Traveller-digest       Tuesday, June 3 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1400



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Babylon Five and More...
Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4
Re: Hi Pop Worlds
Re: Statistical impressions II (and B pop worlds)
Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4
Re: SSDS & QSDS
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1396
Re: Nukes for T4
Re: Trading Systems
Re: FS Statistical impressions
Re: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4
Surrey Traveller players
FS/M0 Data
Re: Progress (was Re: FS Statistical impressions)
Re: Hi Pop Worlds
Re: Re:FFS Gauss weapons
Re: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4
Re: Hmmmm...Is the truth stranger..
Re: Trading Systems
Re: Hi Pop Worlds
FFS Gauss Weapons Design Question

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 97 05:09:57 -0400
From: FKiesche@concentric.net
Subject: Babylon Five and More...

Greetings All:

Following up on the praises on the recent B5 episode...

Great stuff: Loved the drama, loved the story, loved the space battles. 
Wish there had been more and I wish I could have seen this on a big 
screen (B5: The Next Generation Movie anyone?).

Anyhow--take a look at the "Lurkers Guide" B5 web page if you are 
interested in the show. Lots of news on the upcoming TBS made for TV 
movies (yes movies, two of them) as well a possible spinoff. And many 
hints on background, plot, questions, etc., etc., on shows seen and shows 
forthcoming...

On the gaming front my main supplier (Dragon's Trove) is stating that the 
board/space combat/miniatures game should be out soon. I've got a massive 
order of minis on record, so any gamers in Central New Jersey are welcome 
to come and drool when they come in (of course, I will try to talk you 
into joining my upcoming Traveller game as well...).

The B5 minis have gotten some good advanced reviews, so I would urge 
those with no interest in B5 to check them out for use with Traveller. I 
would also suggest a gander (if you can find them) at some of the stuff 
that was done for FASA's now-gone Renegade Legion games. Some useable 
space fighters as well as ground stuff there...



Frederick Paul Kiesche III
(FKiesche@concentric.net)
(Traveller since 1977!)

"For two weeks,then, preparations can be made...The characters should be 
heavily involved in such planning...after all, their safety will depend 
on the precision and coordination of the attacks they launch."

- --The Traveller Adventure, GDW, 1983

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:04:47 -0400
From: Andy Brick <exeus@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4

Hi all,

I've got a quibble with the nuclear warheads listed in Sam Thomas' postin=
g.
He has stats for
massive gigaton and teraton devices, which seem a little excessive to me.=
 I
thought there was an =

upper limited to nukes, because the fury of the explosion tore the device=

apart before the
full payload could be involved in the chain reaction. As far as I know, t=
he
upper limit is about
6 gigatons. Anyone want to correct me / agree with me ?

Also, a nuke is a nuke is a nuke. You need the same critical mass
regardless of tech level to
achieve a chain reaction. So why does the bore size decrease with TL ? Ar=
e
warheads getting =

longer as tech advances ? :-).

Just my Cr0.02.

Andy Brick
exeus@compuserve.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/exeus/ <--- 2300AD web pages !!!=

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:42:10 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: Hi Pop Worlds

- -> 
- -> sector  hex name        uwp     population(%'age)
- -> cdr 3225    Shaniin     C226BEE-9   8E+11   72%
- -> dag 2512    Irash.      B220BAD-C   5E+11   35%
- -> del 0512    Khakakir.   A000BDD-9   5E+11   25%
- -> del 1213    Sabaagiirar.    B767BAC-A   8E+11   39%
- -> lis 0626    Gishgi.     A300BBB-B   1E+11   7%
- -> lis 2333    Leim Ku .   B360BC9-B   4E+11   28%
- -> mas 0510    Shig .      B362BAB-8   4E+11   25%
- ->                     Total   3.5E+12 26%
Yes, begone, you extreme high-pop worlds

- -> The problem arises, of course, of explaining why the Imperium arose in
- -> Core, with this distribution of technology, and why do we persist in
- -> calling it the 'Long Night' when at this point, there is 74% of the
- -> population in the galaxy living at Early Stellar or above tech levels.
Yes, drop those TL's, drop!
- -> I haven't got my books here, so I'm not sure how that went...were there
- -> hostilities between Vland and the 3I or was it a peaceful merger?
All info i have makes it look like a peaceful thing "Vland joined 
early on" and suchlike!
 

Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:46:17 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: Statistical impressions II (and B pop worlds)

- -> Yes, but why should I change this, unless we're saying, for some reason,
- -> that hi pop worlds can't exist. It's been mentioned many times throughout
- -> canon that the Hi Pop worlds are what shape and drive the
- -> imperium...they're your biggest markets and the biggest movers and
- -> shakers. The fact that for almost all of the Traveller timeline, the game
- -> play was set far off in the provinces doesn't change the fact that the
- -> social and technological dynamic of the Imperium IS set and ruled by those
- -> Hi Pop planets.
- -> Unless we decide that these Hi Pop worldsare wrong, either in TL or
- -> otherwise they're part of the picture we have to develop of the young
- -> Imperium.
I feel they ARE wrong. Highest pop-level always was A, no higher. The 
high pop worlds mentioned above always meant Worlds of pop 9-A, 
higher worlds were never considered since they were impossible to 
create! These worlds seriously unbalance the m:0 environment, so they 
sould be toned down to A!
 




Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:56:23 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4

>Also, a nuke is a nuke is a nuke. You need the same critical mass
>regardless of tech level to
>achieve a chain reaction. So why does the bore size decrease with TL ? Are
>warheads getting
>longer as tech advances ? :-).
>
>Just my Cr0.02.

Higher TL warheads will be triggered by something else than a standard
fission bomb.
Laser triggers, gravitic compression, super unstable isotopes in damper
fields etc. When they get rid of the fission trigger the warheads will get
increasingly smaller, right.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:20:25 +0300 (EET DST)
From: "Mikko V. I. Parviainen" <mvparvia@cc.hut.fi>
Subject: Re: SSDS & QSDS

Thanks for the information! Possibly there's a new constestant in June
THUDDD...

Mikko Parviainen

http://www.hut.fi/~mvparvia

Teach kids the value of a dollar, give them a dime.

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 23:33:43 +1200
From: Andrew Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1396

>Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 20:54:10 -0800
>From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
>Subject: Re:  Tech, RoM and M:0

>Andrew Vallance (a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz) writes:

>[SNIP]

>>... M:0 is set firmly in the middle of the former Ziru Sirka, so the vast
>>majority of relics are actually going to be TL 11, with a sprinkling of TL 12.

>If this was the case, I would agree with you; a few barely functional
>relics only slightly more advanced than current technology would add
>adventure plots without invalidating canon and turning the game into a
>treasure hunt. The trouble is, that is not the impression I got from FS;
>there seemed to be a lot of worlds far more advanced than Sylea. I just
>didn't see how the Third Imperium was supposed to have conquered all these
>vastly more powerful systems yet not have advanced to TL 14 itself for
>centuries. And EA states the RoM had "experimental" TL 15 weaponry. This
>just didn't fit with my understanding of Traveller history or the FS data;
>shouldn't some of the more stable systems have been able to advance past TL
>15 after 1700 years?

I wholeheartedly agree here. Just a quick flick through FS was enough
to indicate that something was seriously wrong. Corridor has no less than
7 worlds at TL 12 and one at TL 13, they just shouldn't be there (yes I do
know other people have noticed this :*). Two or three TL 12 worlds I
can believe, but not seven.

With EA (and CSC) I think its neccessary to be a bit 'easy' with canon.
Greg Porter was trying to produce the suppliments in RPG mode so to
speak. These suppliments are presumably ment to be useable with more
than one milieu, so they have to include higher than M:0 tech; and it's
very hard to do that and stay in M:0 RPG mode. I think its best just to
regard the supposed experimental TL 14+ RoM stuff as theoretical
design studies.

As to relics, some real good fun can be had. Imagine your PC's as
the find a repairable TL 13 RoM computer; only to repair it and find
that a) it can't interface with anything they've got and b) the software
on it is just the TL 13 equivilant of Claris Works and a whole load of
games. Or a laser rifle that won't accept standard Imperial power
couplings. The list could go on for quite awhile :*).

