Traveller-digest       Friday, June 27 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1493



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re:Battledress and Heroism
Re: Re: Deckplan Question?
Re: Traveller Digest 8: Core info 
Re: Rule of Man TL?
Re:
Re: Battledress and Heroism
Re: Hardware and O/S
Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL
Re: T4 Task Rational
Re: Notes Toward a New Task System
Re: Task Based Combat
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1492
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1492
Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL
Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL
Re: FS Data Correction
World Builder's Handbook
Re: Deckplan Question?
Re: TL of ramshackle empire

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:54:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re:Battledress and Heroism

>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:52:41 -0700
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
>Subject: Re: Battledress and heroism

>At 01:32 PM 6/26/97 -0700, Chris Griffen wrote:
<Some parts snipped>

>>As for the game being heroic, what about when the *PCs* are the ones
>>wearing the battledress? They're subject to the same rules. This whole
>>scenario that I brought up was from a real gameplaying experience. One of
>>my players back in the MT days worked very hard to save up enough credits
>>to buy a suit of light battledress. Once he acquired it, he soon became
>>frustrated with the fact that he was still getting hit and seriously
>>wounded with great frequency.

>He's learned the Tanker's Lesson:  You are not immortal just because you
>are surronded by 60 tons of armor.  That player had to learn (the hard way)
>to use sound tactics in conjunction with the improved abilities conferred
>by his armor.

This reminds me of a joke:

It is a dark stormy night at sea.  An Admiral on a huge, heavily armed and 
armoured air craft carrier gets a message on the radio demanding that he 
change course.

"Who is this?", says the Admiral.

"This is Ensign McGyvers sir, we humbly request you change course..."

The Admiral thinking that it's a lowly Ensign on a PT boat is not amused by 
the "order". "What, how dare you. I am an Admiral and this is a Carrier, you 
change course or I'll see you slapped down so hard you'd think you were a 
first year cadet!

"I can't do that sir..."

"What?  This is insubordnation! I'll see you in chains for this..."

"Where a lighthouse sir!"

"Ulp!"

 ------------------------------------
Commander X

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

Date: 27 Jun 1997 12:59:17 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Re: Deckplan Question?

>2). I seem to remember that there is a significant "fudge factor" written
>into the rules for making deck plans...maybe 10% or so?  At least this is
>the case in MT and CT.

The fudge factor is +/- 20%

Stateroom volume includes all corridors, recreation areas, etc.

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:59:05 +0100 (BST)
From: Eamon Patrick Watters <E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Traveller Digest 8: Core info 

On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de> sent:

>  
> Bill and me are preparing to correct the CORE Sector data in Marc's 
> FS-Data Post. What we still need is someone willing to look through 
> TD 8 (which we both don't have) for any relevant information, or any 
> information about worlds or alliances or suchlike!
> Please answer, anyone who has this issue!

I'll have a look through mine and let you know the info you need.
 
> BTW: Does TD 10 contain data on Core as well? Someone once said so 
> and i don't have that either!

Yup, I'll scan that too.

On another note, Chant is not the capital of the Chanestin Kingdom (note 
spelling).

> Ad Astra,
> V.A.G.       
> - ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----

Eamon.

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:03:58 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Rule of Man TL?

>> 1) What tech does it take to Terraform a size 8 world?
>        Counter question.  How long do I have to do it in and at what levels do
>I start/finish at?  Another point too, the very IDEA of altering a world to
>suit Humanity is a fairly arrogant and speculative one to begin with.  Given
>the Vilani's conservative mindset... would they have even thought of it?  And
>what would their reaction have been to the Terrans that casually planned for
>it?

You got a point there but what about the opposite?
The Vilani grew up in an alien ecosystem where most everything had to be
carefully prepared in order to eat etc. The view that they didn't belong to
the plant/animal kingdom must have been much stronger in them than in us
and perhaps it was also easier to come up with the idea about changing the
environment to suit them as well. The Vilani view of nature would be devoid
of the animism we terrans universally embraced before the kings forced
monotheism upon us.

This might even be an interesting division in Vilani/Terran thought:
The Vilani will easily exterminate local animals/plantlife if they aren't
productive which we terrans find unacceptable thinking while we remodel
ourselves with geneering which look extremely disgusting to the Vilani.


