Interesting and more. I have almost no knowledge of the OTU, and i was totally unaware of the Hub World's history (both real world that Dave just shared or in game). I chose Massilia sector as the backdrop for my TNE campaign because it was on the Vampire highway, and it was (sort of) out of the main two campaign areas of Regency and RCS. It was only after I started to dig that I saw this Hub worlds group in sector A, and decided they are one of the antagonists (note: NOT bad guys, necessarily, but the group with goals most likely in conflict with the PCs) for the area.
This new insight into their origins will be helpful, thanks Dave.
It was interesting that Alan asked the question about HW when he did. Just
a couple weeks ago I didn't remember that we had assigned the example for
the PE setting to HIWG, and was thinking, "we defined PEs as a TNE
setting, but I'm not even sure that we included a PE in the book, boy that
would suck if we left that out." Gradually with the various discussions
about HIWG, CofS, etc., it came back to me, the day before Alan's
question.
Since I frequently bemoan issues of memory, I will point out the new
memory observation HW provided, along with a couple previous realizations
related to it.
1. (New) I had very little immediate memory of the HW. I consider this to
be an example of the "Someone Else's Problem Field" from "Hitchhikers
Guide to the Galaxy" (one of the later books, I think, a scene on a
Cricket field). Since it was HIWG's baby it was out of my direct mind for
long periods. The part that I did remember was the stress/concern, "did we
remember to do that/do it right?" and more specifically, "HW was a little
on the large and powerful side, probably not the best example to put out
there," and my replies last night detailed that.
2. Memories (also learning which depends on memory processing) works best
when it is "branded in" by an emotional component, the more powerful the
emotion, the better the memory. Since the "Someone Else's Problem Field"
was operating on the HW sub-project at the time, that real-time
invisibility translated into not very many memories being laid down. The
memories that were laid down more clearly were those when it DID become my
problem, i.e., "is this an instructive example, do we need to do re-work
on it, will that defeat the purpose of working with HIWG?" and also the
subsequent memories of concern, "I don't know that the PE example was as
representative as it should have been, I hope it didn't set a bad
example," which was the first PE memory that bubbled up.
3. Related to 2, spending a lot of mental effort determining courses of
action and deciding among them may not be thought of as an "emotion" per
se, but it works the same way in terms of laying down memories, i.e., lots
of brain activity, whether emotional or intellectual, is what feeds the
memory formation process. An example of this is the way I will usually
better remember the consideration of possible alternatives than I do the
final decision we wrote down. The alternative consideration requires more
thought, but the final act of typing up the decision is almost nothing.
You collapse the quantum wave down to the single eigenstate and it's like,
"is that all there is to a decision?" I actually need the publication in
question to remember what we actually wrote down, because all I remember
is the competition of ideas before that. One might imagine that the act of
making a decision would induce an emotional burst of triumph or
satisfaction that would lay down a good memory. The fact that in my case
it clearly does not indicates to me that the decision functions as a
release/loss of energy (like grounding out a static electrical charge) and
not as an emotional event in itself. I guess my brain is thinking,
"Decision made, cross that off the list, move onto the next thing."
Here ends the latest of my occasional journeys into "human" psychology,
where I call "human" into question as I am performing these observations
on myself.
> Interesting and more. I have almost no knowledge of the OTU, and i was
> totally unaware of the Hub World's history (both real world that Dave
> just shared or in game). I chose Massilia sector as the backdrop for my
> TNE campaign because it was on the Vampire highway, and it was (sort of)
> out of the main two campaign areas of Regency and RCS. It was only after
> I started to dig that I saw this Hub worlds group in sector A, and
> decided they are one of the antagonists (note: NOT bad guys, necessarily,
> but the group with goals most likely in conflict with the PCs) for the
> area.
>
> This new insight into their origins will be helpful, thanks Dave.
>
> Regards,
> Tim aka bardbear
>
And back at Tim's post, the more I think about HW being in Massilia A the
more I think, "I guess that's where they wanted it, I assume they knew the
trade-offs," because that really is an odd place for it to be, given the
Black Curtain. The HIWG leaders should have been aware of all that stuff
because of the F2F "summit" we had along with other communications. But I
can't help but think that our first recommendation would have been to put
it a little more off to one side where they wouldn't get stomped on. I
have to assume that Massilia was something they had done a lot of recent
work on so knew its resources well, that they thought that was a good,
long-time Imperial stomping ground, and wanted to be where the action was.