>Amen to your plea against overuse.

It was getting so that the code for an Ancient base was starport X :*) I'd
hate to see that happen for the RoM (or anything).


  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:03:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Nukes for T4

>Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 22:26:42 -0500
>From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
>Subject: Nuclear Warheads for T4

>I have generated some values for nuclear warheads for the use in T4, My
>values will differ from the ones in EA because Greg did not use the value
>for TNT, I used the same procedure that he used just I used the value for 
TNT.

>All of the nukes below are TL-15 warheads, if you want TL-12 warheads just
>read down the CM column 2 rows, Example
>a TL-12 1 kton warhead would be the mass and volume of a 12 cm warhead
>rather than a 10 cm warhead.

<Snippage of tables and charts of dammages for Giga  and Teraton weapons>

(The Commander sees the dammages for those big nukes and nearly has a cow!)

Ahem...
Going to blow up Sylea with your Pu238 Explosive Space modulatooooooor?
It's blocking your view of Vland?  :-) (Giggle!)

Marvin the Martian, cute alien guy or Grandfather....You decide!
:-) (Chuckle)

This has been more insanity
brought to you by X-TEK
makers of Chthulhu Chip Cookies!
Insanely Delicious!

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 01:37:55 +1200
From: Rupert Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Trading Systems

At 05:09 3/06/97 -0400, Frederick Paul Kiesche III
wrote:
>Greetings All:
>
>O.K., so we had the favorite space combat system discussion, here's a new 
>one...
>
>What system do you use for trading activities? Off of the top of my head 
>I can think of:
>
>Classic Traveller system
>Book Eight: Merchant Prince system
>MegaTraveller System
>Traveller: TNE rules
>Rob Prior's home grown system on his web pages
>..any others?
>
>All thoughts welcome!

My vote has to go with the old Classic Traveller system. I still use it, as
I like the choices it gives - do we go for staples (garanteed profit, but
not much) or go for the high risk, high return option?

R. Boleyn
 <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
TNE to the core

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 01:24:06 +1200
From: Rupert Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: FS Statistical impressions

At 12:34 2/06/97 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> 
>> If that's the case, then how in all creation did the TL12 Sylean Federation
>> get to be the centre and prime mover in the new empire? One High population
>> TL14 system in the central region of the Empire(s) would put an end to
>> Sylea's Imperial ambitions real quick.
>
>Unless there was some compelling reason to join the Imperium...market
>access, or perhaps they joined with the intentions of co-opting Cleon's
>reign, maybe?
>
>Bruce Johnson

My point was that it would be the Syleans joining the TL14 and its
billions, not the other way round.

R. Boleyn
 <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
TNE to the core

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 01:35:20 +1200
From: Rupert Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4

At 05:04 3/06/97 -0400, Andy Brick wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I've got a quibble with the nuclear warheads listed in Sam Thomas' posting.
>He has stats for
>massive gigaton and teraton devices, which seem a little excessive to me. I
>thought there was an 
>upper limited to nukes, because the fury of the explosion tore the device
>apart before the
>full payload could be involved in the chain reaction. As far as I know, the
>upper limit is about
>6 gigatons. Anyone want to correct me / agree with me ?
>
>Also, a nuke is a nuke is a nuke. You need the same critical mass
>regardless of tech level to
>achieve a chain reaction. So why does the bore size decrease with TL ? Are
>warheads getting 
>longer as tech advances ? :-).
>
>Just my Cr0.02.
>
>Andy Brick

Firstly the percentage of the fusion 'fuel' that is 'fuzed' does go down,
so the bomb becomes less efficient, but I don't think it drops fast enough
for there to be any real size limit for a fusion bomb. BTW the RL price of
a fusion bomb rises very slowly with yield, as the expensive bit is the
fission trigger.

On your second point - this isn't so, as research into sub-critical devices
shows that under sufficient pressure a normally sub-critical quantity of
Uranium or Plutonium can be made to undergo fission. Also onse the TL
advances to a point where fission triggers are no longer needed the size of
a bomb would be determined by yield and TL only, with no real lower limit.

