Traveller-digest      Wednesday, June 4 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1403



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re Progress (was Re: FS Statistical impressions)
RE: Trading Systems
Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...
Re: Left Fielded Jump troops...
Re: Left Fielded Jump troops...
Re: Strange Weapons for Starships
Planet Surface Area
Re: Tech, RoM, and M:0
Cleon I & Vland
Re: Privateering
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1402
Re: Deneb and Corridor in Year 0
Re: The high-tech offenders
Re: Data on Sylea / Capital
Re: Planet Surface Area

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 23:11:20 +1200
From: Andrew Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re Progress (was Re: FS Statistical impressions)

>Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 15:25:56 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Brett Fishburne <bfish@atlantech.net>
>Subject: Re: Progress (was Re: FS Statistical impressions)

>At 11:15 AM 6/3/97 -0400, Brett Fishburne wrote:
>>ACK!  Clearly I was educated by Jesuits...

>Maybe I wasn't so wrong, please look below:

>>At 11:38 PM 6/2/97 -0700, John R. Snead wrote:

><snip my Dark Ages reference>

>>>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]

>OK, you cite 3 inventions in 800 years.  I'll also give you the Heavy plow
>and use of horses instead of oxen.  The stuff borrowed doesn't count (it
>actually makes my point if that is stuff that brought Europe out of the Dark
>Ages) as in "The Long Night" there was no one to borrow from.  Let's see
>when else do we see this level of advancement...hmmmm...how about stone age?
>Rock as a tool (covers lots of inventions right there), fire (management and
>benefits therefrom), farming (as opposed to gathering), paint (for the cave
>paintings), and language.  None of these are small advances, but let's take
>a close look at what you're saying about the dark ages.  The "technological"
>jumps made in 800 years stack up pretty unfavorably against the 100,000
>years of advances made by Neanderthals.  Granted the Neanderthals had more
>time, but I think you'd have to agree that any one of Neanderthal inventions
>DRAMATICALLY altered their lifestyle whereas the inventions in the Dark Ages
>PERPETUATED an existing life style.

Okay, now the heavy plow and improved yoke were inventions that radically
and permanently reshaped Northern European culture. Combined they rate on
a par with the wheel. They more than doubled food production by allowing two
crops per year and the cultivation of marginal land; they enabled the
dietary shift
to legumes with the attendant drop in infant mortality and increase in
female life
expecancy. These two inventions allowed the accumulation of wealth, and
delayed childrearing that characterise Northern European culture. The
introduction of accurate mechanical timekeeping enabled the great European
age of discovery (navigation would have been impossible without them). Just
look at the great cathedrals built during later half of this period. Add to
these
the pommelled saddle (vital for the charging heavy lance cavalry); the use
of clinker shipbuilding and then caravel shipbuilding, deep draught hulls, the
rudder, the chimney. Plus many of our philosophical and legal concepts date
from this era (such as ending subinfeudation 1198).

And incidentially, the stirrup and windmills appeared in Northern Europe
during late Roman times.

>>>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. 

>Uhm, maybe one of the canon guys would want to correct me, but a 1700 year
>loss of empire could reasonably be considered "falling apart."  

Could be considered to have fallen apart. Once you have stopped falling, you
go forwards again. I see the Long Night as very much like the Northern
European Dark Age; characterised mostly by a lack of administrative
competence rather than a lack technological competence. No empire emerged
because there was a lack of depth of administrative skills, you could have some
brilliant ephemerial Empires (such as the dark age North Sea and Carolingean
Empires), but these would be dependent on brilliant individuals, when their
creators are removed, they collapse.

>>>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. 

>Been to Egypt?  How about Babylon?  Mesepotamia?  No slam against these
>countries, but the cultures that were originally there did stagnate for
>hundreds of years until outside influences renewed them.  They weren't the
>only ones either.  Given a sense of scale, it is not unreasonable to expect
>that this could happen during the long night.

Both Egypt and the fertile crecent stagnated not due to collapse but due to
a failure to adapt. They did not develop the mass literacy of the Europeans
and just slowly sunk (in the fertile crecent this was greatly assisted by a
singular act of vandalism by some asian horse nomads). Faced with
competition from Europe they did not develop, but rather retreated into
conservatism and infighting. Once sunk, they stayed sunk due to significant
external influences wanting them to stay sunk.