I don't know if Jim or Roger on this list can provide me any reverse
azimuths on that or not.
But I am pretty sure that at least the leading edge of their HW articles
got into Challenge, and I also have a strong sense that we had a stack of
them ready to go into ensuing issues of Challenge, had that gone on. Some
of that may have wound its way into some of the unpublished stuff I think
Marc may have collected and released. But I have even poorer memories of
that, as it's just hearing things 2d or 3d-hand.
> Interesting and more. I have almost no knowledge of the OTU, and i was
> totally unaware of the Hub World's history (both real world that Dave
> just shared or in game). I chose Massilia sector as the backdrop for my
> TNE campaign because it was on the Vampire highway, and it was (sort of)
> out of the main two campaign areas of Regency and RCS. It was only after
> I started to dig that I saw this Hub worlds group in sector A, and
> decided they are one of the antagonists (note: NOT bad guys, necessarily,
> but the group with goals most likely in conflict with the PCs) for the
> area.
>
> This new insight into their origins will be helpful, thanks Dave.
>
> Regards,
> Tim aka bardbear
>
And I guess that would be a factor when the RC takes Promise, though they might hope to turn it into a Killzone for returning Vampires.
Eamon
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 3/4/14, <> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
To:
Date: Thursday, 3 April, 2014, 5:37
No matter where, the lesson is a valid one: flushing Vampires from their current location might be good for you for now, but it's going to be pretty bad for someone someplace else.
Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that
run could then be chased down.
- Sent from my SM-N900T
On Apr 3, 2014 7:18 PM, "Eamon Watters" <> wrote:
>
>
> And I guess that would be a factor when the RC takes Promise, though they
> might hope to turn it into a Killzone for returning Vampires.
>
> Eamon
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 3/4/14, <> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> To:
> Date: Thursday, 3 April, 2014, 5:37
>
> No matter where, the lesson is a valid one: flushing Vampires from their
> current location might be good for you for now, but it's going to be pretty
> bad for someone someplace else.
>
>
>
>
>
>
True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire Highway.
Eamon
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
To:
Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that run could then be chased down.
I think that's where the Solee ships come in. The RCN is going to be
pretty formidable by 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman
destroyers out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
- Sent from my SM-N900T
On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM, "Eamon Watters" <> wrote:
>
>
> True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up for
> question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a
> very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer Virus
> which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire Highway.
>
> Eamon
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> To:
> Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
>
> Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
> going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that
> run could then be chased down.
>
>
>
Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement at the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to intedict those who go on the run.
Eamon
--------------------------------------------
I think that's where the Solee
ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
- Sent from my SM-N900T
On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
"Eamon Watters" <>
wrote:
True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
Vampire Highway.
Not right away, that's for sure. RC is mostly facing a war of attrition
with Solee before Sandman, though. They are better skilled and more
motivated, but ships are just outclassed and awaiting a lucky hit they
just can't afford too many of.
After Sandman, the RC has real capital ships with skilled crews and Sandman
automating. THAT should be enough for derelict Vampires that can avoid
being taken over by Sandman through damage/wear.
Only thing the RC lacks at that point is population... Which makes Yontez
much more attractive, though still potentially unbalancing... At least by
itself.
- Sent from my SM-N900T
On Apr 3, 2014 8:48 PM, "Eamon Watters" <> wrote:
>
>
> Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement at
> the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a
> shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to intedict
> those who go on the run.
>
> Eamon
>
> --------------------------------------------
> I think that's where the Solee
> ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
> 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
> out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
>
> - Sent from my SM-N900T
>
> On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
> "Eamon Watters" <>
> wrote:
>
> True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
> run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
> reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
> inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
> Vampire Highway.
>
>
>
>
> Eamon
>
>
>
>
Better than that, a trap for returning Vampires to turn them into Sandmen.
> And I guess that would be a factor when the RC takes Promise, though they
> might hope to turn it into a Killzone for returning Vampires.