Hydrogen-Grenade anyone?

R. Boleyn
 <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
TNE to the core

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:56:18 -0400
From: Douglas N Sinclair <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
Subject: Surrey Traveller players

Is anyone on the list from Surrey, UK?  I'm moving to Guildford in
September and I'm wondering if there are any other gamers in town.
Please respond via email.

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 14:59:57 +0100
From: Nigel Hawkins <nigelh@pavilion.co.uk>
Subject: FS/M0 Data

< Cut power to Black Globe Generators! Open Comms!>

   Whilst you fine people with lots of spare time are fixing said
Data,could you see your way clear to putting the Subsector names back where
they belong? I hate using the letters: It lacks style and gravitas somehow.
   Ta, 
             Andy C.
   CT player/GM since 1982,collector since 1993.

< Well, they know we're here now,lads: keep a good eye on those screens:
Black Globes to Flicker!> 

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:15:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brett Fishburne <bfish@atlantech.net>
Subject: Re: Progress (was Re: FS Statistical impressions)

ACK!  Clearly I was educated by Jesuits...

At 11:38 PM 6/2/97 -0700, John R. Snead wrote:
>Brett Fishburne <bfish@atlantech.net> wrote:
>
>>A general comment.  There was virtually no progress during the dark ages,
>>which lasted several hundred years.  The dark ages broke down (and
>>repression with it) and the advances started again.  I think there should be
>>a lot more repressive regimes than the survey indicates...Of course, I have
>>only sampled the data by hand as of yet...
>
>If you are referring to Europe's "Dark Ages" you are entirely incorrect.
>Crop rotation, improved horse collars, windmills (borrowed from Central
>Asia) Stirrups (borrowed from Asia), Gunpowder (borrowed from Asia),
>mechanical clocks (the basic for modern gear technology) all were invented
>or brought into Europe from 500 AD-1300 AD.  In many ways, this era had a
>faster rate of technological progress than the Roman Empire. [1]
>
>The inventions I listed as borrowed from Asia (generally from China) were
>imported by Westerner travelers, the rest were invented by Europeans, all
>during the "Dark Ages".  The only time the technological progress of a
>large society ceases is when it is actively falling apart.  The rate of
>progress may be slow (and often is) or it may be rapid, but it happens. 
>
>The concept of the "Dark Ages" is a myth made up by scholars in the
>Renaissance to make themselves feel good, and promulgated by narrow-minded
>Victorians, it is not accepted as valid by any modern scholars of the
>history of science and technology. 
>
>Many worlds would have died or sunk to barbarism during the Long Night,
>but some would rise from it again, and I'd imagine of the easily habitable
>(say Atm 7, Hydro 4-9) worlds would have continued to progress (albeit
>slowly in most cases).  Humans don't sit around and stagnate for 1700
>years, ever. 
>
>[1]  See _Medieval Technology and Social Change_ by Lynn White,
>or many other fine books on the history of science & technology. 
>(more references available if desired)
>
>Comments?
>
>-John Snead jsnead@netcom.com
>
>
>
>

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:39:36 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hi Pop Worlds

On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Volker A. Greimann wrote:

> -> I haven't got my books here, so I'm not sure how that went...were there
> -> hostilities between Vland and the 3I or was it a peaceful merger?
> All info i have makes it look like a peaceful thing "Vland joined 
> early on" and suchlike!

Yeah, I re-read Milieu 0 for this info last night, and according to it,
Vland either: 

a) joined in -30 (p 48 "In Year -30 Vland, and the bulk of
the Vilani cultural region, agreed to join the Sylean Federation in
return for a promise not to interfere in the internal culture of the
Vilani People....One of the Chief negotiators for the Sylean side was
Cleon Zhunastu, then a member of the Grand senate")

b) joined immediately after the founding of the Third Imperium (p.77 "The
Vilani had been in secret negotiations with Cleon for some time, and
agreed to be the first sector to join the Imperium, immediately after its
founding...")

