "I'll (Mikesh) give you
(the Fisc) X amount of credits, which you'll then give back to me in
exchange for performing a particular amount of work". Essentially true, if
overly simplified. As you point out, some of it will go to individuals in
Imperial Service, and other parts of it will disappear in general overhead
costs.

Michael

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 00:16:26 +1100
From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
Subject: Forerunner Artifacts & Other Matters

Something I read the other day got me thinking -- so bear with me for a
moment, even those who would claim its an unusual situation ;-)

Imagine that you have a brand new 1997 model Car (fill in model and make of
choice), just off the showroom floor, in fact - less than 20 ks on the
clock. OK, then imagine that you immediately put it into your garage at
home on returning from the showroom and, without further ado, left it
there. You make no attempts to prepare it for storage - its just sitting
there.

How many months do you think would pass before some vital subsystem would
malfunction if you decided to get into it one day and simply turn the key
in the ignition and drive away? Six months? Twelve months? Two years? Ten
Years? A hundred years?

I think we can safely say that the chances of it being operational without
*much* work after as little as *ten* years would be close to zero; and
after a hundred it would take more work than the machine would be worth,
except as a "vintage" car, to get it running again.

Rubber parts decay, plastics stiffen and crack, fuel evaporates, fabrics
decay or are attacked by insects, metal parts rust.

Even if it was stored, unprepared, in a vacuum, metal parts tend to surface
weld themselves in such conditions over lengthy periods of time, though if
it was a *space* vehicle the overall structure may remain relatively sound.

Try the same thing with, say, a brand new Laptop Computer, top of the line
model. Because it doesn't rely as much (in some ways) on moving parts,
perhaps it *might* last a little longer - perhaps not.

What's the point? Well, what defines Forerunner Artifacts - *some* of them
(considerable numbers, in fact, *all* Black Globe generators are Forerunner
artifacts, remember!) - still work some hundreds of thousands of years
after being abandoned (for whatever reason). Whether this is *real world*
realistic or not, it is something that evidently *defines* Forerunner tech
(or some of it, at least).

We also know from the Darrian sourcebook that TL16 Starships and related
tech lasts for a 1000 years or more - though this was contradicted in the
Regency Soucebook, something I personally would ignore - but, then, you all
know that I believe that TNE and Virus were a bad joke :-(

Regardless of whether Virus exists or not, the thing defining TL16 tech
seems to be that it, too, is much longer lasting than would normally be
expected.

So this is the question - why?

This is rhetorical, of course! I have a *suggestion* -- one that actually
ties in with the insult to the intelligence that was Virus (though one that
makes what Virus was *vastly* more believable ... the idea of walking
microchips is about as ludicrous and science-fantasy as you can get).

Well, *how* would these items last for so long? The answer seems to be that
they must have some capacity for *self-repair*. In a limited sense they
must be "alive". I would suggest that its the *electronics* alone that are
most likely to be like this - and, while I doubt that they'd be alive in
the sense that they were in the "Virus" descriptions we have (which seem to
be based on a silly idea by someone who had not a clue about computers and
what they may be like in 3000 years time - OK, I admit it, I *lothed* the
*stupidity* of Virus :-(  -- means that they would have to have some sort
of inbuilt "template" for their circuitry and that this *could* become
corrupted under the wrong conditions ... at least if the "right"
precautions were not taken.

Perhaps it is simply that this was the Imperium, a TL15 culture, making its
first tottering steps towards TL16 ... and eventually to something
approaching the reliability of Forerunner level tech. It certainly puts
"Virus" in a new light - and makes the pathetic anti-computer fears of the
Regency and RefCol just that, pathetic ... superstitious drivel based on a
lack of understanding (and, in the case of the RefCol, perhaps, a lack of a
*desire* to understand) as to where the new tech had gone wrong. But, then,
the Vilani have always had an anti-computer streak that the Terrans don't
seem to have had.

Would Darrian computers have been affected by Virus? We don't know, as the
Regency and RefCol and their era are years away from ever being broached
again (and it can't be *too* far away for me!), and, anyway, since the
Regency effectively cut itself off from the rest of the Imperium to protect
itself from the Virus, thus "protecting" the Darrians from something that
they may never have needed protection against anyway, we'll probably never
know.

