<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1392</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	11/24/99 12:14:01 PM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest    Wednesday, November 24 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1392<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Mass Destruction<BR>
3d imperium<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #1391<BR>
Re: Re Loans and Indentures<BR>
RE: Sepratists (was Ortillery VS Gropos)<BR>
Re: Vargr (Was: Re: Weapons of mass destruction)<BR>
RE: Loans and Indentures<BR>
Re: adventure just waiting for the writing...<BR>
Re: X-Files scenarios in Trav (the d'Alemberts)<BR>
Re: Ortillery VS Gropos<BR>
GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
2d maps and galactic thickness (was RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #1391)<BR>
Another GK<BR>
Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
Re: Vargr (Was: Re: Weapons of mass destruction)<BR>
Ship crews (was re: adventure just waiting...)<BR>
RE: GT Streamlining<BR>
Re: YKYBPTMTW:<BR>
Re: old 15mm Traveller mini's by Citadel<BR>
Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
Re: 3d imperium<BR>
Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
Re: OT: Dogma<BR>
Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
Where Does the Spinward Marches REALLY Begin?<BR>
Re: Tourism in the Marches<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:30:41 +0000<BR>
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Mass Destruction<BR>
<BR>
>> But it's a *very* rare thing for a planetary orbit to decay. Ditto for<BR>
>> orbits of natural satellites.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
>I think I read somewhere that those two rocks that orbit Mars are in<BR>
>decaying orbits, and that one of them I can't remember which has a date with<BR>
>the planets surface, I think though it is the closer of the two.<BR>
><BR>
>Then theres that large rock Luna I think its called which is actually<BR>
>spiralling away from its primary Earth I believe, but this will be solved<BR>
>when the hyperspace bypass is built necessitating the removal of Earth.<BR>
><BR>
>Antony Farrell<BR>
<BR>
IIRC, the Moon would[1] continue to spiral away for about 50 billion years<BR>
(the rate is about cm/year?) until the Earth is tidally locked to it<BR>
and then return (at an equally slow rate) until it impacts.<BR>
<BR>
I think that Leonard was referring to orbital decay in a period of<BR>
days, weeks or months being bad SF. Even a satellite orbitting at a few<BR>
hundred miles gives years of notice.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
[1] assuming that someone fixes the "Sun turns into a Red Giant" thing.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Phil Kitching<BR>
- --<BR>
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/<BR>
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.<BR>
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 07:38:59 -0600<BR>
From: Steve Lieb <steve@necadon.com><BR>
Subject: 3d imperium<BR>
<BR>
> dunelm.org.uk><BR>
> Subject: Re: 3d imperium<BR>
> >Has anyone ever tried even somewhat successfully to 3-dimensionalize an<BR>
> >otherwise-standard CT Imperium?<BR>
> <BR>
> I also tried to think up some reason why 'Jump Space' might be 2<BR>
> dimensional, but I couldn't get anything I was happy with.  A 3d->2d<BR>
> mapping<BR>
> doesn't work well.<BR>
> <BR>
	[Steve replied]  Thanks Mark - I went through the same dimensional<BR>
handwaving.  "Um, jumpspace is mapped to 2d because it is extra-dimansional<BR>
and doesn't agree with the 3d goemetry we're all familiar with...."<BR>
	Sounded weak to me, too.<BR>
<BR>
	Bah, now we have a great game, bound to the legacy of it's origins<BR>
before home computers were commonly available.  Isn't that odd?  The one<BR>
game that would most thematically support using computers on a regular basis<BR>
doesn't use them in any INTEGRAL way.  The bitter irony. <BR>
>  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 07:50:04 -0600<BR>
From: Steve Lieb <steve@necadon.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #1391<BR>
<BR>
> > >Has anyone ever tried even somewhat successfully to 3-dimensionalize an<BR>
> > >otherwise-standard CT Imperium?<BR>
> <BR>
> What if you don't use a sphere?  How about a saucer shape?  Out here in<BR>
> the spiral arm, the galaxy is not as thick as at the center (but it<BR>
> might be so thick that a sphere would be the only realistic shape for<BR>
> known space).<BR>
> <BR>
	[Steve replied]  according to a quick web search, the central bulge<BR>