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

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:24:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re:

> From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
> Subject: Re: TL of the Rule of Man (Don't call it Ramshackle!)
> 
> Ethan Henry writes:
> >Not to mention that the Terrans were probably busy doing things that,
> >in hindsight, were totally foolish, like trying to upgrade massive
> >amounts of Vilani technological infrastructure to bring it in line
> >with Terran "standards". 
> 
>    This would not have been foolish at all, at least for Terran
> industrialists.  Upgrading everything in the Vilani Imperium would cost
> untold amounts of MCr, and the only source for the upgrades (at least
> initially) would be worlds that were part of the Terran Confederation. 
> This would make the Vilani economically dependent on the Terrans for
> many years to come.

Well, I did say "in hindsight". It probably seemed like a _great_
idea at the time. Its final effect was probably to hurt Vilani
infrastructure more than it helped it though.

> >Everything you say makes sense, Harold. It certainly is possible that
> >the RoM could have achieved TL 14 capabilities in a few fields for
> >a number of years, but this was all lost as the Empire crumbled.
> 
>    I think you misunderstand what I'm implying--there wasn't time for TL
> 14 equipment to appear.  

Oh, crap. My apologies Harold, I seem to have confused the numbers
"13" and "14". You can ignore everything I said. 

> >I don't, personally, have a big problem with throwing relic TL-14
> >equipment into adventures, sparingly. It's just that authors should be
> >careful that they don't accidentally re-write history or things like that.

This statement is only true if the RoM had a TL of 13, which I thought
it did for a moment... the "TL-14" above should have said "TL-13".

>    I have a *tremendous* problem with relic TL 14 equipment, since it
> basically invalidates a fundamental fact of RoM history.  Really, saying
> that there were a few TL 13 worlds is *non-canon* in and of itself,
> since it assumes that, as in the Third Imperium, there were worlds that
> were the exception to the rule on the high side of technology.  There
> are absolutely no valid references that I've been made aware of (as in
> sourcebook and page number) from the GDW era that say there was a TL 13
> anything in the RoM, let alone TL 14.

Yes, of course. Finding TL 13 artifacts would be possible. I don't think
they'd be so shabby either... anything that still works after a thousand
years or so is to be respected, regardless of TL. TL 14 is right out
though.

Now, the RoM did have some areas where their technology was higher 
than anything ever seen in the mainstream Imperium, even in the 1100s,
like genetic and medical technology, possibly robotics as well. It
might be possible for travellers to find some interesting robotic
goodies towards the rim... hmmm...

Less confused now,
Ethan
- -- 
ehenry@magma.ca                                  http://www.magma.ca/~ehenry

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 07:35:36 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Battledress and Heroism

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>If the target is moving directly towards you, it becomes that much easier..
>a target moving across your field of fire is *very* difficult.  Of course,
>if I even think that the BD equipped trooper doesn't know where I am, I'm
>not going to shoot.
>
>A big part of sniping is knowing when to shoot, along with knowing how to
>shoot.

Sure, but those are fairly specific circumstances. The difficulty is
reduced in this scenario because the target has effectively stopped moving
in three dimensions and for the sniper's purposes, moves in only two as he
either moves directly *toward* you or *away* from you. But this describes
only one scenario.

If you want a good set of sniper rules for Traveller, refer to Harold
Hale's TNE sniper rules at the HIWG home page. They're at:

http://home.sn.no/~starwolf/HIWG/

Follow the HIWG ftp archive to the Rules folder and download sniper.zip.
Great stuff. It can be extrapolated to use for any Traveller game.

>So the characters survive a little longer..  I really don't like games
>where PC death is caused by anything short of gross stupidity.  I never let
>random event kill off well crafted PCs.

I agree with you here.

>>As for the game being heroic, what about when the *PCs* are the ones
>>wearing the battledress? They're subject to the same rules. This whole
>>scenario that I brought up was from a real gameplaying experience. One of
>>my players back in the MT days worked very hard to save up enough credits
>>to buy a suit of light battledress. Once he acquired it, he soon became
>>frustrated with the fact that he was still getting hit and seriously
>>wounded with great frequency.
>
>He's learned the Tanker's Lesson:  You are not immortal just because you
>are surronded by 60 tons of armor.  That player had to learn (the hard way)
>to use sound tactics in conjunction with the improved abilities conferred
>by his armor.

