Reply to Evyn
> This really depends on the shipping model, in that there are two prevailing
> models than needn't be mutually exclusive, yet most people think in one
or
> the other. The 1st or original model is termed the Small Ship Model it's
genesis is in Book 2 of CT where 5000 tons was the limit, this is
supported
> by the Traveller adventure as well it is the level most groups playing
the
> game reside. In this model most commercial shipping is sub 5000 dTons
and
> is largely local in flavor (The majority of merchantmen are equipped
with
> J1 or J2 drives). So there are lots of ships going everywhere, and the
model starts to break in terms of traffic to High Population worlds. The
other end of this model is the Large Ship Model (funny thing that name
considering). Which Larger, 10 to 20 kdTon liners with J3 or J4 drives
service much longer routes in a hub and spoke model, from the waypoint
of
> these large ships the small ones radiate out into the fringe/local markets.
> As I lead with often people get hung up with one of these two and have hard
> times justifying middles where they cross over. By extension I have
pondered what the J3/J4 liner network of the Imperium looks like. The
major
> limiting factor is the metric to use for figuring out trade volume, SJG
used a algorithm based on GDP, which is ok in terms of cash flow framing
the trade routes, but not so hot at roughing in volumes in their most
physical sense. I have often pondered using numbers based on real world
volumes which work out a cubic meter per person world wide.
Have you seen any good formulae on how many ships or tons of ships passing
through an area per time?
Then there is the argument, "there is no such thing as interstellar trade,
worlds are self-sufficient, starship transport is far more expensive than
making what you need locally." What I remember of this stuff is that the
people saying it had analysis good enough to convince themselves, maybe
even me, but it's beside the point.
Traveller is based on classic SF/Space Op notions of interstellar trade.
Without that, it's not Traveller, so we have to agree to be "unrealistic."
However, if our starting point is "unrealistic," what metrics do we use to
calculate how much is there? We're at assertions. Maybe the best assertion
to start with is the trade tables. But those don't really get at it, they
tell you how many cargoes come available how often for YOUR ship, not an
entire ecosystem of N ships, of which yours is only one of many (...how
many?).
And also the perpetual flame war about how piracy in Traveller is
impossible, there's not enough shipping to prey on to make a living. But
Traveller has explicitly defined "pirate ships" in it, so we're back to
the tropes and assertions we can't live without.
> There are about 25,000 commercial ships of all stripes worldwide
Compared
> something like 2500 active warships (I had numbers but I can't seem to
pin
> them down as I write this.) Then add in all the the other ships and
craft
> that exist, note these were from reported sources there is some not
small
> number of craft are not reported anywhere that is quantifiable.
That's another reason I'd like to find that article I mentioned, because I
think they did get into saying how much of overall shipping capacity was
all of the chaff and dross of small craft which was allowed for before you
get useable big warship tonnage. I remember it being pretty rigorous.
>> This implies that
>> somewhere GDW had some rules for how many (how many tons of) warships
could be built by population, starport, etc. However, I never became
aware
>> of any of these. It is fair to assume that since Frank was one of the 5FW
>> designers he was aware of the algorithm, and it is probably very
similar
>> to the one he put in PoT, i.e., same order of magnitude.
> Trillion Credit Squadron?
Yes, I mentioned TCS in the next para after the one you cited, but IIRC it
only gives tons of maximum output of shipbuilding per world, which is a
theoretical maximum, but we have to factor in % of production for military
vs. civilian, starships vs. local rowboats, approximate ship lifespan,
etc., and based on 5FW and the article I mentioned they had done that
before.
>> Starships
>> are just cooler than not starships, and I thought the Covenanter
> I never understood this point of view, Smallcraft with their ability to
have burn their way across a system with a combats load of fuel. TNE
made
> this even more so. Small craft and SDB really become the big boys they
should always have been.
I am justly chastised! :-) I guess I'm just a typical fanboy, mooning over
glamorous starships.
> Part of of the big issue there was the Battleship
> simulator that was CT's Book 5 High Guard. In which if it wasn't a spinal
> mount it wasn't a weapon. Hint Book 2 ship combat was a different critter
Yes. Winning TCS tourney squadrons were almost exclusively rocks with
spinal mounts IIRC. Another case of Traveller asserting a "reality" and
then the Law of Unintended Consequences bit it. Everyone wanted to play
Star Wars and now Traveller was just full of rocks. So in almost all cases
we are deliberately ignoring what our "rules" tell us to be true.
> even more so with the release of Special Supplement 3 Missiles, i.e
Missiles became the main battery of ship to ship
> combat that was no way represented in High Guard.
Yeah, that was bound into JTAS. I had forgotten about that.
>> Finally, and this is a pure TNEism, Marc has repudiated this elsewhere,
TNE allows jump capable craft smaller than 100 tons. I am honestly of
not
>> convinced of J-torps, but I do know that I want you to be able to built
little couriers or Xboats down around 50-80 tons and not 100.
> A 50 dton Couriers are still damn big ships. I am often surprised at how
little comprehension there is about the size of Traveller ships among
Traveller Fans.
Sure, but 50 is still less than 100, and when you're trying to carry
couriers aboard warships every savings helps.