of the milky way is about 100,000ly in diameter, and<BR>
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/MilkyWay/structure.html <BR>
<BR>
	would suggest that the disk itself is what, about 40-50kly "thick"?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:13:43 -0500<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Re Loans and Indentures<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>(Sorry but there have been some _particularly_ trollerific<BR>
>jingoist posts today that I'm REALLY telling myself 'I will<BR>
>not reply...I will not reply'... already I've trashed three or<BR>
>four ones that didn't get sent.)<BR>
<BR>
	You are not alone.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:15:51 -0500<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Sepratists (was Ortillery VS Gropos)<BR>
<BR>
Glenn St-Germain writes:<BR>
>>less happy being british. Then there are the Quebec seperatists.<BR>
>>And twice in a row they've voted down independence.<BR>
>The second time, only by a very narrow margin. And they keep<BR>
>electing separatist governments.<BR>
<BR>
	Although the opposition party garnered more of the popular<BR>
	vote in the last election.  Gotta love a parliamentary<BR>
	democracy.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 14:14:25 +0000<BR>
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Vargr (Was: Re: Weapons of mass destruction)<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry worried:<BR>
><BR>
>>At Close Quarters - Doug Berry's detailed combat rules for Traveller, <BR>
>>famous for Penguins.<BR>
><BR>
>You know, I'm beginning to have nightmares that twenty years from now I'll<BR>
>be a famous game designer, and people will still come up to me at GenCon<BR>
>and call me "The Penguin Guy."<BR>
<BR>
You noticed. ;-)<BR>
<BR>
What's the list's view on this?<BR>
<BR>
I mean, can secret conspiracies to associate someone with penguin throwing<BR>
still work once the victim realises what's happenning?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Phil Kitching<BR>
- --<BR>
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/<BR>
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.<BR>
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:17:35 -0500<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Loans and Indentures<BR>
<BR>
Kyle Schuant writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>And I don't want<BR>
>to hear about transponders and "late payment messages<BR>
>stopping the engine." If an engineer put it there,<BR>
>another engineer can remove it!<BR>
><BR>
>The only vaguely plausible one I heard, it was a sci<BR>
>fi story, for the loan the ship captain had had his<BR>
>spleen removed and replaced with an artificial one<BR>
>which would decay in six months, unless he returned to<BR>
>the world to make his payments...<BR>
<BR>
	If a doctor can put it there...<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 07:27:46 -0700<BR>
From: cos 90 <cos90@powersurfr.com><BR>
Subject: Re: adventure just waiting for the writing...<BR>
<BR>
>Well, I just did a crude calc for a famous SF vessel. I come up with a<BR>
>*minimum* of over 500e15 (500 *quadrillion*) m^3. Or about 40<BR>
>quadrillion dTons. And it was likely more than double that. <BR>
><BR>
>Question. At what TL can *one* person run such a vessel? <BR>
<BR>
That's a mighty big ship, especially for just one person. The only<BR>
published SF example I can think of -- great big huge ship, one<BR>
person running it -- is the ecological seedship run by Haviland Tuf<BR>
in George R.R. Martin's "Tuf Voyaging".<BR>
<BR>
(And wouldn't *that* make an interesting encounter for a Traveller<BR>
group -- either with or without Tuf aboard...)<BR>
     Glenn St-Germain  Edmonton, Alberta, Canada <BR>
cos90@powersurfr.com  http://plaza.powersurfr.com/glenn<BR>
        "There is no longer any normal to be"<BR>
                                 -- Gary Numan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 06:57:45 -0800<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: X-Files scenarios in Trav (the d'Alemberts)<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Micheal D. Peters" <Travelleri@home.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: X-Files scenarios in Trav (the d'Alemberts)<BR>
...<BR>
>One other bit of trivia, the copies of the books I have (that I now HAVE to<BR>
>dig out) didn't have Foss covers, but originals that coinsided with the<BR>
>stories. Were yours published in Europe by any chance?<BR>
<BR>
  I bought my first one (#4?) in the UK, with Foss cover (one of the<BR>