>
> Eamon
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 3/4/14, <> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> To:
> Date: Thursday, 3 April, 2014, 5:37
>
> No matter where, the lesson is a valid one: flushing Vampires from their
> current location might be good for you for now, but it's going to be
> pretty bad for someone someplace else.
>
>
>
>
>
Yes. Could possibly be the biggest fleet expansion in history.
Sent from my iPad
On 4 Apr 2014, at 13:32, wrote:
> Better than that, a trap for returning Vampires to turn them into Sandmen.
>
> > And I guess that would be a factor when the RC takes Promise, though they
> > might hope to turn it into a Killzone for returning Vampires.
> >
> > Eamon
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Thu, 3/4/14, <> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> > To:
> > Date: Thursday, 3 April, 2014, 5:37
> >
> > No matter where, the lesson is a valid one: flushing Vampires from their
> > current location might be good for you for now, but it's going to be
> > pretty bad for someone someplace else.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up for
> question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a
> very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire Highway.
Evangelical Doomslayer? Is that what I said caused the Vampire Highway?
Not saying you're wrong, if you developed that in your campaign as the
story behind the phenomenon that's great.
I was thinking that the V Highway was explained rimward by Vampires going
on a pilgrimage to see the place of their birth, while the ones going back
finding it destroyed (I think I said at some point, maybe in TNS, that
Lucan nuked it to prevent others from reverse-engineering his chip-based
Virus project, right?) headed back to their "other birthplace" perhaps by
a mix of curiosity to figure out what happened, or as you say, to punish
Lucan for the Silicon Holocaust.
But I could have also said it started with one, or a small cadre of
Doomslayers. There goes my damned memory again.
> Eamon
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> To:
> Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
>
> Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
> going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that
> run could then be chased down.
>
>
Just for the record, there was...an issue with the quotes in Vampire Fleets.
Everything in there is true, and happened as written, but Frank put some
of those in at the last minute without my seeing them. I loved them all,
but when I saw the dates on a couple of them I said, "Holy Crap, Frank,
that wasn't going to happen so soon!"
But we would have found a way to make it work. For example, the "first
contact between RC and Regency" was like 1205 or 6, but we could easily
massage that, where that date was the first contact of the way-way-advance
scouts, not the main bodies where the disagreements began.
I had to do that sort of thing all the time. Not only were there huge
numbers of inconsistencies and contradictions in the CT and MT material
that I had to rationalize or bury, but stuff like the time Frank gave two
at least two different names to the Queen of Solee, which I had to
rationalize, I think in COALINFONET in Challenge 76 at least.
So yes, the VF quotes are real and true, just not indicative of what I
believed the timeline would be, VF made them appear a little sooner, but
we would have found a way to make it work.
> Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement at
> the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a
> shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to
> intedict those who go on the run.
>
> Eamon
>
> --------------------------------------------
> I think that's where the Solee
> ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
> 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
> out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
>
> - Sent from my SM-N900T
>
> On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
> "Eamon Watters" <>
> wrote:
>
> True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
> run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
> reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
> inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
> Vampire Highway.
>
>
>
>
> Eamon
>
>
>
Yep, but I see Uxi already pointed that out and you and he exchanged a
couple more while I was writing the bootstrap thing.
> Yes. Could possibly be the biggest fleet expansion in history.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 4 Apr 2014, at 13:32, wrote:
>
>> Better than that, a trap for returning Vampires to turn them into
>> Sandmen.
>>
>> > And I guess that would be a factor when the RC takes Promise, though
>> they
>> > might hope to turn it into a Killzone for returning Vampires.
>> >
>> > Eamon
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------
>> > On Thu, 3/4/14, <> wrote:
>> >
>> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
>> > To:
>> > Date: Thursday, 3 April, 2014, 5:37
>> >
>> > No matter where, the lesson is a valid one: flushing Vampires from
>> their
>> > current location might be good for you for now, but it's going to be
>> > pretty bad for someone someplace else.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
I wrote the thing rationalizing the two names. Gabriella Ramastan and Christian Overtak or something very like that. The rationalization is in the BARD pages somewhere.
Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPhone...
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 21:53, wrote:
>
> Just for the record, there was...an issue with the quotes in Vampire Fleets.
