Thread: Re: Marketing  personality

The argument has been made to GDW that so long as Traveller is black books
with colored stripes it would never grow to include new players, but just
keep appealing to the same aging cohort. Those who prefer the black books
counter-argue that you don't get new players with exciting cover art, you
get them by existing players recruiting in new ones. On the other hand,
the tradition of SF novels indicates there is something to Boris Vallejo
covers.

I think at one point someone suggested we could put a design sequence in
FF&S for giant gladiator robots.

We did do a design sequence for powered armor somewhere, didn't we?

> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:43 PM, <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> The fact that for many Traveller players, the "sexiest" of all covers
>> was
>> completely black with a colored stripe across it just drove home the
>> point
>> how different our design and marketing, hence audiences, were.
>
>
> Ain't that the truth. I am one of those weird fans that far prefers
> Literary Science Fiction to all of the film and tv forms, Mind you I like
> it in Comic form too, just as long as there aren't any superheros (in the
> caped running around in their underwear sense, not the the "Pulp"
> sense)....
> --
> Evyn
>

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:35 PM, <> wrote:

>
>
> We did do a design sequence for powered armor somewhere, didn't we?

Yes, yes you did.....
--
Evyn

Dave N. wrote:

>>The argument has been made to GDW that so long as Traveller is black
books with colored stripes it would never grow to include new players,
but just keep appealing to the same aging cohort. Those who prefer the
black books counter-argue that you don't get new players with exciting
cover art, you get them by existing players recruiting in new ones. On
the other hand,
the tradition of SF novels indicates there is something to Boris Vallejo
covers.<<

As someone who played CT when it was the /only/ version of Traveller, I
have to say that I never liked the black books with colored stripes. My
first Traveller book was the BBB (big black book) which came with an
illustrated dust jacket. For those who never saw it, the cover featured
an armed crew exiting their starship through a docking arm like you'd
see at airports but the walls were transparent so you could see the
scene outside. The starport was on some airless moon and you could see a
planet in the distance. To me, that spoke "adventure." The LBB's didn't
"sell" the game to me. I always thought they were lame, but then again
so much of the early Traveller art was bad so maybe that was a good idea.

I liked the fact that later editions of Traveller had cover art. Yeah,
some of it wasn't so good but when it worked it was great.

\_/
DED
TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin

DED--

Yeah, the hardcover "Traveller Book," and the companion "Traveller
Adventure" paperback. The TB had a blue background, and TA had a red
background and a big Vargr. Those were nicely done products.

I think you need the cover art. People are so visual the last 30 years,
they need something that makes them stop and look again.

I remember sitting through some marketing lecture with someone telling us
how our GDW covers were so much worse than FASA covers, holding them up.
"FASA cover, young attractive people doing exciting things, GDW cover
scary goopy people, things blowing up," basically trying to make the point
that our audience should be young attactive people getting excited, and we
were screwing up. But you have to be true to who you are, and you can't
fake it. So we were goopy and blew up. We were people with beards, man,
not Glenn Frey with cool sunglasses.

> Dave N. wrote:
>
> >>The argument has been made to GDW that so long as Traveller is black
> books with colored stripes it would never grow to include new players,
> but just keep appealing to the same aging cohort. Those who prefer the
> black books counter-argue that you don't get new players with exciting
> cover art, you get them by existing players recruiting in new ones. On
> the other hand,
> the tradition of SF novels indicates there is something to Boris Vallejo
> covers.<<
>
> As someone who played CT when it was the /only/ version of Traveller, I
> have to say that I never liked the black books with colored stripes. My
> first Traveller book was the BBB (big black book) which came with an
> illustrated dust jacket. For those who never saw it, the cover featured
> an armed crew exiting their starship through a docking arm like you'd
> see at airports but the walls were transparent so you could see the
> scene outside. The starport was on some airless moon and you could see a
> planet in the distance. To me, that spoke "adventure." The LBB's didn't
> "sell" the game to me. I always thought they were lame, but then again
> so much of the early Traveller art was bad so maybe that was a good idea.
>
> I liked the fact that later editions of Traveller had cover art. Yeah,
> some of it wasn't so good but when it worked it was great.
>
> \_/
> DED
> TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
>

Absolutely, TTB and TTA were the Traveller products I purchased apart from Mercenary and Striker in my High School days. Of those four, only Mercenary lacked the cover art (and it made up for it with the cool pic of the mid-tech forward observer inside).