illo's from T4, FWIW, a yellow sheet-metal sided space-barge being shot<BR>
to hell); all of the others were purchased in Canada, and had the odd<BR>
(but OK) stylized airbrush (?) art.<BR>
<BR>
        Steven Hudson<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 06:57:51 -0800<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ortillery VS Gropos<BR>
<BR>
...<BR>
>The second time, only by a very narrow margin. And they keep electing<BR>
>separatist governments.<BR>
><BR>
>     Glenn St-Germain  Edmonton, Alberta, Canada <BR>
<BR>
  Hey, you might too if you were adjacent to Ontario :><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:35:21 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
>I agree.<BR>
><BR>
>(I realize that the list policies frown on doing this, but since everyone<BR>
>else seems to cheerfully ignore the policies when they *really* feel like<BR>
>it, I will also.)<BR>
<BR>
No we don't! :-)<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: In my copious spare time (not!) I've been trying to build the ships<BR>
from FSotSI with GT. Yes, I know the ships in there are broken (the CA-15 I<BR>
have been working on has a crew of 1079 but a frozen watch of 12!), but I<BR>
am trying to go with the spirit of the designs rather than the actual stats.<BR>
<BR>
One thing I have run straight head on into is streamlining. Many Imperial<BR>
warships are streamlined, so as to scoop fuel from gas giants. However,<BR>
streamlining in GT takes away a whopping 20% of the ships internal volume.<BR>
At first I felt I understood the reasoning behind this (wasted space that<BR>
is too small/awkwardly shaped to be used for anything else). However, the<BR>
more I think about it, the less I am in agreement -- especially on larger<BR>
ships.<BR>
<BR>
For example, take the 100,000 dton CA-15 -- a big, streamlined cone. By GT,<BR>
20% of this cone is unusable because of streamlining. Now where, I ask, is<BR>
this wasted space at? Surely on the scale of a 100,000 dton, even the nose<BR>
cone of the vessel would be large enough to be used for something.<BR>
<BR>
It occurs to me in writing this that the streamlining penalty on volume may<BR>
be an abstraction to simulate the volume differences between a box on a<BR>
certain length and surface area and, say, a wedge. By this thinking, a<BR>
100,000 dton cone is not *really* 100,000 dton in volume, but is as long<BR>
and wide at it's largest dimension and has the same surface area as a box<BR>
of that size. But this seems like an unnecessary abstraction -- why not<BR>
just use configuration modifiers (as has been the tradition in other<BR>
versions of Traveller).<BR>
<BR>
If someone could make a good case for the GURPS Vehicles/Traveller way of<BR>
handling streamlining, I'd like to hear it.<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:48:36 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: 2d maps and galactic thickness (was RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #1391)<BR>
<BR>
>would suggest that the [galactic] disk itself is what, about 40-50kly "thick"?<BR>
<BR>
It depends on your definition of thickness. A great majority of stars are<BR>
concentrated in an area about 3,000 ly thick, IIRC.<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 16:16:31 -0000<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Another GK<BR>
<BR>
... hoping for a better response than the last one....<BR>
<BR>
Anyone here involved in real rocket science type stuff? I need to chat<BR>
off-list with some real space scientists.<BR>
<BR>
Regards<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:11:25 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich writes:<BR>
<BR>
> It occurs to me in writing this that the streamlining penalty on volume may<BR>
> be an abstraction to simulate the volume differences between a box on a<BR>
> certain length and surface area and, say, a wedge.<BR>
<BR>
This is, in fact, correct.  It's also a reasonable approximation of the difficulty of _storing_ streamlined objects, which are generally not terribly good shapes to put into vehicle bays and the like.<BR>
<BR>
The reasoning for doing in it GT is mostly that that's the way GURPS Vehicles handles streamlining.  However, a point worthy of note is that an unstreamlined ship in GT would be called 'partially streamlined' in other rules systems; a streamlined ship is what FF&S would call 'airframe'.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:27:27 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