>
> Everything in there is true, and happened as written, but Frank put some
> of those in at the last minute without my seeing them. I loved them all,
> but when I saw the dates on a couple of them I said, "Holy Crap, Frank,
> that wasn't going to happen so soon!"
>
> But we would have found a way to make it work. For example, the "first
> contact between RC and Regency" was like 1205 or 6, but we could easily
> massage that, where that date was the first contact of the way-way-advance
> scouts, not the main bodies where the disagreements began.
>
> I had to do that sort of thing all the time. Not only were there huge
> numbers of inconsistencies and contradictions in the CT and MT material
> that I had to rationalize or bury, but stuff like the time Frank gave two
> at least two different names to the Queen of Solee, which I had to
> rationalize, I think in COALINFONET in Challenge 76 at least.
>
> So yes, the VF quotes are real and true, just not indicative of what I
> believed the timeline would be, VF made them appear a little sooner, but
> we would have found a way to make it work.
>
> > Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement at
> > the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a
> > shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to
> > intedict those who go on the run.
> >
> > Eamon
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > I think that's where the Solee
> > ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
> > 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
> > out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
> >
> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
> >
> > On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
> > "Eamon Watters" <>
> > wrote:
> >
> > True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
> > run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
> > reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
> > inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> > Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
> > Vampire Highway.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Eamon
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 21:45, wrote:
>
> > True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up for
> > question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a
> > very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> > Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire Highway.
>
> Evangelical Doomslayer? Is that what I said caused the Vampire Highway?
> Not saying you're wrong, if you developed that in your campaign as the
> story behind the phenomenon that's great.
>
> I was thinking that the V Highway was explained rimward by Vampires going
> on a pilgrimage to see the place of their birth, while the ones going back
> finding it destroyed (I think I said at some point, maybe in TNS, that
> Lucan nuked it to prevent others from reverse-engineering his chip-based
> Virus project, right?) headed back to their "other birthplace" perhaps by
> a mix of curiosity to figure out what happened, or as you say, to punish
> Lucan for the Silicon Holocaust.
>
> But I could have also said it started with one, or a small cadre of
> Doomslayers. There goes my damned memory again.
>
> > Eamon
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> > To:
> > Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
> >
> > Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
> > going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that
> > run could then be chased down.
> >
> >
>
>
> Not right away, that's for sure. RC is mostly facing a war of attrition
> with Solee before Sandman, though. They are better skilled and more
> motivated, but ships are just outclassed and awaiting a lucky hit they
> just can't afford too many of.
Speaking for myself, I hope it's not too much of a war of attrition, the
RC just doesn't have that many ships to attrit. Were I to have written it
the RC would do a lot of dancing and feinting and jumping out, a bunch of
inconclusive engagements to thin, disperse, and misdirect the Solee fleet
to allow them to slip in a knockout blow, either inserting Sandman into
centralized Solee computers in a commando raid, or a decapitation,
starting an insurgency that Solee has to fight, that sort of thing. There
have to be dissatisfied Solee that could be leveraged.
> After Sandman, the RC has real capital ships with skilled crews and
> Sandman
> automating. THAT should be enough for derelict Vampires that can avoid
> being taken over by Sandman through damage/wear.
>
> Only thing the RC lacks at that point is population... Which makes Yontez
> much more attractive, though still potentially unbalancing... At least by
> itself.
Yes, you make an excellent point, which kind of undermines the whole
bootstrap concept. There's a tendency in Traveller to think in terms of
the map and worlds when the keys are actually the Hi-Pop worlds. "Amateurs
talk about worlds, Professionals talk about Hi-Pop worlds." While that may
be "smart," to bypass, island-hop, ignore the low-pop worlds and focus all
of the effort on the Hi-Pop worlds, it seems to be counter to the spirit
of SF gaming, where worlds matter.
And I have to be honest that when it comes down to worlds vs. only Hi-Pop
worlds, I fall down on the "romantic" side where all the worlds matter
because that just seems more like the spirit of the SF Traveller tries to
do. While Traveller has siphoned a lot of its mojo from Dominic Flandry,
picking the one world in the rebellious subsector to sway, which will then
shift the balance of power and bring a bunch of other worlds along with
it...that's just really not the level that Traveller is generally played
at. You CAN run that scenario in Traveller, but most of Traveller lives
down in all of the individual unique worlds.