Yes, but tankers need only fear artillery rounds or shots fired from other
tanks. With MT rules, a guy with an ACR can penetrate BD with astonishing
ease. Definitely a problem.

The problem becomes even more acute if you're running a mercenary or other
military campaign. In a merc campaign, you have a high incidence of these
encounters. The problems of the reality-flouting MT rules multiply
expontentially because you have a lot more people running around in combat
armor or BD. In a less militaristic campaign, you can get away with it
because such encounters may be few and far between.

I don't have a problem with trying not to kill PCs, but I'd rather show
mercy for them when using realistic mechanics so I know more accurately
what I've allowed them to survive.

>>The game can be heroic and realistic at the same time, but what's the point
>>of heroism if it wasn't earned? If you're facing a guy in battledress, you
>>better have some form of heavy weapon or man-portable high-energy weapon at
>>hand or the best form of heroism should be to run like hell! <g>
>
>Or make that miracle shot that my wife *still* brags about  :)

So, who's the sniper? You or your wife? <g>

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.cris.com/~Cgriffen/traveller/deneb.shtml


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Griffen                      Phone: (408) 527-7189
Cisco Systems, Inc.                      Fax:   (408) 527-0452
NMBU Technical Publications              cgriffen@cisco.com

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:01:30 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hardware and O/S

On Thu, 27 Jun 1996, Jon Fuller wrote:

> > > I was wondering what computers/operating systems people here use?  
> 
> 486/133, Windows95/ 6x86/200+, Windows95/ Powermacs of all types/ Iris
> 3130, Unix and a Kaypro 3, CP/M 
> 
> :) That about covers it.

Cool! I saw a Kaypro 3 at the swap meet (giant organized permanent garage
sale sort of thingie) for $15 the other day. Unfortunately, my wife was
with me too, so I got dragged away at high speed, hearing something like
"No you CAN'T have ANOTHER useless old computer in the house!"

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:05:05 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL

Harold Hale wrote:
 
> >2) What tech does it take to genetically alter homo-sapiens into a
> >   self-reproducing, stable, water-breathing variant (i.e. make a minor
> >   human)?
> 
>    Given that humans can be cloned late in TL 8, and that we can
> genetically alter plant and lesser animal species now, I would assume
> that such a thing would be possible late TL 9, early TL 10.
> 
> >3) What tech does it take to genetically alter a non-sapient species to
> >   sapience (i.e. dolphins)?
> 
>    One much lower than you seem to be implying--given the above,
> probably about TL 12.
> 
> >All of the above were accomplished by the Terran Confederation BEFORE the
> >Rule of Man.
> 
>    We like our genetic science.  The Vilani were way behind the Terrans
> in that regard.

And the reason why the Vilani lags behind should be obvious. They are a
foreign species introduced to Vland. They have close relative to compare
themselves to, genetically.

We on Terra can experiment with Simians, sheep and whatnot to perfect
genetic techniques.

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:05:40 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rational

David P. Summers wrote:

> >>Well, the problem is that you have skill-0 in heart surgery.  You
> >
> >       No, I don't. I don't have any skill in heart surgery, and every
> >version of
> >Traveller so far has made a clear distinction between "Skill-0" and "No Skill"
> 
> There is no distinction.  GM's are allowed to _sometimes_ allow
> rolls against skill-0 for thing that can be accomplished by
> an untrained person.  In this case, heart surgery, wouldn't
> be that case and so you wouldn't be allowed to roll.  No
> problem.

Actually, afaik in T4 there is a distinction. The default skill list
shows those skills which everyone can use at level 0. Any skill *not* in
that list cannot be rolled against.

Your point stands. No one should have automatic Heart Surgery-0 :)

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:05:51 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Notes Toward a New Task System

Glenn Grant warned:

> Suggestion 2: Don't increase the stat:skill ratio by increasing the number
> of skills awarded in CharGen (so that skills have a range of 1-15 or more).
> 
> Reasons: PCs will end up with an even broader collection of skills (and not
> necessarily higher skill levels), making the PCs more generic. In CT/MT/T4
> (I never played TNE), it's important for the various characters to have a
> variety of skills. It's no fun if every PC has some Pilot skill, some
> Astrogation, some Gunnery, some Broker, etc... they would no longer have to
> rely on each other.
> 

You make a very valid point. But if Chargen was designed to avoid this,
it wouldn't be a problem.