From: Joseph R. Dietrich <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>of that size. But this seems like an unnecessary abstraction -- why not<BR>
>just use configuration modifiers (as has been the tradition in other<BR>
>versions of Traveller).<BR>
><BR>
>If someone could make a good case for the GURPS Vehicles/Traveller way of<BR>
>handling streamlining, I'd like to hear it.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The *best* case that could be made is that GURPS: Vehicles is *not*<BR>
traditional Traveller. That is, the Vehicle design system was in existence<BR>
and in use before Traveller was ported to the GURPS system.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, I personally tend to chalk up the loss in space to both<BR>
"waste space", and special structural design modifications. I'm not an<BR>
aerospace engineer in real life, so I don't know if such reasoning is<BR>
justified.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 17:14:33 +0000<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Vargr (Was: Re: Weapons of mass destruction)<BR>
<BR>
At 7:59 -0500 24/11/99, "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote:<BR>
> >At Close Quarters - Doug Berry's detailed combat rules for Traveller,<BR>
> >famous for Penguins.<BR>
><BR>
>You know, I'm beginning to have nightmares that twenty years from now I'll<BR>
>be a famous game designer, and people will still come up to me at GenCon<BR>
>and call me "The Penguin Guy."<BR>
<BR>
Well, I did argue with Andy Lilly to keep them in as you asked....<BR>
<BR>
>Also, ACQ was co-written by James Lindsay, who is only partially under the<BR>
>influence of the penguins.<BR>
<BR>
And following reading ACQ I bought the Atari Jaguar Cartridge 'Attack <BR>
of the Mutant Penguins'.<BR>
<BR>
The really surreal thing is that when I was a small kid I used to <BR>
call nuns 'penguins'.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
                        MiB - Marines in Battledress<BR>
    "Protecting the Imperium from the Scum of the Galaxy"<BR>
Rob Prior's Mac software @ http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:57:33 EST<BR>
From: GypsyComet@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Ship crews (was re: adventure just waiting...)<BR>
<BR>
Black ICE <wombat@premier.net> types:<BR>
<BR>
>Seriously, one of the quibbles I have about the various ship design<BR>
>sequences in Traveller is that one gains no extra benefit from<BR>
>increasing the number of computers (over the required number) linked<BR>
>into ship operations.  Perhaps for each additional doubling of computing<BR>
>power, the crew requirement could be halved.<BR>
><BR>
>Feedback, anyone?<BR>
<BR>
 In FF&Sv2 (The T4 version) this is accomplished by setting the degree of <BR>
interconnectedness between systems. The raw computing power aboard isn't <BR>
nearly as important unless you introduce robotics to actually replace <BR>
crewsophonts (unlikely in the TNE setting; quite possible in the CT setting).<BR>
<BR>
GC<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 18:36:58 -0000<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: GT Streamlining<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:<BR>
> One thing I have run straight head on into is streamlining.<BR>
> Many Imperial warships are streamlined, so as to scoop fuel<BR>
> from gas giants. However, streamlining in GT takes away a<BR>
> whopping 20% of the ships internal volume. At first I felt I<BR>
> understood the reasoning behind this (wasted space that is too<BR>
> small/awkwardly shaped to be used for anything else). However,<BR>
> the more I think about it, the less I am in agreement --<BR>
> especially on larger ships.<BR>
<snip><BR>
> If someone could make a good case for the GURPS Vehicles/Traveller<BR>
> way of handling streamlining, I'd like to hear it.<BR>
<BR>
This is a common mathematical  problem  called  "packing".  Given<BR>
fixed dimension items such as standard height  deck  squares  its<BR>
true that a portion of internal volume will be wasted in  awkward<BR>
shapes.  However, there are 2 important factors missed out here:<BR>
<BR>
First, there is something called (I believe)  "gradation",  which<BR>
basically means that the smaller the internal objects  *relative*<BR>
to the area/volume they are to be  packed  in  the  less  overall<BR>
waste.  In other words the  larger  the  ship  the  smaller  this<BR>
percantage should be.<BR>
<BR>
Second, some items to be packed do *not*  have  fixed  dimensions<BR>
(but do have fixed volumes) ... such as fuel  tanks.  These,  and<BR>
other items, can  be  packed  into  most  of  this  wasted  space<BR>