> This really depends on the shipping model, in that there are two prevailing
> models than needn't be mutually exclusive, yet most people think in one
or
> the other. The 1st or original model is termed the Small Ship Model it's
genesis is in Book 2 of CT where 5000 tons was the limit, this is
supported
> by the Traveller adventure as well it is the level most groups playing
the
> game reside. In this model most commercial shipping is sub 5000 dTons
and
> is largely local in flavor (The majority of merchantmen are equipped
with
> J1 or J2 drives). So there are lots of ships going everywhere, and the
model starts to break in terms of traffic to High Population worlds. The
other end of this model is the Large Ship Model (funny thing that name
considering). Which Larger, 10 to 20 kdTon liners with J3 or J4 drives
service much longer routes in a hub and spoke model, from the waypoint
of
> these large ships the small ones radiate out into the fringe/local markets.
> As I lead with often people get hung up with one of these two and have hard
> times justifying middles where they cross over. By extension I have
pondered what the J3/J4 liner network of the Imperium looks like. The
major
> limiting factor is the metric to use for figuring out trade volume, SJG
used a algorithm based on GDP, which is ok in terms of cash flow framing
the trade routes, but not so hot at roughing in volumes in their most
physical sense. I have often pondered using numbers based on real world
volumes which work out a cubic meter per person world wide.
Have you seen any good formulae on how many ships or tons of ships passing
through an area per time?
Then there is the argument, "there is no such thing as interstellar trade,
worlds are self-sufficient, starship transport is far more expensive than
making what you need locally." What I remember of this stuff is that the
people saying it had analysis good enough to convince themselves, maybe
even me, but it's beside the point.
Traveller is based on classic SF/Space Op notions of interstellar trade.
Without that, it's not Traveller, so we have to agree to be "unrealistic."
However, if our starting point is "unrealistic," what metrics do we use to
calculate how much is there? We're at assertions. Maybe the best assertion
to start with is the trade tables. But those don't really get at it, they
tell you how many cargoes come available how often for YOUR ship, not an
entire ecosystem of N ships, of which yours is only one of many (...how
many?).
And also the perpetual flame war about how piracy in Traveller is
impossible, there's not enough shipping to prey on to make a living. But
Traveller has explicitly defined "pirate ships" in it, so we're back to
the tropes and assertions we can't live without.
> There are about 25,000 commercial ships of all stripes worldwide
Compared
> something like 2500 active warships (I had numbers but I can't seem to
pin
> them down as I write this.) Then add in all the the other ships and
craft
> that exist, note these were from reported sources there is some not
small
> number of craft are not reported anywhere that is quantifiable.
That's another reason I'd like to find that article I mentioned, because I
think they did get into saying how much of overall shipping capacity was
all of the chaff and dross of small craft which was allowed for before you
get useable big warship tonnage. I remember it being pretty rigorous.
>> This implies that
>> somewhere GDW had some rules for how many (how many tons of) warships
could be built by population, starport, etc. However, I never became
aware
>> of any of these. It is fair to assume that since Frank was one of the 5FW
>> designers he was aware of the algorithm, and it is probably very
similar
>> to the one he put in PoT, i.e., same order of magnitude.
> Trillion Credit Squadron?
Yes, I mentioned TCS in the next para after the one you cited, but IIRC it
only gives tons of maximum output of shipbuilding per world, which is a
theoretical maximum, but we have to factor in % of production for military
vs. civilian, starships vs. local rowboats, approximate ship lifespan,
etc., and based on 5FW and the article I mentioned they had done that
before.
>> Starships
>> are just cooler than not starships, and I thought the Covenanter
> I never understood this point of view, Smallcraft with their ability to
have burn their way across a system with a combats load of fuel. TNE
made
> this even more so. Small craft and SDB really become the big boys they
should always have been.
I am justly chastised! :-) I guess I'm just a typical fanboy, mooning over
glamorous starships.
> Part of of the big issue there was the Battleship
> simulator that was CT's Book 5 High Guard. In which if it wasn't a spinal
> mount it wasn't a weapon. Hint Book 2 ship combat was a different critter
Yes. Winning TCS tourney squadrons were almost exclusively rocks with
spinal mounts IIRC. Another case of Traveller asserting a "reality" and
then the Law of Unintended Consequences bit it. Everyone wanted to play
Star Wars and now Traveller was just full of rocks. So in almost all cases
we are deliberately ignoring what our "rules" tell us to be true.
> even more so with the release of Special Supplement 3 Missiles, i.e
Missiles became the main battery of ship to ship
> combat that was no way represented in High Guard.
Yeah, that was bound into JTAS. I had forgotten about that.
>> Finally, and this is a pure TNEism, Marc has repudiated this elsewhere,
TNE allows jump capable craft smaller than 100 tons. I am honestly of
not
>> convinced of J-torps, but I do know that I want you to be able to built
little couriers or Xboats down around 50-80 tons and not 100.
> A 50 dton Couriers are still damn big ships. I am often surprised at how
little comprehension there is about the size of Traveller ships among
Traveller Fans.
Sure, but 50 is still less than 100, and when you're trying to carry
couriers aboard warships every savings helps.