> - Sent from my SM-N900T
> On Apr 3, 2014 8:48 PM, "Eamon Watters" <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement at
>> the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a
>> shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to
>> intedict
>> those who go on the run.
>>
>> Eamon
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> I think that's where the Solee
>> ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
>> 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
>> out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
>>
>> - Sent from my SM-N900T
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
>> "Eamon Watters" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>> True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
>> run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
>> reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
>> inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
>> Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
>> Vampire Highway.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Eamon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Trust me, you were not the first. The moment is seared onto my brain when
I realized, "Dammit, I have to fix this."
I found the BARD page and see where you correctly identified (and I was
pleased that you did so, I actually saw this for the first time years ago)
where I turned Christen Overtak into an honorific in Challenge 76, but you
missed where she had already been named Gabriella Ramstattan in Striker II
I think, which is why I had to rationalize it the way I did in Ch 76.
> I wrote the thing rationalizing the two names. Gabriella Ramastan and
> Christian Overtak or something very like that. The rationalization is in
> the BARD pages somewhere.
>
> Derek Stanley
> Sent from my iPhone...
>
>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 21:53, wrote:
>>
>> Just for the record, there was...an issue with the quotes in Vampire
>> Fleets.
>>
>> Everything in there is true, and happened as written, but Frank put
>> some
>> of those in at the last minute without my seeing them. I loved them
>> all,
>> but when I saw the dates on a couple of them I said, "Holy Crap, Frank,
>> that wasn't going to happen so soon!"
>>
>> But we would have found a way to make it work. For example, the "first
>> contact between RC and Regency" was like 1205 or 6, but we could easily
>> massage that, where that date was the first contact of the
>> way-way-advance
>> scouts, not the main bodies where the disagreements began.
>>
>> I had to do that sort of thing all the time. Not only were there huge
>> numbers of inconsistencies and contradictions in the CT and MT material
>> that I had to rationalize or bury, but stuff like the time Frank gave
>> two
>> at least two different names to the Queen of Solee, which I had to
>> rationalize, I think in COALINFONET in Challenge 76 at least.
>>
>> So yes, the VF quotes are real and true, just not indicative of what I
>> believed the timeline would be, VF made them appear a little sooner,
>> but
>> we would have found a way to make it work.
>>
>> > Doesn't that occur after Promise gets liberated? I recall a statement
>> at
>> > the end of vampire fleets that the operation was going to be run on a
>> > shoestring. With that, it's hard to see ships able to be spared to
>> > intedict those who go on the run.
>> >
>> > Eamon
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------
>> > I think that's where the Solee
>> > ships come in. The RCN is going to be pretty formidable by
>> > 1205 - 1206 when they're pumping out Sandman destroyers
>> > out of the automated Guilded Lilly shipyard.
>> >
>> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
>> >
>> > On Apr 3, 2014 8:28 PM,
>> > "Eamon Watters" <>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > True, though how effective a hunt for those on the
>> > run could be is up for question. The EC value disparity
>> > reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a very special
>> > inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
>> > Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the
>> > Vampire Highway.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Eamon
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
It's in Vampire Fleets, page 8. The ships that visit Cymbeline get infected by the Virus that inhabits the few surviving chips there and set off to core to fight Lucan...or something like that.
Eamon
Sent from my iPad
On 4 Apr 2014, at 13:45, wrote:
> > True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up for
> > question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted with a
> > very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
> > Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire Highway.
>
> Evangelical Doomslayer? Is that what I said caused the Vampire Highway?
> Not saying you're wrong, if you developed that in your campaign as the
> story behind the phenomenon that's great.
>
> I was thinking that the V Highway was explained rimward by Vampires going
> on a pilgrimage to see the place of their birth, while the ones going back
> finding it destroyed (I think I said at some point, maybe in TNS, that
> Lucan nuked it to prevent others from reverse-engineering his chip-based
> Virus project, right?) headed back to their "other birthplace" perhaps by
> a mix of curiosity to figure out what happened, or as you say, to punish
> Lucan for the Silicon Holocaust.
>
> But I could have also said it started with one, or a small cadre of
> Doomslayers. There goes my damned memory again.
>
> > Eamon
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
> > To:
> > Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
> >
> > Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
> > going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those that
> > run could then be chased down.