>More importantly, how can "[t]he rate of progress be slow" in worlds which
>have "died or sunk to barbarism?"  Seems to me that the rate of progress
>would be negative and solidly negative at that.  Why is it reasonable to
>expect that a world which once had high tech and lost it could return to
>that tech level faster than a world which had never reached the high tech?
>The trip from TL-9 (us right now, right?) to TL-13 is thought to take 4000
>years in Traveller, right?  So if a world fell to barbarism (TL-0?) in one
>generation (mighty fast, but give me latitude) from even TL-12, you would
>expect that it would take 5-10,000 years to recover at best--still well past
>the 1700 years available in the long night.  Maybe these folks would be TL-1
>by now.  If it took 3-400 years to go to barbarism, maybe they are still TL-0!

Technology is lost far faster than it is recovered (Russia took over 30 years
to recover the very moderate losses during 1917-21). But recovering lost
technology is faster than developing it. However there is a point at which
it becomes impossible to recover lost technology. When significant cultural
drift has occured, you lose the basic understanding of the mindset that
created the technology. Thus the 'Dark Ages' Northern European
culture was unable to recover Roman technology as it was significantly
different from the Roman culture (you not only have to understand the
how, but also the why). This is what I think happened during the Long
Night. The former Vilani worlds absorbed significant Solomani culture
and in the process became divorced from both. Thus they were
unable to simply recover either Ziru Sirka or RoM tech as they had
lost their cultural connection to it.

>Brett "It still sounds like 'Dark Ages' to me" Fishburne


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

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

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:26:46 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: RE: Trading Systems

Peter Brenton wrote:

>>  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.


andy long asked:
>
> Is this a commercial piece, or can I find it somewhere?

It's a supplement in the style (same shape and size) of the old GDW
supplements (but with a colour cover), that BITS published.  BITS = British
Isles Traveller Support

I believe that Andy Lilly still has some for sale (they're about a fiver
but I don't know what postage to .ae would be - they're not heavy).

Try him on
a.s.lilly@nortel.co.uk


There's a review of the book (by me!) on Jeff Zeitlin's Freelance Traveller
at:

http://www.dragonfire.net/~FreelanceTraveller/Features/Reviews/101CReview.h
tml



Is that enough plugs everyone?  Cash or new Traveller books can be sent to:

tc
timothy.collinson@solent.ac.uk

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:35:46 +0200
From: Nicolas LEJEUNE <nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr>
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...

Frederick Paul Kiesche III wrote:

>So, the question is: Do any of the ship experts on the list have any 
>thoughts along these lines to help out a non-Gearhead? Would machine guns 
>be worthwhile at all as a weapon (even in scaring off Evil Pirates 
>because you are shooting the heck out of their antennas, etc.)? Any 
>chance at all of penetrating windows, areas, screwing up engine nozzles, 
>etc.., etc., etc.?

For spaceship and starship combat, I wouldn't use any weapon with "muzzle"
speed lesser than 0.1c. Even with a laser it takes quite a long time to
reach it's target. Further more the sensor lock don't give the actual
position and heading but the one several secondes before. That's why it's
hard to hit a space ship even with a computer linked sensor/laser (called
MFD). This is the optimum weapon to hit a ship at a given range.

Now for slug weapon, don't even think about it.

I've seen a fusion gun (quite havy fusion gun in fact) mounted on a ship
(Victrix class). The weapon wasn't used for space combat but for air and
ground combat, where the speeds and distances are much smaller. FFS stated
that Fusion muzzle speed was around 8000hm/h which is very very very far
from speed of light. May be at very close range. But even though, it's very
hard to match vectors in space (especially if the other ship doesn't want
you match its vector ;-).

So machine guns could only be used in air combat or ground strikes. So if
your ship isn't AF, it's not very usfull.
- -----------
Nicolas LEJEUNE
   Engineer, Paris, France
   Traveller (TNE), and WhiteWolf RPG
   Mailto:nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr 
   Mailto:marben@worldnet.net (Week-end only!)

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

Date: 04 Jun 97 09:07:08 EDT
From: Jeffery.M.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU (Jeffery M. Miller)
Subject: Re: Left Fielded Jump troops...

- --- Traveller-digest wrote:

>4. This is just *begging* to be computerised - any possibility? (SimEmpire,
>anyone?)