Dave, what would the cover art of the Regency ships book have been if you had your way?

--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> DED--
>
> Yeah, the hardcover "Traveller Book," and the companion "Traveller
> Adventure" paperback. The TB had a blue background, and TA had a red
> background and a big Vargr. Those were nicely done products.
>
> I think you need the cover art. People are so visual the last 30 years,
> they need something that makes them stop and look again.

I think we had actually put it together. We didn't have the money at that
point to commission a new painting for it. It would have been a blue
version of the RCVG cover, so created completely graphically on a
computer.

> Absolutely, TTB and TTA were the Traveller products I purchased apart from
> Mercenary and Striker in my High School days. Of those four, only
> Mercenary lacked the cover art (and it made up for it with the cool pic of
> the mid-tech forward observer inside).
>
> Dave, what would the cover art of the Regency ships book have been if you
> had your way?
>
> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>>
>> DED--
>>
>> Yeah, the hardcover "Traveller Book," and the companion "Traveller
>> Adventure" paperback. The TB had a blue background, and TA had a red
>> background and a big Vargr. Those were nicely done products.
>>
>> I think you need the cover art. People are so visual the last 30 years,
>> they need something that makes them stop and look again.
>
>
>

I realize that the answer I gave was not the question you asked. You
asked, "if I had my way," so maybe that means if we had plenty of money. I
was perfectly fine with the RCVG-style cover we would have used, but
naturally in an ideal world it would be great to have an arty cover. I
thought the Arrival Vengeance cover (Tom Peters, colorized in-house by GDW
art) was nice. I thought the BL cover was nice too, but it would be cooler
if the ships were coming TOWARD the viewer, not going away. So maybe a
phalanx of Regency ships coming at us. Obviously they'd have to be ships
in the book, so I'm thinking maybe a mix of Midu Agashaam, Kinunir,
Gazelle, Fiery plus some bigger stuff. My favorite ship from Book 9 was
one of the cruisers that looked kind of like the Plankwell BB, but more
rounded (it was also redone in Shattered Ships). Obviously that would only
have made sense if I had designed it in the book, however. And of course
the old Arrival Vengeance bringing up the rear maybe. In an ideal world.

Otherwise a big gold Regency shield on a blue gradient background.

> Absolutely, TTB and TTA were the Traveller products I purchased apart from
> Mercenary and Striker in my High School days. Of those four, only
> Mercenary lacked the cover art (and it made up for it with the cool pic of
> the mid-tech forward observer inside).
>
> Dave, what would the cover art of the Regency ships book have been if you
> had your way?
>
> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>>
>> DED--
>>
>> Yeah, the hardcover "Traveller Book," and the companion "Traveller
>> Adventure" paperback. The TB had a blue background, and TA had a red
>> background and a big Vargr. Those were nicely done products.
>>
>> I think you need the cover art. People are so visual the last 30 years,
>> they need something that makes them stop and look again.
>
>
>

Dear Folks -

>The LBB's didn't
> "sell" the game to me. I always thought they were lame, but then again
> so much of the early Traveller art was bad so maybe that was a good idea.

Heh. Back when I was asking all & sundry for permission to use their artwork on my Lib Data site, the email I received from Paul Jaquays said he was always surprised that Traveller hadn't come up with better ship illos than the ones he drew at his kitchen table...