> >
> >
>
>
When Frank was writing VF he came to me and said, "I have to write about
this Vampire Highway, so what's going on there?"
So I laid it out for him, and he said, "Okay, good," and ran with it. It
was fun working with Frank like that, he always gave back more than you
gave him, and I like to think the other side* was true as well.
But that explains why it sounds familiar but not quite: it was based on
stuff that I had established, then written following those principles by
another author who added specific detail I don't remember adding, because
I didn't.
That was another observation on the peculiarities of memory, for those
keeping score at home. I apologize for this obsession, but I find it
interesting tracing the paths of half-dead neurons and their synapses.
*I gave up trying to find the right word. It's in here somewhere: Obverse,
inverse, reverse, converse, opposite, contrary, reciprocal, complementary,
flipside, etc. It's hard because you have to keep the right bits positive
and only reverse some of them, and not reverse the polarity of every
element and turn it into a even-numbered negative, or something. Or avoid
not turning it into a non-odd-numbered negative.
> It's in Vampire Fleets, page 8. The ships that visit Cymbeline get
> infected by the Virus that inhabits the few surviving chips there and set
> off to core to fight Lucan...or something like that.
>
> Eamon
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 4 Apr 2014, at 13:45, wrote:
>
>> > True, though how effective a hunt for those on the run could be is up
>> for
>> > question. The EC value disparity reminds me of a scenario I plotted
>> with a
>> > very special inflitration team taking over the Evangelical Doomslayer
>> > Virus which is the origin of the corewards traffic on the Vampire
>> Highway.
>>
>> Evangelical Doomslayer? Is that what I said caused the Vampire Highway?
>> Not saying you're wrong, if you developed that in your campaign as the
>> story behind the phenomenon that's great.
>>
>> I was thinking that the V Highway was explained rimward by Vampires
>> going
>> on a pilgrimage to see the place of their birth, while the ones going
>> back
>> finding it destroyed (I think I said at some point, maybe in TNS, that
>> Lucan nuked it to prevent others from reverse-engineering his chip-based
>> Virus project, right?) headed back to their "other birthplace" perhaps
>> by
>> a mix of curiosity to figure out what happened, or as you say, to punish
>> Lucan for the Silicon Holocaust.
>>
>> But I could have also said it started with one, or a small cadre of
>> Doomslayers. There goes my damned memory again.
>>
>> > Eamon
>> > --------------------------------------------
>> > On Fri, 4/4/14, Master Uxi <> wrote:
>> >
>> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] The Hubworlds
>> > To:
>> > Date: Friday, 4 April, 2014, 3:52
>> >
>> > Difference there is Sandman. By the Electronic Combat values, most are
>> > going to be taken over and become allies rather than fleeing. Those
>> that
>> > run could then be chased down.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
When I typed it I was pleased with it, and I was hoping someone would
admire it.
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:45 PM, <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Silicon Holocaust.
>>
>
> Now that is a Phrase that is going into the notebook so full of potential.
>
> --
> Evyn
>
Dave wrote:
>Yes, you make an excellent point, which kind of undermines the whole
bootstrap concept.
>There's a tendency in Traveller to think in terms of the map and worlds
when the keys are
>actually the Hi-Pop worlds. "Amateurs talk about worlds, Professionals talk
about Hi-Pop
>worlds." While that may be "smart," to bypass, island-hop, ignore the
low-pop worlds and
>focus all of the effort on the Hi-Pop worlds, it seems to be counter to the
spirit of SF
>gaming, where worlds matter.
In one game I ran of the _Fifth Frontier War_, I changed the rules because
of this problem. The original rules give points based on the tech level of
the worlds you conquer; I changed it to give more emphasis to the Hi-Pop AND
high-tech worlds. (Hmm, maybe full points for UWP Pop and only half points
for TL? Something like that, anyway.)
Makes for a different game, and more like the canonical 5FW - a war of
attrition - especially since those worlds generally have LOTS of SDBs and
local troops that an invader needs to subdue.