		Howabaout the plug-in-from-hell for Ambrosias Escape Velocity?
I haven't been on the cutting edge of this discussion, but I've already
considered cranking up their plug-in editor and making a TNE-based scenario;
Vampire Fleets'd be COOL in EV!

- --- end of quote ---

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

Date: 04 Jun 97 09:07:08 EDT
From: Jeffery.M.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU (Jeffery M. Miller)
Subject: Re: Left Fielded Jump troops...

- --- Traveller-digest wrote:

>4. This is just *begging* to be computerised - any possibility? (SimEmpire,
>anyone?)

		Howabaout the plug-in-from-hell for Ambrosias Escape Velocity?
I haven't been on the cutting edge of this discussion, but I've already
considered cranking up their plug-in editor and making a TNE-based scenario;
Vampire Fleets'd be COOL in EV!

- --- end of quote ---

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:00:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships

The Commander takes note of the following message:

>Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 05:54:43 -0400
>From: FKiesche@concentric.net
>Subject: Strange Weapons for Starships...

>Greetings All:

>I'm setting up a campaign and I'd like to something offbeat for the ship
>the PCs will be using. I want to start them off with some capabilities,
>but not a perfect ship...one that needs maintenance and upgrading.

>One thought was to give them a ship that has multi-jump capability, but
>is under a severe need for repairs so that it is limited to J1 (something
>like the one "push" used in The Traveller Adventure to limit the PCs to a
>certain route).

Most of us have started there before. I remember my fist ship, a beat up old 
Corsai...er, I mean Subsidised Merchant!  Jump 1 on a good day, J-2 if you 
prayed to ol' Granddad! (Drinkin' the stuff helped too!<G>)

>Another thought was to weapons capability. I thought of giving them some
>decent defensive capability (sandcasters and the like), but very limited
>offensive capability...my memory went back to...

>Triplanetary, First (1973) Edition

>Didn't this version have ships equipped with .50 caliber machine guns?
>Now I don't pretend to be a Traveller Gearhead (I leave that to other
>members of the TML group), but this might be a interesting (and for the
>players frustrating...think of the attempts to get ammo!) way of gunning
>the ship...until they can make enough money to buy a "real" weapon like a
>laser!

>So, the question is: Do any of the ship experts on the list have any
>thoughts along these lines to help out a non-Gearhead? Would machine guns
>be worthwhile at all as a weapon (even in scaring off Evil Pirates
>because you are shooting the heck out of their antennas, etc.)? Any
>chance at all of penetrating windows, areas, screwing up engine nozzles,
>etc.., etc., etc.?

>Any help at all would be appreciated (and credited...want to be the NPC
>that sells this ship to my PC group?)

Well, first of all, a 50 cal machinegun will do some dammage to a ship, but 
only if its right on top of you. (0 hexes or within 30,000km)  This is how 
alot of The Point Defence
systems in EA work.  The Plasma weapon can do a heluva lot of dammage, but 
the enemy has to be on your doorstep before you can wail on them, and them 
plasma PD guns will vape almost anything!

My strategy when I was down to PD systems was to let the bastards think I'm 
down, and preparing for boarders.  Then when they just about to dock, open 
up on 'em with the PD lasers, use the sandcasters like shotguns, and DAMN 
THE TORPEDES!....sorry, got a little carried away there! :-)  Needless to 
say, after that the enemy boarders had no sensors or working weapon systems, 
and the bridge didn't look to cool either! (Heh!)

My company does have a new PD system based on VRF Gauss Technology.  It is a 
10 barrel 8mm Gauss VRF gun designed to shred missiles and close combat 
craft (like fighters).  Origionaly the thing did 50 damage to ground targets 
and 2 to starships, but that was before the new chart was printed in EA. (I 
don't have EA in front of me, but could some kind soul on the TML please 
post the EA USD dammage equivalency?) I'm still wondering what chart is the 
one to use, but it looks like its Porter's system for weapons like this. 
 Personaly I cant wait for  FF&S II to come out! :-)

Come down to Planet X (http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/x.htm)
click on the "Promenade" button, then click "X-TEK Arms"
for our Starship Weaponry Catalog.

The weapon system you want is the "Stinger" Point Defence/Ground Assault VRF 
Gauss System.