;-)

Back then Traveller had a lot of bad art, but compared to what else was
out there, it wasn't much worse than others. Do you guys remember what was
in the original three little D&D books? They came out four years before
Traveller, and the state of the art had not advanced that much. The fact
that Bill Keith's Star Warsy sketches were so adored is an indication of
what the field was like. The art in the first AD&D monster manual was
pretty all over the place too.

Jaquays drew some bad ships, but I recall that he did a couple of
endearing ones. I can't think of what they were, though.

> Dear Folks -
>
>>The LBB's didn't
>> "sell" the game to me. I always thought they were lame, but then again
>> so much of the early Traveller art was bad so maybe that was a good
>> idea.
>
> Heh. Back when I was asking all & sundry for permission to use their
> artwork on my Lib Data site, the email I received from Paul Jaquays said
> he was always surprised that Traveller hadn't come up with better ship
> illos than the ones he drew at his kitchen table...
>
> ;-)
>
>

The game mechanic of how to use it is a bit flawed. Each suit of battledress
has a total mass it can carry before it is overloaded with an absolute upper
limit, it also doubles the wielders strength stat (hence some of my marines
wielding battleaxes) and gives unlimited endurance while the power lasts. So
far so good

But is the suits mass limit the total that can be included, which in many
cases appears to mean no allowance for the trooper or other equipment or
does the troopers strength itself add to total load capacity

For example, this is the standard TL14 from the TNE rulebook

Base Battledress - Standard Light TL14



Description

TL14 Standard Light




Component

Volume

Mass

Power

Area

Price

Battery Output

0.210000

TL14 Light Powered Exoskeleton

0.050000

210,000

10 hour draw

0.021000

Armour - Full Torso AV8

0.014400

2,664

100 hour draw

0.004200

Armour - Arms AV8

0.004800

888



Armour - Legs AV8

0.014400

2,664



Armour - Visored Helm AV8

0.002400

444



TL10+ Helmet Sensor Suite

750



Battery (100 hour endurance)

0.084000

0.210000

-0.004200

840



Power Requirement

0.004144




Totals

0.296000

tons

218,250

Cr




Spare Mass

0.004000

tons



4.000000

kg




Power consumed

0.004144

Mw



Surplus power

0.000056

Mw



It looks like if you add a 70kg troops the suit is automatically moved to an
overloaded rating. Or add a fairly light weapon. Etc. Add life support same
thing. Also a right pain trying to work out battery endurance if an energy
consuming item is added that draws off the same battery. (Fuel celled
versions are much more efficient)

Antony

From: []
On Behalf Of Evyn MacDude
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 11:11 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Marketing personality

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:35 PM, <> wrote:

We did do a design sequence for powered armor somewhere, didn't we?

Yes, yes you did.....

--
Evyn

_____

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5097 - Release Date: 06/27/12

I recall that design sequence being a little thin, and done quickly.
Could/should have been beefed up later.