But would *ancient* level computers have been affected by Virus. According
to the ludicrous way it seems to have been implemented in TNE, *yes*.
According to my suggestion? NO! The Ancient computers would be a *mature*
level of self-repair tech (if they haven't gone beyond that, in fact), and
so would probably not even recognise the presence of viral code!

Anyway, its an idea that I thought might be of interest, whether you think
Virus is garbage or not.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@.curie.dialix.oz.au
Have Game Designer, Will Travel

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 10:50:22 -0500 (EST)
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
Subject: RE: IG Pricing 

In Reply to Your Message of Sun, 29 Dec 1996 04: 18:56 MST
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 10:50:21 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@brahms.udel.edu>

: > I feel that the prices on the original rulebooks for T4 were reasonable,
: > though I would, of course, have preferred a less-rushed end product.  
: > Starships was overpriced, though I think this was because IG so totally
: > missed the mark with the book, rather than because there wasn't enough
: > in the book to justify the cost.  If there had been even a little of
: > what made SOM so great, I could have overlooked the awful deckplans and
: > been happy with the book.

Ah I think I see the difference in our discussions.  I'll agree that the
T4 line isn't worth the price we're paying for the books (with the
exception of the CSC).

Unfortunately, value of content is not the creteria for pricing a book.
Factors such as production costs, variable and fixed business costs, and
size of print run determine the cost of a book.

Value of content is however what makes us determine if we want to buy
the book or not.  The book may or may not be worth the price tag--that
however is a purely subjective matter.

       --Jerry

8) Jerry Alexandratos                %  "Nothing inhabits my    (8 
8) darkstar@strauss.udel.edu         %   thoughts, and oblivion (8
8) darkstar@canary.pearson.udel.edu  %   drives my desires."    (8

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 10:51:17 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: RE: IG Pricing 

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, That Computer Guy wrote:

> Unfortunately, value of content is not the creteria for pricing a book.
> Factors such as production costs, variable and fixed business costs, and
> size of print run determine the cost of a book.

Hmmm.  In college, they drilled it into our heads that cost should have 
nothing to do with price.  You charge what you can get.  If you can't 
charge enough to cover your costs, then you don't produce the product.  
Other than that, cost and price should have no relationship.  There's no 
such thing as too much profit. =)

Heck, look at the cost of producing Nike shoes in Korea or wherever 
they're producing them now, vs. the price of those shoes.  Really, the 
clothing industry as a whole is a good example of "all the market will 
bear" in action.


- -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: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 19:36:16 +0200
From: Antti Lahtinen <lahtinen@ee.tut.fi>
Subject: Load of Weapons (long)

        During the Christmas holiday I took some time to bug-fix my
        old FFS design spreadsheets. I checked my weapon design
        spreadsheets against all weapon designs found in TNE
        "Reformation Coalition Equipment Guide", and I noticed that
        many of the RCEG weapons had design errors or features that
        should have been removed during a reality check. (over 20cm
        long flash suppressors, RAM adapter placed atop of flash
        suppressor, Ithklur gauss pistol has some values calculated
        as 5.5/12.5 and some as 5.5/25, etc.)

        I added some new features to the design spreadsheet (advanced
        materials, ETC HPG/magazine battery, Gauss HPG/magazine
        battery, volume-based grip-magazine capacity, caseless
        ammunition, cut-and-paste final datasheet, weapon data in TNE,
        T4, Timelords and CORPS formats, etc.) and tested the
        spreadheet against real-world weapon data. While there is still
        many problems, FFS versions of modern weapons can come very
        close to real-world values.

        Anyway, in case someone might be interested, here is some
        sample weapons I designed for my campaign.

- ---

5.56x45mm Assault Rifle (M-Z M16A6)

This is an old Solomani rifle dating from 1996 AD, and it is 
basically an upgraded version of the AR-15 rifle. Instead of 
using stock-mounted recoil spring tube and long bolt carrier, 
this weapon has re-designed gas system and shortened bolt 
carrier. This allows the use of a true folding stock instead of 
using semi-retractable stock as in M4 carbine. The receiver is
made of 7075-T6 aircraft alloy.