And if you realy want wierd, check out the "Ice Caster"  It's just a high 
pressure water canon! (Water freezes quickly at 3 Kelvin, making shards of 
ice as hard as steel!)

More Insanity to the TML
brought to you by X-TEK Industries, LIC.
makers of Cthulhu Chip Cookies
"Insanely Delicious!"

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:35:27 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Planet Surface Area

Hi!

	Can some kind soul please tell me how to calculate the surface area of a
planet based on its size. For example, if a planet has a Traveller size
rating of 7, i.e. 7,000 miles / 11,200 kms across, what's the formula to
work out the surface area of my size 7 planet, so I can tell how many
square miles / kms covers it?

	Many thanks in advance...


Bruce E J Lewis - mailto:bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk
Telephone - 0956-506527

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:53:10 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Tech, RoM, and M:0

Andrew Vallance writes:
>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. 

Which is why IG should have made up its mind whether it was a Milieu 0
module or a General module. Both would have been useful and worthwhile.
A General module about tech sould have an overwiew of tech all the way
up to 16 (at least) with a single example of each type and few, if any,
illustrations; a Milieu X module about tech would have a broader selection
of stuff with several alternatives for each item and lots of 'period'
illustrations. Trying to do both in one book was a mistake.  


      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, 4 Jun 1997 16:08:46 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Cleon I & Vland

Bruce Johnson writes:
>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

Not necessarily a contradiction. In -30 they agreed to join the Federation
and in 0, following secret negotiations, they supported Cleon for emperor.
Two quite different things, actually. Cleon obviously made good use of his
stint as a Federation negotiator to make friends on Vland. 

>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.

I agree with your conclusion, but the premise is not quite sound. If the
difference in tech is "only" a few levels then numerical superiority _will_
allow you to defeat a technologically superior enemy. By High Guard rules
a TL 14 force will have about a 10:1 advantage over a TL 12 force. So the
Imperium "merely" has to outnumber the foe by more than 10:1 (or out-
general him). The problem is that IF the Imperium defeated a TL 14 foe
(or absorbed him peacefully, for that matter), then they'd find out how to
build those TL 14 ships and weapons, in which case they'd reach TL 13 a
lot sooner than 300 and TL 14 a lot sooner than 700. Likewise if RoM was
actually TL 14. The knowledge of a single planet may disappear in a
catastrophe, the way the Darrian knowledge did, but I find it hard to
accept that the knowledge of anything as widespread as the RoM could 
disappear completely. 


      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, 4 Jun 1997 16:29:24 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Privateering

>Steven Charlton writes:
> 
>The Commander wrote:
>>I remember that back in MT
>>days, Pirates could get a "Letter of Marque" From a Sector Duke (or Faction
>>Leader as it was in MT) where they could only prey upon ships of an enemy
>>nation.
> 
>>I don't remeber exactly, but I believe basicaly your govt gives you
>>missions, but if you're caught by the enemy, they don't even acknowledge
>>your existance (FNORD!)  You are then subject to the enemy's piracy laws.
>
>I imagine Letters of Marque are around in Mileu 0.  A Letter of Marque
>entitled the bearer to seize or destroy the assets of an enemy, and granted
>a certain legal immunity for those actions (immunity from the laws of the
>government that GRANTED the Letter of Marque).  The advantage of this is
>the granting nation gets a free naval asset (albeit not a Ship of the Line)
>and is able to hurt an enemy state without expending resources.  If the
>privateer is caught, the granting government can either repudiate the
>Letter of Marque, or simply ignore the situation, or use the situation as
>an act of provocation to declare war (you are holding our loyal servant
>Commander X?  Prepare to feel the might of our fleet!).

The whole point of a Letter of Marque is that it gives a private man-of-war
legal protection against the _enemy_ if he is caught. The LoM informs the
opposing government that this is not a pirate, but an individual who,
albeit a private individual, is entitled to the same protection as
regular soldiers of that nation. As such, a LoM is only worth anything
if the enemy 1) treats captures soldiers better than pirates and b) accept 
the concept of Letters of Marque. So they are useless if the opposing sides
does not subscribe to some common code of conduct.

Historically some privateers sometimes succumbed to the temptation to
capture neutrals (or even friendlies!), which made them pirates and which
gave all privateers a bad reputation. 