Forex: Characters get the same number of skill *choices* they do now,
they just get 2 skill levels up to skill-6, after which skills advance
by one level...

or:

Characters get a certain number of free skill levels (say 4 per year)
which they can choose to use to advance a skill choice by up to 3...

or:

Characters roll a task to advance skill levels, spectacular failure
means they don't advance, failure means they advance one skill level,
success means 2 levels, spectacular success means 3 levels... (or some
other formula)

or:

Characters advance 3 skill levels for the first choice that term, 2
skill levels for the second and third, and 1 skill level for subsequent
choices...


I guess I'm just trying to say that there are ways to avoid problems
like this, and keep the number of skills awarded similar to what it is
now, while nudging the actual value of skills into a slightly higher
range.

I don't think we should be wedded to the 1=novice, 6=expert skill scale
we were accustomed to in CT & MT, because T4 already changed this in its
first incarnation: it was quite possible to get double digit levels, or
nearly so.

If a skill range 1-15 improves the task system, I say "Make it so."

Glenn Hoppe

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:05:43 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Task Based Combat

vanya wrote:
> 
> > From: William F. Hostman <aramis@asylumbbs.com>
> > This would work GREAT if only the COMBAT rules were crossed over to using
> > modifiers to difficulty level, rather than target number... thusly
> freeing
> > combat from being task-system specific (as it is in T4.0).
> 
> This is something that definitely needs to be done.  As the T4.1 rulebook
> takes shape, now is the time to fix some of the little details as well.
> Make T4.1 a truly task-based game, in all respects, and get rid of many of
> the tables with row upon row of combat modifiers.

<example snipple>
 
> See how much simpler this is? The difficulty increase for night and/or bad
> weather is intuitive enough I could almost guess how to do it. And with the
> technique of "fine-tuning" difficulty levels, the moving/not moving problem
> is nearly intuitive too. However, a variable difficulty task is more
> complicated than a task with only one difficulty, so use the variable
> difficulty task sparingly. If possible, refer the gamer to a simple chart
> with the difficulty changes noted on the chart (like the MegaTraveller
> direct fire difficulty tables on page 72 of the Players' Manual). Ideally,
> keep the changes consistent from column to column so the chart is easy to
> commit to memory."

Amen Brother vanya! Testify!

This is always been a craw in my side, errr. or something like that.

If you're using a difficulty based task system, for goodness sakes,
adjust the difficulty levels only! Result modifiers (+1 to die roll et.
al.) are useless, complicating, and create inaccuracies in the carefully
constructed probability charts.

They also make it difficult to plug in a different die rolling
mechanism. (like MT or KBv.20 or FUDGE or your own pet system)

for example: a -1 to the roll creates vastly different probabilities for
2d6 tasks compared to 4d6 tasks. Lets not use apples to modify oranges
here. (I must stop mixing metaphors...)

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:08:28 CDT
From: Don McKinney <dmckinne@csci.csc.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1492

> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:13:03 MET
> From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
> Subject: Traveller Digest 8: Core info
> 
> Bill and me are preparing to correct the CORE Sector data in Marc's 
> FS-Data Post. What we still need is someone willing to look through 
> TD 8 (which we both don't have) for any relevant information, or any 
> information about worlds or alliances or suchlike!
> Please answer, anyone who has this issue!
> 
> BTW: Does TD 10 contain data on Core as well? Someone once said so 
> and i don't have that either!
> Ad Astra,
> V.A.G.       

I did some research once a while back, as I was going to do my own version
of Core sector...

Subsector G (Core) is in TD#8, I (Bunkeria) and J (Cemplas) are in #9, and
K (Chant) and M (Cadion) are in TD #10; in addition, the library data
from all three TDs has other worlds defined, and a couple are "post-Imperial"
colonies, from that information.

The only other Core information I can find in other products deals with 
Shudusham (TD #8) and Capital (TD #9), except for a reference in Challenge #30
detailing that the world of Ushra (1016 Core) has an Imperial Duke who is
the leader of the Moot when Emperor Strephon's double was murdered.
There are some references in "Arrival Vengeance", which I don't have, but
as it's TNE, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

Point your flamethrower the other way!


DonM.