Weapon Type:		TL-9 light self-loading longarm
Ammunition:		5.56x45mm TL-8 necked
Muzzle Energy:		1600 joules
Weapon Length:		70 cm (stock folded), 90 cm (stock open)
Weapon Weight:		3.722 kg loaded, 3.199 kg empty, with no magazine
Weapon Price:		Cr 687.84
Magazine Weight:	0.523 kg loaded, 0.196 kg empty
Magazine Price:		Cr 2 (30 round box)
Ammunition Price:	Cr 0.22 (Ball), Cr 0.48 (DS, HP)
Ammunition Weight:	10.9 grams per round
Features:		Iron sight, folding stock, muzzle brake.
			Flattop upper receiver has an integral
			Weaver-style rail and no carrying handle
Notes:			Hard steel barrel, light alloy receiver,
			light alloy magazine. Optic sight gives
			SR=40m, and telescopic or electronic sight
			gives SR=50m.

Name		ROF	Dam Val	Pen Rtg	Bulk	Magaz	SS	Burst	S Range
5.56x45mm Ball	10	3	1-Nil	6/4	30	2	9	30
5.56x45mm DS	10	3	1-2-Nil	6/4	30	2	9	40
5.56x45mm HP	10	4	Nil	6/4	30	2	9	30

- ---

4.93x33mm Caseless Assault Rifle (H&K G11K5)

Based on the H&K G11K2 assault rifle, this weapon has gyroscopic
recoil compensator instead of free-floating self-compensating action
used in G11-series. (This weapon comes very close to the "Rifle,
Bullpup" described in T4 rulebook. However, the T4 price of "Cr300"
must be typo, because the barrel and receiver alone cost Cr528.)

Weapon Type:		TL-9 light self-loading longarm
Ammunition:		4.93x33mm TL-9 telescoped caseless
Muzzle Energy:		1448 joules
Weapon Length:		75 cm
Weapon Weight:		3.502 kg loaded, 3.181 kg empty, with no magazine
Weapon Price:		Cr 990.1
Magazine Weight:	0.321 kg loaded, 0.071 kg empty
Magazine Price:		Cr 1 (50 round box)
Ammunition Price:	Cr 0.1 (Ball), 0.2 (DS, HP)
Ammunition Weight:	5 grams per round
Features:		Optic sight, bullpup stock, gyroscopic
                        compensator.
Notes:                  Light alloy receiver, plastic magazine.

Name		ROF	Dam Val	Pen Rtg	Bulk	Magaz	SS	Burst	S Range
4.93x33mmC Ball	5	3	1-Nil	5	50	1	3	40
4.93x33mmC DS	5	3	1-2-Nil	5	50	1	3	40
4.93x33mmC HP	5	4	3-Nil	5	50	1	3	40

- ---

5.56x45mm ETC Assault Rifle (Steyr ETC)

The 5.56x45mm ETC AR is a Solomani weapon based on the ETC
version of 5.56x45mm Nato ammunition and short-stroke gas-piston
receiver. The long muzzle brake doubles as 22mm BTU adapter
(Bullet Trap Universal), can be used to launch any standard BTU
and BTU RAM grenades.
(Design loosely based on the 5.5mm Assault Rifle in RCEG, page 52.)

Weapon Type:		TL-9 light self-loading longarm
Ammunition:		5.56x45mm TL-9 necked ETC
Muzzle Energy:		4561 joules, required energy: 273 joules
Weapon Length:		117.3 cm
Weapon Weight:		3.007 kg loaded, 2.571 kg empty, with no magazine
Weapon Price:		Cr 1319.29
Magazine Weight:	0.436 kg loaded, 0.109 kg empty
Magazine Price:		Cr 2 (30 round box)
Ammunition Price:	Cr 0.22 (Ball), Cr 0.44 (DS, HP)
Ammunition Weight:	10.9 grams per round
Features:		Optic sight, bullpup stock, bayonet 
			lug, long muzzle brake.
Notes:			Barrel, receiver, muzzle brake and
			magazine are manufactured from light
 			composite materials. BTU grenades fit 
			over the muzzle brake.
										