>As for Pirates (unMarqued privateers), I suspect Cleon would handle them
>just like every other government in history has handled hostile pirates.
>They would be declared wolves and hunted down, or if they were strong
>enough the Imperium would attempt to co-opt them by making them Privateers.

Pirates were hated by all ordinary sailors. It may not be true, but there 
are stories of enemy ships making temporary truces in order to hunt down 
pirates.
 
>I think in the Mileu 0 Imperium you have a couple of sources for Letters of
>Marque (or their equivalents)
> 
>1.  The Imperium.  It strikes me that when the Imperium grants an
>exploitation charter for a company to effectively rule a world, the
>Imperium is granting that company governmental powers and authority,
>including the right to arm and maintain a military.

Possibly, but not necessarily, so. Historically governments have been very
reluctant to grant private companies that kind of power. There were plenty 
of company charters granted by European kings during the 16th and 17th
centuries, but the only one that ever recieved the right to raise regiments
and ships was the British East India Company (and they got revoked after
the Great Mutiny). Mostly the kings provided the companies with regular
soldiers to protect their trade stations.


      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, 4 Jun 1997 10:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1402

> Subject: Re: The high tech offenders 
> 
> I don't really have a problem with the TL D worlds.  In 1700+ years it
> only makes sense that a few TL 11& 12 worlds would (after likely dropping
> to TL 9 or 10) move up to 13.  I think it's naive to assume that the
> Imperium won out due to higher technology alone.  They had better
> organization, better planning, and they were actually trying to form an
> empire and had been for hundreds of years (the Sylean Federation is
> hundreds of years old).  As long as most of these TL D worlds are either
> research bases or fairly isolated worlds with few designs for conquest or
> expansion there is no problem.  Also, a number of these worlds may be
> inhabited by non-humans whose technology is simply too odd or to difficult
> to use to easily borrow. 

One of the major factors in the expansion of Sylea may be the seemingly
simplest one - Sylea is the only major power around that is really
hunkerin' to re-establish a total interstellar rule. So one else cares.
I mean, look at how things are today - why hasn't the US invaded Canada
and Mexico to establish a really huge power base? It could save them
a lot of hassles in the long run... Of course, we all know why - it's
expensive and there's simply no real motivation to do so. Now, with
NAFTA, et al, maybe Canada, US & Mexico are slowly moving to a situation
where there is so little room in terms of what you can do without violating
all these treaties, so that the countries are, in essence, a single
political entity.  Certainly, when it comes to trade, they pretty much
are already. Other internal matters are left up to the individual
countries... hm, sound familiar?

In terms of actual military action to force planets into the Imperium, 
again, after 1700 years of little or no interstellar traffic, I'd
bet that most systems don't have anything that you could call a "space
navy". Maybe Sylea is the first "empire" to re-arm itself in a serious
way.

Finally, in spite of the RoM having reached borderline TL13 a looong
time ago, they didn't discover Fusion+. Sylea has discovered something
that everyone else has overlooked for a long time and it's probably
giving them some sort of economic if not a military edge. (You know, 
I wonder if those little Fusion+ powered fighters could really make
a big difference on the battlefie... *AAARGH* *SPLAT* as .3c rock
takes out an old flamewar).

> Also, the Syleans have Fusion+, and no one else does unless they buy it
> from the Syleans.  This would make a major difference.  Everyone wants
> Fusion+, since it is incredibly superior to batteries and fuel cells. The
> Syleans have it and have too many ships for a single TL D world to safely
> attack them.  End result: trade with the Syleans and join the new
> Imperium. 

Uh, yeah, what he said.
 
> TL 14 does seem rather high for this era and those worlds should (IMHO) be
> reduced to C or D (unless they are high tech ruins)

From the other set of data that was posted, it seems like all those
M0 high-tech worlds were very high tech worlds in 1100... it seems like
all that happened was that they went through 1100 data and did
new_tl=old_tl-2 or some such thing. Groan - this should probably
be written off as a bad mechanical conversion and fixed by hand.