BreeEEEP breeEEEP All hands All hands we have a red alert...canon
explosion on the C deck ;-0

Vland sector changes some things drastically, making the 3I by far the
most populous high tech entity in known space..but I don't think that the
Vland sector made any great advances technologically during the long
night. In fact, the collapse was a perfect excuse for the Vilani to say
 "See where this dang new-fangled stuff gets you! We're going back to the
good ol' days where men moved in 2 parsec jumps, and we had to load the
precious jump tapes by hand...and weeee LIKED it!"

So the 3I is still at a maximum of TL C, most of Vland is at TL A and B.
There should be no way that neighboring sectors have significant
populations at TL D and E. Numerical advantages will only go so far
against a technologically superior foe.

Then I had an thought...

Unless, of course, these high tech worlds don't view the 3I as a foe at
all, but a huge, expanding market for the goods that only they can
produce...;-) and 'free' protection by the Naval fleets to boot. Nothing
like getting someone else to protect your profits, or do your dirty work.
Ain't whitewashing fences FUN? 

Perhaps this is where the mysterious disappearance of Zhunastu Industries
megacorporation lies...they got swamped by what hit them, economically,
from Dagudashaag and Massilia...

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:51:31 -0400
From: "Eric Freitas" <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Re:FFS Gauss weapons

- ----------
> From: The Stump Family <stumps@earthlink.net>
> To: traveller@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re:FFS Gauss weapons
> Date: Monday, June 02, 1997 9:27 PM
> 
> I thought the formula was BL= (V/100)*TLm ?

No, it's clearly stated in FFS as bl = v/(100*tlm) and
FFS2 as well.

Eric

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 12:17:09 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Re : Nuclear Warheads for T4

At 05:04 AM 6/3/97 -0400, Andy Brick wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>SNip questions already answered by more intelligent lifeforms<G><<
>
>Also, a nuke is a nuke is a nuke. You need the same critical mass
regardless of tech level to achieve a chain reaction. So why does the bore
size decrease with TL ? Are warheads getting longer as tech advances ? :-).
>

The bore size is from the striker book 3 regarding the size of nukes, I use
it as reference for those who might want nukes of different TL's, also I
will be using it to figure out how many nukes will fit in the RAAMpage
Modules that will coming later.

As to why I did the nukes greater than the megaton range, well I was
curious, there is a article that describes a Imperial "Planet Killer"
warheads being mounted in starships to kill planets. Besides a 1 Gigaton
warhead could make for an interesting adventure/story. Say that the players
have to "disarm" the 1 Gigaton warhead under less than desirable
circumstances. If it goes boom well "Armor, Armor I don't need your
stinking Armor Values" <G>

One note however the damage/pen values are for detonations in empty space,
ie no atmosphere(s). 


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 13:31:16 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Hmmmm...Is the truth stranger..

>To some people, the problems of ignition are "merely" engineering
>problems, whereas the theory or "science" is certain (others would
>disagree, but all would admit that the theory is at worst "not quite
>complete"). In the cold fusion world, on the other hand, there is not >yet
>a well accepted theory that even explains the phenomenon that seems to >be
>producing energy. 
>
>Geez I think I made my point now.  Hope all take this as intended; In >my
>Opinion only as an amateur connected to the Fusion Program by >employment.
>(I'm just an accountant!  Really!).
>
>[end Soapbox Mode]
>
>Pete

Just as and add on to the "engineering problems" mentioned above But the
ICF (Inertial Confinement Fusion) program at LLNL (Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory), (with which I was breifly associated with several
years ago) are working on a version of "hot" fusion which involves
imploding (a mixture of fusion fuels) in order to get the temperatures
and densities required. **It is a very different approach than the
magneticly confined "tokamack" fusion that is widely publicised and the
gavity confined fusion that we observe when we look up on that clear day
at noon.  They are very sure of there theory...They have tested it from
the high end....where more than enough energy is input... and the low
end where they have been doing more controled efforts with steadily
larger lasers to induce the implosion.  This low end was most recently
investigated there using the NOVA laser and according to predictions the
new laser facility (NIF--National Ignition Facility)--which they are
attempting to build--should provide a 1:1 reation.  That means they get
as much energy out as was put in to start the reaction in the first
place.  If this prediction is born out then, as someone pointed out
earlier on the list, then "we need more powerful lasers (paraphrased)".
When reactions with outputs greater than 1:1 we are on our way.  We will
still be a long ways away from a reactor that can reliably initiate
these reactions continuously for an extended period of time, but we'll
be on our way.