But I take your point about the "romantic" side of Traveller. (Why else do
you think we took over Tavonni IMTU? It _is_ right in the way of the SW
invasion... ;-)
----------------------------------------------------------
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
The world/Hi-Pop world thing is an interesting wrinkle in a game full of
interesting wrinkles. The game kind of wants to come out and say, "ignore
all but the Hi-Pop worlds," but if it did, then you'd say, okay, what are
the other 90% of the worlds for? The real world is sort of like that. You
can take all of Illinois except Chicago, and you have taken something, but
you really want Chicago as well.
The other thing about Hi-Pops, as you observed, is that they tend to
become holocausts. Because they are so important, and both sides want
them, and have such huge defenses, and require such huge attacking forces,
and have such large ground forces, and require such large invading forces,
the fight lasts so long, what have you got after you finally take one?
Scorched earth. You spend all that effort and get nothing for it. Stalingrad.
Maybe it's smarter to just take all the low-pop worlds after all.
> Dear Folks -
>
> Dave wrote:
>>Yes, you make an excellent point, which kind of undermines the whole
> bootstrap concept.
>>There's a tendency in Traveller to think in terms of the map and worlds
> when the keys are
>>actually the Hi-Pop worlds. "Amateurs talk about worlds, Professionals
>> talk
> about Hi-Pop
>>worlds." While that may be "smart," to bypass, island-hop, ignore the
> low-pop worlds and
>>focus all of the effort on the Hi-Pop worlds, it seems to be counter to
>> the
> spirit of SF
>>gaming, where worlds matter.
>
> In one game I ran of the _Fifth Frontier War_, I changed the rules because
> of this problem. The original rules give points based on the tech level of
> the worlds you conquer; I changed it to give more emphasis to the Hi-Pop
> AND
> high-tech worlds. (Hmm, maybe full points for UWP Pop and only half points
> for TL? Something like that, anyway.)
>
> Makes for a different game, and more like the canonical 5FW - a war of
> attrition - especially since those worlds generally have LOTS of SDBs and
> local troops that an invader needs to subdue.
>
> But I take your point about the "romantic" side of Traveller. (Why else do
> you think we took over Tavonni IMTU? It _is_ right in the way of the SW
> invasion... ;-)
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
> http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
> "I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
>
>
Lends itself to Andre' Norton's idea of the Dipple (displaced people) which recurred in many of her space-based fantasy books ... also considering Stalingrad, Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh, and probably look at a number of other ancient cities and the way they went about conquering - the "scorched earth" policy may have been more prevalent than we think. After you've conquered the world, what better way to keep control than to have your own people colonize it?
Tim
On Monday, April 7, 2014 1:17 AM, "" <> wrote:
>That is a good idea in 5FW.
>
>The world/Hi-Pop world thing is an interesting wrinkle in a game full of
>interesting wrinkles. The game kind of wants to come out and say, "ignore
>all but the Hi-Pop worlds," but if it did, then you'd say, okay, what are
>the other 90% of the worlds for? The real world is sort of like that. You
>can take all of Illinois except Chicago, and you have taken something, but
>you really want Chicago as well.
>
>The other thing about Hi-Pops, as you observed, is that they tend to
>become holocausts. Because they are so important, and both sides want
>them, and have such huge defenses, and require such huge attacking forces,
>and have such large ground forces, and require such large invading forces,
>the fight lasts so long, what have you got after you finally take one?
>
>Scorched earth. You spend all that effort and get nothing for it. Stalingrad.
>
>Maybe it's smarter to just take all the low-pop worlds after all.
>
>> Dear Folks -
>>
>> Dave wrote:
>>>Yes, you make an excellent point, which kind of undermines the whole
>> bootstrap concept.
>>>There's a tendency in Traveller to think in terms of the map and worlds
>> when the keys are
>>>actually the Hi-Pop worlds. "Amateurs talk about worlds, Professionals
>>> talk
>> about Hi-Pop
>>>worlds." While that may be "smart," to bypass, island-hop, ignore the
>> low-pop worlds and
>>>focus all of the effort on the Hi-Pop worlds, it seems to be counter to
>>> the
>> spirit of SF
>>>gaming, where worlds matter.
>>
>> In one game I ran of the _Fifth Frontier War_, I changed the rules because
>> of this problem. The original rules give points based on the tech level of
>> the worlds you conquer; I changed it to give more emphasis to the Hi-Pop
>> AND
>> high-tech worlds. (Hmm, maybe full points for UWP Pop and only half points
>> for TL? Something like that, anyway.)