Ethan

- -- 
ehenry@magma.ca                                  http://www.magma.ca/~ehenry

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:42:06 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Deneb and Corridor in Year 0

SD Mooney writes:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>>I disagree. The speed with which the Imperium expanded into Deneb and the
>>Spinward Marches indicates (to me) that the met almost no problems on the
>>way. Certainly not active corsair problems. IMO Deneb, Corridor and the
>>rimward half of the sectors immidiately corewards of them were comparatively
>>open. Any Vargr worlds would be low- to mid-tech. When the Imperium moved
>>into these areas it attracted the Vargr from further coreward and the
>>Imperium abandoned their settlements coreward of the Spinward Marches/Deneb/
>>Corridor sector border.
>
>I think I disagree. I don't think the Vargr were a pushover, especially in
>Corridor and the Coreward end of Deneb. Various CT and MT sources mention
>the Vargr Pacification Campaigns which ran until the late 100s, early 200s
>to ensure safe passage to the Marches. I can see a lot of the Imperial
>fleet getting dragged behind the claw if the megacorporations started
>screaming about raiders.

The Vargr Pacification Campaigns dosen't start till 220 (and runs to 348).
That fits perfectly with my theory. Read what I wrote: "When the Imperium 
moved into these areas it attracted the Vargr from further coreward..."

The sequence of events as I envisage them is something like this: First the
Imperium moves into the largely empty areas in Corridor (or Eneri, if you
insist), Deneb, and the subsectors just coreward of that. Eventually the
Vargr discover all these yummy new targets and start moving in. They start
with the colonies closest to them, so traffic trough Eneri and Deneb is not
impeeded at first. Then the pressures grow bigger and the Imperium begin the
Vargr Campaigns. The Campaigns end with the Imperium abandoning any colonies
coreward of the Spinward Marches/Deneb/Corridor sector border (and with 
Eneri's name changed to Corridor).


And just to avoid misunderstandings: The above is not what I claim canon is,
it's what I think canon ought to be.


      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, 4 Jun 1997 17:00:10 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The high-tech offenders

John R. Snead writes:
>I don't really have a problem with the TL D worlds.  In 1700+ years it
>only makes sense that a few TL 11& 12 worlds would (after likely dropping
>to TL 9 or 10) move up to 13.  

You're quite right. Given our own recent history it does seem implausible
that at least _some_ worlds would not advance tremendously in 1700 years.
The problem is that this is one of the places where the Traveller Universe
differs from the real universe. In the Traveller Universe it must be 
tremendously difficult to go up a TL on your own. The rapid advances of
the Terrans and the Darrians has to be freak occurences. Otherwise it is
impossible to explain why the 3rd Imperium, backed by the Industrial might
of scores of high-population planets, nevertheless dosen't reach TL 13 till
300 and TL 14 till 700 (Or why scorers of hundreds of planets regularily
stagnate at the same TL for centuries and millenia).

>Rupert Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz> wrote:
>>My point was that it would be the Syleans joining the TL14 and its
>>billions, not the other way round.
> 
>Why?  How about if the Imperium finds such a world around year 4.  OK,
>well you now have a several sector wide Imperium meeting *1* world (with
>maybe a few lower tech colonies).  The higher tech world joins the
>Imperium, no the other way around.

You do realize, don't you, that it would take about 100 planets like Sylea
to _match_ the might of one population B, TL 14 planet? (Population B is 
10 times population A and TL 14 ships outmatch TL 12 ships about 10:1
(Admittedly, this dosen't factor in the difference that Fusion+ would 
make)).


      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, 4 Jun 1997 17:12:29 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: Data on Sylea / Capital

- -> A plea for you canonists (and others):
- -> 
- -> I'm writing an adventure set on Sylea (which has the only UPP in T4 I 
- -> don't want to change...) in M0.  If anyone has old Traveller's 
- -> Digests or something which deal with Sylea, I'd be very interested 
- -> in:
TD 9 deals with Sylea, and i have it! I'll check if there is any info 
of interest to you in there!
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: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 17:29:17 +0200
From: Per Bernhardsson <bard@ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Planet Surface Area

Bruce E J Lewis wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
>         Can some kind soul please tell me how to calculate the surface area of a
> planet based on its size. For example, if a planet has a Traveller size
> rating of 7, i.e. 7,000 miles / 11,200 kms across, what's the formula to
> work out the surface area of my size 7 planet, so I can tell how many
> square miles / kms covers it?

Assuming the planet is a sphere. The formula is:

A = 4*pi*r^2

where r is the radius of the planet

or

A = pi*d^2

where d is the diameter of the planet.

 / Per

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1403
***********************************

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