Just a little blurb from my own experience...I hope someone found it
useful.

TT

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:21:30 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Peter  H. Brenton" <pete@cummings.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: Trading Systems

On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> At 05:09 3/06/97 -0400, Frederick Paul Kiesche III
> wrote:
> >
> >What system do you use for trading activities? Off of the top of my head 
> >I can think of:
> >
> >Classic Traveller system
> >Book Eight: Merchant Prince system
> >MegaTraveller System
> >Traveller: TNE rules
> >Rob Prior's home grown system on his web pages
> >..any others?
> >
> My vote has to go with the old Classic Traveller system. I still use it, as
> I like the choices it gives - do we go for staples (garanteed profit, but
> not much) or go for the high risk, high return option?
> 

I like Rob's system.  I want to be trading in "powdered Yarrow Root" not
"Carbohydrates".  Its a lot of work, but it makes trading really part of
the action.  Just stay away from shipping things like "assorted heavy
weapons".

Oh, and while we're on the subject, Jo Grant's 101 Cargos is simply a
smashing supplement.  We had a shipment of "Grav Stabilized Stiletto
Heeled Shoes" the other night that was the source of much jocularity.  

Pete

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:31:10 +0000
From: "Suzette C. Dollar" <suzd@pop.goodnet.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Pop Worlds

> a) joined in -30 (p 48 "In Year -30 Vland, and the bulk of
> the Vilani cultural region, agreed to join the Sylean Federation in
> return for a promise not to interfere in the internal culture of the
> Vilani People....One of the Chief negotiators for the Sylean side was
> Cleon Zhunastu, then a member of the Grand senate")

The quote indicates to me that they *agreed to join* not that they 
did so publicly. This could have happened in the below noted secret 
negotiations, no?


> b) joined immediately after the founding of the Third Imperium (p.77 "The
> Vilani had been in secret negotiations with Cleon for some time, and
> agreed to be the first sector to join the Imperium, immediately after its
> founding...")

So, immediately after the founding, they came forth and joined 
publicly.


> BreeEEEP breeEEEP All hands All hands we have a red alert...canon
> explosion on the C deck ;-0

All depends on how you look at it.

Suz
 

Suzette C. Dollar
#Traveller Channel Manager
suzd@goodnet.com

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 19:35:08 -0700
From: Nicholas Wright <xgr52@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: FFS Gauss Weapons Design Question

On 06/01/97 at 06:21 AM,  "Eric Freitas" <edf@atlantic.net> said:
>> The equation actually reads Barrel Length =3D V / 100TLm, and in FFS2 =
it > reads in a much clearer way: >      V=20
>>               BarrelLength =3D --------------=20
>>                                100 * TLm
>> Which still gives a longer barrel for higher TL. =20
This is true but contradicted by the text just above the formula which
says=20

.... advances in technology allow higher acceleration in shorter
distances (thus allowing shorter barrels).

><scratching my head>  Are you sure? =20
>Ah ha! I bet it's an order of operations thing! ;->
>The grouping should be V/(100*TL), so the denominator gets larger as tec=
h levels go up.

You are using the Tech Level instead of the Tech Level Modifier.

>Take this example:=20
>Velocity =3D 4000m/s
>TL      V/(100*TL) 10         4.00 11         3.64 12         3.33 13   =
      3.08
>Given a constant velocity, barrel length will go down as Tech Levels go =
up?

Eric=92s table shows the Modifier decreasing for increasing TL

One way to get the barrel size down, although I don=92t know if this is
what was intended, is to read the formula thus:

   Lb=3D(V / 100)TLm=20

Nick Wright
Its only work if you would rather be doing something else.   Sir James
Barrie

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1400
***********************************

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".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