>>
>> Makes for a different game, and more like the canonical 5FW - a war of
>> attrition - especially since those worlds generally have LOTS of SDBs and
>> local troops that an invader needs to subdue.
>>
>> But I take your point about the "romantic" side of Traveller. (Why else do
>> you think we took over Tavonni IMTU? It _is_ right in the way of the SW
>> invasion... ;-)
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
>> http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
>> "I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
I had forgotten the Dipple. She was pretty sharp, and I think was the
entry into SF for a lot more kids in the 60s and 70s than maybe admitted
it.
> Lends itself to Andre' Norton's idea of the Dipple (displaced people)
> which recurred in many of her space-based fantasy books ... also
> considering Stalingrad, Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh, and probably look at
> a number of other ancient cities and the way they went about conquering -
> the "scorched earth" policy may have been more prevalent than we think.Â
> After you've conquered the world, what better way to keep control than to
> have your own people colonize it?
> Tim
> On Monday, April 7, 2014 1:17 AM, ""
> <> wrote:
>
> Â
>>That is a good idea in 5FW.
>>
>>The world/Hi-Pop world thing is an interesting wrinkle in a game full of
>>interesting wrinkles. The game kind of wants to come out and say, "ignore
>>all but the Hi-Pop worlds," but if it did, then you'd say, okay, what are
>>the other 90% of the worlds for? The real world is sort of like that. You
>>can take all of Illinois except Chicago, and you have taken something,
>> but
>>you really want Chicago as well.
>>
>>The other thing about Hi-Pops, as you observed, is that they tend to
>>become holocausts. Because they are so important, and both sides want
>>them, and have such huge defenses, and require such huge attacking
>> forces,
>>and have such large ground forces, and require such large invading
>> forces,
>>the fight lasts so long, what have you got after you finally take one?
>>
>>Scorched earth. You spend all that effort and get nothing for it.
>> Stalingrad.
>>
>>Maybe it's smarter to just take all the low-pop worlds after all.
>>
>>> Dear Folks -
>>>
>>> Dave wrote:
>>>>Yes, you make an excellent point, which kind of undermines the whole
>>> bootstrap concept.
>>>>There's a tendency in Traveller to think in terms of the map and worlds
>>> when the keys are
>>>>actually the Hi-Pop worlds. "Amateurs talk about worlds, Professionals
>>>> talk
>>> about Hi-Pop
>>>>worlds." While that may be "smart," to bypass, island-hop, ignore the
>>> low-pop worlds and
>>>>focus all of the effort on the Hi-Pop worlds, it seems to be counter to
>>>> the
>>> spirit of SF
>>>>gaming, where worlds matter.
>>>
>>> In one game I ran of the _Fifth Frontier War_, I changed the rules
>>> because
>>> of this problem. The original rules give points based on the tech level
>>> of
>>> the worlds you conquer; I changed it to give more emphasis to the
>>> Hi-Pop
>>> AND
>>> high-tech worlds. (Hmm, maybe full points for UWP Pop and only half
>>> points
>>> for TL? Something like that, anyway.)
>>>
>>> Makes for a different game, and more like the canonical 5FW - a war of
>>> attrition - especially since those worlds generally have LOTS of SDBs
>>> and
>>> local troops that an invader needs to subdue.
>>>
>>> But I take your point about the "romantic" side of Traveller. (Why else
>>> do
>>> you think we took over Tavonni IMTU? It _is_ right in the way of the SW
>>> invasion... ;-)
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM
>>> 1520)
>>> http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                  Â
>>>
>>> "I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of
>>> gravity"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Lends itself to Andre' Norton's idea of the Dipple (displaced
> people) which recurred in many of her space-based fantasy books ...
> also considering Stalingrad, Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh, and
> probably look at a number of other ancient cities and the way they
> went about conquering - the "scorched earth" policy may have been
> more prevalent than we think. After you've conquered the world,
> what better way to keep control than to have your own people
> colonize it?
Well, Norton's Dipple was based on the many, *many* refugee camps and
centers after WWII. And on how said populations tended to not
integrate well into the local culture (often, as in her stories,
because the locals didn't *want* them there)
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com