provided the architect is competant.<BR>
<BR>
The GURPS:Vehicles method  of  20%  loss  works  okay  for  small<BR>
vehicles such as ground cars and aircraft but does not make sense<BR>
for larger vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
The non-G:T Traveller method of modiifers (explained as  external<BR>
equipment cowlings, structural reinforcement,  and  airosurfaces)<BR>
is okay for medium sized vehicles (eg. the Kinunir).<BR>
<BR>
But IMHO large vehicles  such  as  dreadnaughts  and  battleships<BR>
would be  so  unstable in  an  atmosphere  that  streamlining  is<BR>
pointless.<BR>
<BR>
A quick fix would be to have the GURPS:Vehicles  percentage  vary<BR>
with overall volume ... becoming smaller and smaller  the  larger<BR>
the vehicle.  For added flavour this could be improved by a  task<BR>
roll against the architect's skill.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
"!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:50:48 +0100<BR>
From: Jens Rydholm <jenry023@student.liu.se><BR>
Subject: Re: YKYBPTMTW:<BR>
<BR>
Timothy Collinson wrote:<BR>
> >You Know You've Been Playing Too Much Traveller When:<BR>
> Or you walk across some hexagonal paving stones and expect to take a<BR>
> week getting from one to another.<BR>
<BR>
But you might be able to move more than one step at a time... :-)<BR>
<BR>
/Jens 'Spacejens' Rydholm<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:13:20 -0800<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: old 15mm Traveller mini's by Citadel<BR>
<BR>
>From: Volker Greimann <volker@greimann.de><BR>
>Subject: Re: old 15mm Traveller mini's by Citadel<BR>
...<BR>
>>   For those who are interested, this most excellent site for all things<BR>
...<BR>
>>         http://www.voodoostudios.com/Legends/cittrav/index.htm<BR>
><BR>
>Sadly, the picture quality is appalingly bad.<BR>
<BR>
  Well, the original catalog art was pretty poor :(<BR>
<BR>
>Couldnt anyone who has these minis (painted or unpainted) make some photos<BR>
>that i could put up on my site?<BR>
<BR>
  <sigh> I've got a very few painted up, and the rest, while fairly far<BR>
up on the priority list of several thousand figures, are scheduled for <BR>
completion for next summer.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:24:09 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
>The *best* case that could be made is that GURPS: Vehicles is *not*<BR>
>traditional Traveller. That is, the Vehicle design system was in existence<BR>
>and in use before Traveller was ported to the GURPS system.<BR>
<BR>
I understand this, but that extra 20% makes a huge difference. In the<BR>
CA-15, its about 2Gs of manuever capability and a bunch of armor.<BR>
<BR>
As Anthony pointed out, "unstreamlined" hulls in GT are what traditional<BR>
Traveller called partially streamlined, and "streamlined" hulls are<BR>
airframes. So tell me ... should there be a "partially streamlined"<BR>
category in GT to represent Traveller streamlined ships?!?<BR>
<BR>
What exasperates me about this is that GV doesn't even use the Traveller<BR>
classifications "unstreamlined, partially streamlined, streamlined," or<BR>
"airframe." Instead, a vehicle is either streamlined or it isn't, with<BR>
several levels of streamlining available.<BR>
<BR>
So *why not* name it like it is? IMHO, unstreamlined in GT should be just<BR>
that: a hull with no streamlining. Streamlined hulls in GT should have<BR>
basic streamlining, and not airframes. Airframes (and partially streamlined<BR>
hulls) should be seperate categories.<BR>
<BR>
Hopefully this will be addressed in the upcoming goodies from SJG.<BR>
<BR>
And it seems to me that Peter's comments on "gradation" should be taken<BR>
into account when figuring streamlining for large hulls.<BR>
<BR>
Oops. Sorry about the minor rant. Have a nice Turkey Day, you fellow U.S.<BR>
inhabitants out there (and just have a nice Day to all the rest!)<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:37:57 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: 3d imperium<BR>
<BR>
Look at the map of the London Underground. It is a perfectly functional<BR>
map that doesn't bear much if any relationship to rw geography. (I read an<BR>
article recently, in Scientific American, IIRC where the author talked of<BR>
his experiences with the Underground. There are two destinations on<BR>
different branches, that were you to follow the map, would seem to be<BR>
quite far aoart. In transit time on the Underground, they were, but up on<BR>
the surface, they were a quarter mile apart.<BR>
<BR>