Name		ROF	Dam Val	Pen Rtg	Bulk	Magaz	SS	Burst	S Range
5.56x45mmE Ball	3/5	5	2-3-Nil	7	30	1	1/2	90	
5.56x45mmE DS	3/5	5	1-2-3	7	30	1	1/2	110	
5.56x45mmE HP	3/5	6	4-5-Nil	7	30	1	1/2	90	

- ---

7mm Advanced Combat Rifle (Ares ACR)

The 7mm ACR is light and powerful advanced combat rifle that is 
based on the imperial 7x30mm ETC round. The weapon is 
completely ambidextrous and comes with telescopic sight.
(Design loosely based the 7mm ACR in RCEG, page 60.)

Weapon Type:		TL-9 light self-loading bullpup longarm
Ammunition:		7x30mm TL-9 necked ETC
Muzzle Energy:		4803 joules, required energy: 288 joules
Weapon Length:		93.2 cm
Weapon Weight:		2.521 kg loaded, 1.912 kg empty, with no magazine
Weapon Price:		Cr 1094.51
Magazine Weight:	0.609 kg loaded, 0.149 kg empty
Magazine Price:		Cr 2 (40 round box)
Ammunition Price:	Cr 0.23 (Ball), Cr 0.46 (DS, HP)
Ammunition Weight:	11.5 grams per round
Features:		Telescopic sight, bullpup stock, 
			long muzzle brake.
Notes:			Barrel, receiver, muzzle brake and
			magazine are manufactured from light
 			composite materials. BTU grenades fit 
			over the muzzle brake.

Name		ROF	Dam Val	Pen Rtg	Bulk	Magaz	SS	Burst	S Range
7x30mmE Ball	5	5	2-3-Nil	6	40	2	5	100
7x30mmE DS	5	5	1-2-3	6	40	2	5	120
7x30mmE HE	5	6	4-Nil	6	40	2	5	100

- ---

7.62mm Advanced Combat rifle (SAKO 762Rk144)

The 7.62mm ACR is a Solomani weapon based on 7.62x39mm ETC 
ammunition and Kalashnicov-style gas-operated receiver. While 
the weapon has quite long barrel and long muzzle brake, the 
bullpup configuration makes the complete rifle still shorter 
than most conventional rifles.
The weapon has ambidextrous controls and reversible ejection 
port. The carrying handle contains build-in optic sight.

Weapon Type:		TL-10 light self-loading bullpup longarm
Ammunition:		7.62x39mm TL-10 necked ETC
Muzzle Energy:		6812 joules, required energy: 444 joules
Weapon Length:		101 cm
Weapon Weight:		3.197 kg loaded, 2.556 kg empty, with no magazine
Weapon Price:		Cr 1804.81
Magazine Weight:	0.641 kg loaded, 0.107 kg empty
Magazine Price:		Cr 2 (30 round box)
Ammunition Price:	Cr 0.36 (Ball), Cr 0.72 (DS, HP)
Ammunition Weight:	17.8 grams per round
Features:		Optic sight, bullpup stock, long muzzle 
			brake, gyroscopic compensator. 
Notes:			Barrel, receiver, muzzle brake and
			magazine are manufactured from crystal
 			iron. BTU grenades fit over the muzzle 
			brake.

		ROF	Dam Val	Pen Rtg	Bulk	Magaz	SS	Burst	S Range	
7.62x39mmE Ball	10	6	2-4-6	6	30	1	6	90
7.62x39mmE DS	10	6	1-3-5	6	30	1	6	110
7.62x39mmE HP	10	7	4-6-Nil	6	30	1	6	90

- ---

T4 Data
Name			Damage	TL	Range	Shots	Mass	Reloads	Cost
Rifle, 5.56x45mm AR	3	9	Short	30	3.7 kg	0.5 kg	Cr690
Rifle, 4.93x33mmC AR	3	9	Short	50	3.5 kg	0.3 kg	Cr995
Rifle, 5.56x45mmE AR-9  5	9	Medium	30	3.0 kg	0.4 kg	Cr1320	
Rifle, 7x30mmE ACR-9    5	9	Medium	40	2.5 kg	0.6 kg	Cr1095
Rifle, 7.62mmE ACR-10   6	10	Medium	30	3.2 kg	0.6 kg	Cr1805