- --
============================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Senior CM Specialist,           (217) 351-8250 x2365 = 
= Computer Sciences Corporation, Champaign, IL       dmckinne@csci.csc.com =
= Winter War XXV Convention Chairman, Champaign, IL, February 6-8, 1998    =
= dmckinne@prairienet.org or winterwar@prairienet.org       (217) 469-9917 = 
============================================================================

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:08:28 CDT
From: Don McKinney <dmckinne@csci.csc.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1492

> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:13:03 MET
> From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
> Subject: Traveller Digest 8: Core info
> 
> Bill and me are preparing to correct the CORE Sector data in Marc's 
> FS-Data Post. What we still need is someone willing to look through 
> TD 8 (which we both don't have) for any relevant information, or any 
> information about worlds or alliances or suchlike!
> Please answer, anyone who has this issue!
> 
> BTW: Does TD 10 contain data on Core as well? Someone once said so 
> and i don't have that either!
> Ad Astra,
> V.A.G.       

I did some research once a while back, as I was going to do my own version
of Core sector...

Subsector G (Core) is in TD#8, I (Bunkeria) and J (Cemplas) are in #9, and
K (Chant) and M (Cadion) are in TD #10; in addition, the library data
from all three TDs has other worlds defined, and a couple are "post-Imperial"
colonies, from that information.

The only other Core information I can find in other products deals with 
Shudusham (TD #8) and Capital (TD #9), except for a reference in Challenge #30
detailing that the world of Ushra (1016 Core) has an Imperial Duke who is
the leader of the Moot when Emperor Strephon's double was murdered.
There are some references in "Arrival Vengeance", which I don't have, but
as it's TNE, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

Point your flamethrower the other way!


DonM.

- --
============================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Senior CM Specialist,           (217) 351-8250 x2365 = 
= Computer Sciences Corporation, Champaign, IL       dmckinne@csci.csc.com =
= Winter War XXV Convention Chairman, Champaign, IL, February 6-8, 1998    =
= dmckinne@prairienet.org or winterwar@prairienet.org       (217) 469-9917 = 
============================================================================

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:09:51 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL

On Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:50:22 +0100
anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman) writes:
>
>As for this uplift stuff despite it being canon I totally ignore it as it
>smells like Solomani propaganda and is not consistent with MY view of
>Solomani (Military inclined, clever but aggressive and oppressive - kind of
>like the US during the 50:s)

Anders, You are missing an opportunity to incorporate this stuff into
your view of canon exactly as Solomani propaganda.  The Solomani & Aslan
entries are perfect examples of _how_ the Solomani rest on the laurels of
their Terran ancestors, rather than their own achievements.  Especially,
if you accept the _clearly canonical concept_ of a high TL RoM. :)

With this new perspective, it wouldn't hurt anyone to reread some of the
passages in S&A with regard to _this_ view.

>
>/Anders Backman


Leroy
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Science Adventure
                                                        in the Far Future

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:10:55 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Rule of Man (ROM) TL

On Fri, 27 Jun 1997 03:44:56 -0400
hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale) writes:
>
>Leroy William Lu Guatney wrote:
>
>   Leroy, if you or J.P. or anyone else has sourcebook and page numbers
>regarding evidence of higher than TL 12 during the Terran Confederation
>or the RoM, let's get it out in the open in the next couple of days.  So

Actually, I have been thinking about this a little more lately.  I am
withholding sources (for now) because I want to get reasonable opinions
on the subject.  I do see a consensus forming here, rather than a debate
about canon, and that pleases me quite well, thank you!  The canonality
of my sources are not some obscure quote taken out of context, but very
clear references.  Last I knew, even _you_ had the sources I had, so
until I am ready, be content with doing your own research (like we did).

>far a great deal of evidence has been presented that contradicts your

Sorry Harold, but the only evidence you have presented was what was already
pointed out on the list.  The rest is what I would deem suitable for your
own campaign.  TKO yes--but not against those who are being open-minded. :)

>Harold
>


Leroy
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Science Adventure
                                                        in the Far Future

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:50:01 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: FS Data Correction

At 06:40 PM 6/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>At 04:03 PM 6/26/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>I was wondering if there were still people on this list who were working
out 
>>problems with the M:0/FS sector data.  It seems the Great Task Debate has 
>>preempted it somewhat.
>
>Well, I'm still interested..

I am still working on my Python script to come up with a more reasonable,
though not identical, distribution of worlds, population, etc.  Right now,
I am happy with the three physical stats.