Finally _why_ is jumpspace not directly corresponding to RW spacetime<BR>
'weak'? It's essentially the same theory as wormholes in current<BR>
cosmology; a shortcut through the fabric of spacetime.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Steve Lieb wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > dunelm.org.uk><BR>
> > Subject: Re: 3d imperium<BR>
> > >Has anyone ever tried even somewhat successfully to 3-dimensionalize an<BR>
> > >otherwise-standard CT Imperium?<BR>
> > <BR>
> > I also tried to think up some reason why 'Jump Space' might be 2<BR>
> > dimensional, but I couldn't get anything I was happy with.  A 3d->2d<BR>
> > mapping<BR>
> > doesn't work well.<BR>
> > <BR>
> 	[Steve replied]  Thanks Mark - I went through the same dimensional<BR>
> handwaving.  "Um, jumpspace is mapped to 2d because it is extra-dimansional<BR>
> and doesn't agree with the 3d goemetry we're all familiar with...."<BR>
> 	Sounded weak to me, too.<BR>
> <BR>
> 	Bah, now we have a great game, bound to the legacy of it's origins<BR>
> before home computers were commonly available.  Isn't that odd?  The one<BR>
> game that would most thematically support using computers on a regular basis<BR>
> doesn't use them in any INTEGRAL way.  The bitter irony. <BR>
> >  <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:42:59 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
>Oops. Sorry about the minor rant.<BR>
<BR>
Oops. Also sorry if that seemed directed at Chris or anyone else on the<BR>
list. It was a general rant, and not meant as a debate with anyone.<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: I think General Rant would make a wonderful character in GT: Ground<BR>
Forces.<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:44:40 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: OT: Dogma<BR>
<BR>
I suppose that THIS time when he says 'Cancel Christmas!' he can really<BR>
do it ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 07:33 AM 11/23/1999 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >>Go see this movie.  It's wonderfully funny, and makes you think about<BR>
> >>religion and God as seperate subjects.  Alanis Morissette plays God and<BR>
> >>pulls it off beautifully.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Just what we need, a whiny Canadian singer as the Supreme Being. I'd<BR>
> >rather have George Burns. :)<BR>
> <BR>
> You'll be happy to know that she doesn't say a word, and Alan Rickamn (Die<BR>
> Hard, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves) plays the Seraph who is Her Voice.<BR>
> *He* gets a bit whiny, but it's all in good fun.<BR>
> -- <BR>
> <BR>
> Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
> http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:00:12 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Streamlining (was Re: Taikonauts!)<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich writes:<BR>
> I understand this, but that extra 20% makes a huge difference. In the<BR>
> CA-15, its about 2Gs of manuever capability and a bunch of armor.<BR>
<BR>
The extra volume is only significant because jump drives are volume-based.  If you were to specify that only internal spaces count for jump drive mass (or to be even simpler, are used for jump fuel computations) most of the problems people complain about would go away.<BR>
> <BR>
> As Anthony pointed out, "unstreamlined" hulls in GT are what traditional<BR>
> Traveller called partially streamlined, and "streamlined" hulls are<BR>
> airframes. So tell me ... should there be a "partially streamlined"<BR>
> category in GT to represent Traveller streamlined ships?!?<BR>
<BR>
Nope.  Per GV, any GT ship not specifically designed otherwise is capable of entering atmosphere (which means only an idiot builds streamlined merchants, but...).  The difference is that with less than the level of streamlining which is considered 'streamlined' per GT, they must move at subsonic speeds (or disintegrate) while in atmosphere.<BR>
<BR>
To be honest, most 'streamlined' CT designs are basically unstreamlined, judging by the illustrations.<BR>
> <BR>
> So *why not* name it like it is? IMHO, unstreamlined in GT should be just<BR>
> that: a hull with no streamlining. Streamlined hulls in GT should have<BR>
> basic streamlining, and not airframes. Airframes (and partially streamlined<BR>
> hulls) should be seperate categories.<BR>
<BR>
Too late to really errata this one.<BR>
> <BR>
> Hopefully this will be addressed in the upcoming goodies from SJG.<BR>
> <BR>
> And it seems to me that Peter's comments on "gradation" should be taken<BR>
