DED--
> I'd add that it also depends on what happened to the world during the
> Rebellion. Was it a Black War site? Was it the site of a major naval
> battle? Was it ever subjected to nuclear strike or non-nuclear but
> sustained bombardment? And then what happened when Virus showed up? If
> everything just shut down, that would be great. Was it hit early by a
> suicider? Did some destroyer, doomslayer, or other organics hating
> vessel showed up and blasted the crap out of the place, that's obviously
> going to hamper recovery efforts.
I'm glad you went into that. That was in my head when I was writing my
fantasy, but with the other things I was trying to get at, never got back
around to those details. But as you observe below, it all goes back to a
lot of Ref/GM adjudication on details, and then seat-of-the-pants rulings
on time/cost/resources to put stuff back on line.
> A GM is going to have to decide how much hell rained down on the world
> in their TU. I know that in the 1248 sourcebooks, there were tables to
> roll on to determine how far a world crashed and how much it recovered
> by the time 1248 rolled around. But if you're gaming in 1202, I'm not
> sure how useful they'd be to you.
I had thought that the 1248 books were kind of "system-less," but those
tables make sense. I guess that makes at least three generations of tables
to account for the results of the "Rebellion."
1. Hard Times decline tables
2. TNE Collapse Tables
3. 1248 Collapse/recovery tables
Actually there were more than that. The TNE collapse tables only worked on
1117 pre-collapse UWPs, there was also a separate process for collapsing
worlds that had already been declined by the HT tables. Geo Gelinas may
have created that.
> I don't know if the recovery efforts in Europe and Japan after WW2 are
> good examples for modeling recovery times, but they could be looked into
> and extrapolated from, taking into account proximity (travel distance
> adds to recovery time) and tech level of those involved. The jury may
> still be out on more contemporary infrastructure building in other war
> zones, particularly those where there remains a sectarian divide.
> Bootstrapping a balkanized world still engrossed in conflict is trickier
> than decapitating a TED, unless there are active opposition groups with
> conflicting ideas on how to run the place.
My approach sidesteps some of that, by focusing it on very specific,
"practical," "see the results in a year" small subsets of the local
economy. Kills two birds that way: simplifies horrendous/impossible game
mechanics and insupportable assertions, and fits with RC requirements.
> \_/
> DED
> TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
>
> ==================
> Tim O'Reilly wrote:
>
> They'd have to take the long view. First is the power plant - what kind
> is it, what needs to be done (as you've mentioned) to get it working
> etc. Does that power plant type need to be the one running or is an
> older type better for the meantime? Transmission lines ... how is power
> brought from the power plant to the factory(ies) and residences? How
> far is it? More questions would surely arise in the process.
> Tim
>
> On Thursday, April 3, 2014 4:17 PM, Richard Perks wrote:
>
>
> >Does anyone have any thoughts about those RCES
> bootstrap missions. If they are trying to restablish a world's
> pre-coolapse
> industrial base, how much of the old industrial stuff still remains, and
> how
> much effort does the RCES have to make to get factories etc. back up and
> running.
> >
> >A large supply of power is obvious as is the tech
> knowledge to run it. They will obviously have to replace certain
> components -
> ones with limited life such as seals, but is that it. Is it just
> spending a few
> £ to get the plant back up and running or is it a major rebuild
> job.
> >
> >If they are goimg to have to spend in the orer of
> 50% of the buiuld cost to get pre-collapse plant up and running, then
> the RCES
> plans to expand over diaspora and build sufficient infrastructure are
> not going
> to happen in a few years but will take a decade at least - even if they
> only
> fully uplift a few choice worlds.
> >
> >Cheers
> >Richard
>
> I'd add that it also depends on what happened to the world during the
> Rebellion. Was it a Black War site? Was it the site of a major naval
> battle? Was it ever subjected to nuclear strike or non-nuclear but
> sustained bombardment? And then what happened when Virus showed up? If
> everything just shut down, that would be great. Was it hit early by a
> suicider? Did some destroyer, doomslayer, or other organics hating
> vessel showed up and blasted the crap out of the place, that's obviously
> going to hamper recovery efforts.
I'm glad you went into that. That was in my head when I was writing my
fantasy, but with the other things I was trying to get at, never got back
around to those details. But as you observe below, it all goes back to a
lot of Ref/GM adjudication on details, and then seat-of-the-pants rulings
on time/cost/resources to put stuff back on line.
> A GM is going to have to decide how much hell rained down on the world
> in their TU. I know that in the 1248 sourcebooks, there were tables to
> roll on to determine how far a world crashed and how much it recovered
> by the time 1248 rolled around. But if you're gaming in 1202, I'm not
> sure how useful they'd be to you.
I had thought that the 1248 books were kind of "system-less," but those
tables make sense. I guess that makes at least three generations of tables
to account for the results of the "Rebellion."
1. Hard Times decline tables
2. TNE Collapse Tables
3. 1248 Collapse/recovery tables
Actually there were more than that. The TNE collapse tables only worked on
1117 pre-collapse UWPs, there was also a separate process for collapsing
worlds that had already been declined by the HT tables. Geo Gelinas may
have created that.
> I don't know if the recovery efforts in Europe and Japan after WW2 are
> good examples for modeling recovery times, but they could be looked into
> and extrapolated from, taking into account proximity (travel distance
> adds to recovery time) and tech level of those involved. The jury may
> still be out on more contemporary infrastructure building in other war
> zones, particularly those where there remains a sectarian divide.
> Bootstrapping a balkanized world still engrossed in conflict is trickier
> than decapitating a TED, unless there are active opposition groups with
> conflicting ideas on how to run the place.
My approach sidesteps some of that, by focusing it on very specific,
"practical," "see the results in a year" small subsets of the local
economy. Kills two birds that way: simplifies horrendous/impossible game
mechanics and insupportable assertions, and fits with RC requirements.
> \_/
> DED
> TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
>
> ==================
> Tim O'Reilly wrote:
>
> They'd have to take the long view. First is the power plant - what kind
> is it, what needs to be done (as you've mentioned) to get it working
> etc. Does that power plant type need to be the one running or is an
> older type better for the meantime? Transmission lines ... how is power
> brought from the power plant to the factory(ies) and residences? How
> far is it? More questions would surely arise in the process.
> Tim
>
> On Thursday, April 3, 2014 4:17 PM, Richard Perks wrote:
>
>
> >Does anyone have any thoughts about those RCES
> bootstrap missions. If they are trying to restablish a world's
> pre-coolapse
> industrial base, how much of the old industrial stuff still remains, and
> how
> much effort does the RCES have to make to get factories etc. back up and
> running.
> >
> >A large supply of power is obvious as is the tech
> knowledge to run it. They will obviously have to replace certain
> components -
> ones with limited life such as seals, but is that it. Is it just
> spending a few
> £ to get the plant back up and running or is it a major rebuild
> job.
> >
> >If they are goimg to have to spend in the orer of
> 50% of the buiuld cost to get pre-collapse plant up and running, then
> the RCES
> plans to expand over diaspora and build sufficient infrastructure are
> not going
> to happen in a few years but will take a decade at least - even if they
> only
> fully uplift a few choice worlds.
> >
> >Cheers
> >Richard
>