Now, I just need to write my main finder, Hi pop parceller, and colonizer
to do the social stats.

I also need to write something that will determine the economic UWP as
well.  Since I am going to use a slightly different approach than Stuart
and Joe, anyone adapting this will need to fiddle with it a bit.  (labor
vanishes as a computed stat, to be replaced by a life rating.  Ag/Na,
In/Ni, and Ri/Po are all descriptions of stats in the economic UWP,
summarized for use.)

I am very, very interested in fixes, though, as I do want to keep any
canonical data, such as the Geonee home worlds, etc., as published.  This
maximizes the chance that I can use published adventures, etc.

Anyone else working over various sectors, do drop me a line.

Scott

Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu   http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment 
results" - Calvin Coolidge, (Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934))
"The barbarian is thwarted at the moat." - Scott Adams

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 18:38:27 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: World Builder's Handbook

I have seen numerous TML references to this book, presumably by Digest 
Group Publications.  I thought I had everything from that era of 
Traveller, but I don't have the WBH.  Does anyone know how similar 
(or not) the WBH is to Grand Census and Grand Survey (both by DGP), 
which seem to have a lot of overlap with what I hear about WBH.


Simon

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 18:38:22 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Deckplan Question?

The density of liquid hydrogen at 1 atm and -253 C (20 K) is 70.8 
g/litre, giveing a value for 1 displacement tonne of 14.12 m3.

Solid hydrogen at -262 C (11 K) is 70.6 g/l

Unfortunately I could not find the compressibility of liquid hydrogen, 
density data for L-hyd at other pressures.  Also, I can't find any 
information about the storage temperature and pressure on Traveller 
ships - what do the hand-waving crew suggest :-)

<... later>  I must look up the critical pont for hydrogen ... there 
is a good chance that this will be sensible storage conditions for 
L-hyd.


Simon

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 18:38:24 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: TL of ramshackle empire

> was thinking on this instead of working today, and it occured to me 
> that there's really no way of exlaining how the RoM could make TL14 
> Vacc Siuts, and yet didn't have fusion plus - a TL12 invention. And 

A lot of this has to do with how things are invented but also with how 
you use your resources.  Let me take some imperfect analogies from 
current day:

Inventions:  The "Black & Decker Workmate(TM)" was invented 20 years 
ago, approximately.  The TL of this invention is around 4.

Resources: The soviets build high-tech rockets (subject to some debate, 
I know), but their automobile design is a TL (or more) behind the rest 
of the rocket-building countries.

If you look at modern chemical plants (for bulk chemicals like methanol 
and ammonia) all of the main equipment is TL5.  The electronic controls 
are better than those used on the shuttle!  The real advance since TL 5 
has been in lots and lots of research into how to make better catalysts 
- - the advances in materials (metals) technology is relatively 
insignificant in comparison.  If I gave the "recipe" to a TL 5 
engineer, I can assure you that they could build a "modern" plant - 
there is nothing in the manufacturing process that requires higher than 
TL 5, just time to research things.

The time spent on research is why there should be (IMO) a big 
divergence in Solomani TL 13 and Vilani TL 13.  For Traveller races, 
particularly during a war, the TL will be characterised by Jump in 
preference to anything else.  Inside the Imperium in M:1100 there is 
much more similarity of tech between world, with the differences due to 
how people spend their R&D time - better anti-rust coatings for TL 6 
vehicles or cheaper chemicals production so that they can sell for low 
prices into the interstellar market.

"History is decided by the victors" - one of the ways to "define" each 
TL is "what the <prefered race> achieved at the same time as Jump X".

I see the Traveller (referee's view) of TL as being "what can be 
readily reproduced by a society that can achieve Jump X <or other key 
defining technology>".  Thus, once the "secret" of gravitics is out, 
any TL 9 society could build them.  Left to its own devices a given 
culture may never have discovered gravitics, as grav tech may be 
irrelevant to their world.


I have no problem believing that one culture failed to develop Fusion 
Plus while achieving TL 14 in other areas (beam weapons? batteries? 
figher pilot training?).  Similarly one race may decide that fighters 
were not viable for space combat (see earlier TML rules wars) while 
another culture came up with a brilliant way of using fighters for 
space combat ... when these two races go to war, one of them is likely 
to revise their opinions!


Simon

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1493
***********************************