TNE Data
Name            DV (Pen)    Recoil  Range Bulk TL Mass  ExtMag ROF Magaz Price
M-Z M16A6       3 (1-Nil)   S:2,B:9  30m  6/4   9 3.7kg 0.5kg  10  30     688
H&K G11K5       3 (1-Nil)   S:1,B:3  40m  5     9 3.5kg 0.3kg   5  50     991
Steyr ETC       5 (2-3-Nil) S:1,B:2  90m  7     9 3.0kg 0.4kg   5  30    1320
Ares ACR        5 (2-3-Nil) S:2,B:5 100m  6     9 2.5kg 0.6kg   5  40	 1095
SAKO 762Rk144   6 (2-4-6)   S:1,B:6  90m  6    10 3.2kg 0.6kg  10  30	 1805

        Antti Lahtinen    :     Justice is Only a Wish of a Weak
        al76188@cs.tut.fi :

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 12:13:07 -0600
From: Ernest N Rowland <erowland@ionet.net>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)

> From: sam thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
> The point that is being made is that "questionable"(understatement) business
> practices that IG has made in the past, will only drive away the potential
<snip> <snip> <snip>

I disagree completely.  Sure, IG has had some startup problems, and somebody
was in too much of a hurry to bring out T4 without putting the polish on the
systems and production values.  Yes, we should complain when things are
screwed-up, so that IG is aware of the problem, but I see too many people just
going ballistic over these problems!  Give it a rest!

I think part of the problem is expectations versus reality.  If we were new to
Traveller, the problems would be annoying, but not necessarily fatal (assuming
we would know where to find the errata!)  But as people who have known and
loved Traveller for a long time (17 years in my case), the expectation of a
really great, "kick-butt" version of Traveller got my expectations very high,
and I was disappointed.  But I am willing to give IG a chance, and am looking
forward to them surviving long enough for T4 2nd Edition, with all the errata
corrected and artwork in the correct places (and those dang black borders
gone!)

And remember, all these complaints on the TML (which tend to feed off each
other) have come fast and furious, too fast for IG to formulate a response,
_much_less_ make production changes and ship products that reflect those
changes!

"Can't we all just get along?" (tm)

I'm happy that Traveller is not yet dead, and I want to give my support to IG 
and GoldRush and DGP(?) and whoever else is trying to bring it back as the 
premier science fiction game (and it was once - just look at the 
acknowledgements that SJGames and RTalisorian give in GURPS Space and the 
CyberPunk space supplements to the influence of Traveller and Marc Miller, 
etc).

8-)
Ernest N Rowland
erowland@ionet.net
"The flag is solid red, except where a thin ring-shaped hole has been cut
out of it, through which one can see the sky."-GEB:EGB

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:11:01 -0600
From: Ernest N Rowland <erowland@ionet.net>
Subject: Re: Tech and Starports

I think this thread has definite gaming possibilities - the reaction of locals
to advanced offworld technology would vary widely from planet to planet
(culture to culture) - here we have an opportunity to make different worlds
seem different in yet another way.

DGP's "World Builders Handbook" (IMHO the epitome of DGP's contributions to
Traveller) has a set of Social Outlook tables, including a "Progressiveness"
table (7a, pg 74) ranging from radical to reactionary on one 2d6 axis and
enterprising to stagnant on another 2d6 axis.  I would use those values to
determine how likely a culture was to become dependent on outside advanced
technology.

Advanced Tech Acceptance Tables
- -------------------------------
               Action
               ------
Attitude       Enterprising   Advancing   Indifferent Stagnant
- --------
Radical           -5             -4           -3        -2
Progressive       -3             -2           -1        +0
Conservative      +0             +1           +2        +3
Reactionary       +2             +3           +4        +5

The above table gives a DM to the roll made on the following table:

2d6   cultural reaction to advanced tech
- ---   ----------------------------------
 2    eagerly embraces all aspects, massive imitation and importation
3,4   admires advanced technology, will use as can afford it
5,6   accepts only most useful, large scale tech (power generation)
 7    accepts only minor, non-critical items (trinkets)
8,9   refuses access to tech for locals
10,11 reviles offworld technology (offworlders at risk!)
12    hates technology, starport considered a hostile invasion

It shouldn't be too difficult to add modifiers for the local law levels and
government types also.  For example, higher law and gov levels would tend to
add positive DMs to the roll.

8-)
Ernest N Rowland
erowland@ionet.net
"The flag is solid red, except where a thin ring-shaped hole has been cut
out of it, through which one can see the sky."-GEB:EGB

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #796
**********************************