> into account when figuring streamlining for large hulls.<BR>
<BR>
As the 'streamlining' volume for a ship is actually outside the hull, no, not really.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:36:18 -0600<BR>
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortelnetworks.com><BR>
Subject: Where Does the Spinward Marches REALLY Begin?<BR>
<BR>
Howdy folks.  I've got here a new can 'o worms, and I want to<BR>
open it up.  It concerns the potential difference between political<BR>
and cultural boundaries, sort of.<BR>
<BR>
Ask a Traveller player where the Spinward Marches is, and show<BR>
her a map, and most likely she can figure it out if she doesn't already<BR>
know.<BR>
<BR>
Fine.  Now ask a native of the Aramis subsector (or District 268, or<BR>
Five Sisters) where the Spinward Marches is, and he might say his<BR>
region isn't really "the same as" the rest of the Marches.  In short, a<BR>
border area might claim a bit of individuality that separates it from the<BR>
sector's core.<BR>
<BR>
Frontier gives way to wilderness on one side and civilization on the<BR>
other... and location has an effect on its inhabitants.<BR>
<BR>
So then, an exercise to the reader would be to take a close look at<BR>
the Spinward Marches and pick out the areas that, quite frankly,<BR>
don't really fit the mold... if there even is a mold for this sector.<BR>
Where do their cultural ties rest?<BR>
<BR>
Now, I wouldn't suggest this kind of exercise for, say, Deneb,<BR>
because they've only got one Imperial border.  But the Marches<BR>
might have clusters that prefer Deneb worlds, or might be solid<BR>
Marches supporters, or might be only marginal.<BR>
<BR>
What do you think?<BR>
<BR>
This is only an exercise.  If it doesn't go anywhere, that's fine.<BR>
<BR>
- -Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:07:53 -0800<BR>
From: "Jason T. Barnabas" <cybernaut@netzero.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Tourism in the Marches<BR>
<BR>
Ethan Henry <egh@klg.com> wrote:<BR>
<snip><BR>
> Another option might be to farm something that doesn't mind weeds, like<BR>
fruit<BR>
> trees, but, unfortunately, there's a mould/fungus/insect grub that tends<BR>
to<BR>
> spread from tree to tree quickly, wiping out the entire orchard once the<BR>
fungus<BR>
> taken root (so to speak). Whengan trees deal with this by using a<BR>
wind-born<BR>
> seed/spore distribution method that tends to keep individual plants of the<BR>
same<BR>
> species fairly distant from one another, except for certain species, like<BR>
> non-fruit-bearing trees, which soak themselves with a natural anti-fungal<BR>
agent<BR>
> (which is, unfortunately again, highly flamable, making the trees a poor<BR>
choice<BR>
> of building materials).<BR>
<BR>
Can you imaging how valuable the charcoal gas (like coke gas from coal)<BR>
could be from such plants?  Bake the wood and distill the gas for use as a<BR>
high octane fuel.  Depending upon its chemical properties, it might even be<BR>
possible to leach out the anti-fungal agent(s) and re-use them, perhaps<BR>
rendering the wood stock usable for building.  Such a process might require<BR>
pulping, but he pulp could be "glued" back together creating a building<BR>
material that would be stronger than ordianary wood.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jason<BR>
___________________________________________<BR>
      The rules have changed.  Get paid to surf the web.<BR>
http://www.alladvantage.com/home.asp?refid=BMM-972<BR>
Please tell them BMM-972 if they ask who recruited you.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________<BR>
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World<BR>
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at<BR>
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1392<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za01.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:14:01 -0500<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v65.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:13:12 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id PAA94986;<BR>
	Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:12:30 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:11:35 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA94929<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:11:34 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:11:34 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199911242011.PAA94929@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #1392<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