> The game mechanic of how to use it is a bit flawed. Each suit of
> battledress
> has a total mass it can carry before it is overloaded with an absolute
> upper
> limit, it also doubles the wielders strength stat (hence some of my
> marines
> wielding battleaxes) and gives unlimited endurance while the power lasts.
> So
> far so good
>
>
>
> But is the suits mass limit the total that can be included, which in many
> cases appears to mean no allowance for the trooper or other equipment or
> does the troopers strength itself add to total load capacity
>
>
>
> For example, this is the standard TL14 from the TNE rulebook
>
>
>
>
> Base Battledress - Standard Light TL14
>
>
>
> Description
>
> TL14 Standard Light
>
>
>
>
> Component
>
> Volume
>
> Mass
>
> Power
>
> Area
>
> Price
>
> Battery Output
>
> 0.210000
>
>
> TL14 Light Powered Exoskeleton
>
> 0.050000
>
> 210,000
>
> 10 hour draw
>
> 0.021000
>
>
> Armour - Full Torso AV8
>
> 0.014400
>
> 2,664
>
> 100 hour draw
>
> 0.004200
>
>
> Armour - Arms AV8
>
> 0.004800
>
> 888
>
>
>
> Armour - Legs AV8
>
> 0.014400
>
> 2,664
>
>
>
> Armour - Visored Helm AV8
>
> 0.002400
>
> 444
>
>
>
> TL10+ Helmet Sensor Suite
>
> 750
>
>
>
> Battery (100 hour endurance)
>
> 0.084000
>
> 0.210000
>
> -0.004200
>
> 840
>
>
>
> Power Requirement
>
> 0.004144
>
>
>
>
> Totals
>
> 0.296000
>
> tons
>
> 218,250
>
> Cr
>
>
>
>
> Spare Mass
>
> 0.004000
>
> tons
>
>
>
> 4.000000
>
> kg
>
>
>
>
> Power consumed
>
> 0.004144
>
> Mw
>
>
>
> Surplus power
>
> 0.000056
>
> Mw
>
>
>
>
>
> It looks like if you add a 70kg troops the suit is automatically moved to
> an
> overloaded rating. Or add a fairly light weapon. Etc. Add life support
> same
> thing. Also a right pain trying to work out battery endurance if an energy
> consuming item is added that draws off the same battery. (Fuel celled
> versions are much more efficient)
>
>
>
> Antony
>
>
>
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Evyn MacDude
> Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 11:11 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Marketing personality
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:35 PM, <> wrote:
>
>
>
> We did do a design sequence for powered armor somewhere, didn't we?
>
>
>
>
> Yes, yes you did.....
>
> --
> Evyn
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5097 - Release Date: 06/27/12
>
>

What I mean by that is it was put together to allow publication of RC
battle dress/combat armor on a basis which would be replicatable/scaleable
later. If I recall correctly, the sequence was probably published in RCEG.

> I recall that design sequence being a little thin, and done quickly.
> Could/should have been beefed up later.
>
>> The game mechanic of how to use it is a bit flawed. Each suit of
>> battledress
>> has a total mass it can carry before it is overloaded with an absolute
>> upper
>> limit, it also doubles the wielders strength stat (hence some of my
>> marines
>> wielding battleaxes) and gives unlimited endurance while the power
>> lasts.
>> So
>> far so good
>>
>>
>>
>> But is the suits mass limit the total that can be included, which in
>> many
>> cases appears to mean no allowance for the trooper or other equipment or
>> does the troopers strength itself add to total load capacity
>>
>>
>>
>> For example, this is the standard TL14 from the TNE rulebook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Base Battledress - Standard Light TL14
>>
>>
>>
>> Description
>>
>> TL14 Standard Light
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Component
>>
>> Volume
>>
>> Mass
>>
>> Power
>>
>> Area
>>
>> Price
>>
>> Battery Output
>>
>> 0.210000
>>
>>
>> TL14 Light Powered Exoskeleton
>>
>> 0.050000
>>
>> 210,000
>>
>> 10 hour draw
>>
>> 0.021000
>>
>>
>> Armour - Full Torso AV8
>>
>> 0.014400
>>
>> 2,664
>>
>> 100 hour draw
>>
>> 0.004200
>>
>>
>> Armour - Arms AV8
>>
>> 0.004800
>>
>> 888
>>
>>
>>
>> Armour - Legs AV8
>>
>> 0.014400
>>
>> 2,664
>>
>>
>>
>> Armour - Visored Helm AV8
>>
>> 0.002400
>>
>> 444
>>
>>
>>
>> TL10+ Helmet Sensor Suite
>>
>> 750
>>
>>
>>
>> Battery (100 hour endurance)
>>
>> 0.084000
>>
>> 0.210000
>>
>> -0.004200
>>
>> 840
>>
>>
>>
>> Power Requirement
>>
>> 0.004144
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Totals
>>
>> 0.296000
>>
>> tons
>>
>> 218,250
>>
>> Cr
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Spare Mass
>>
>> 0.004000
>>
>> tons
>>
>>
>>
>> 4.000000
>>
>> kg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Power consumed
>>
>> 0.004144
>>
>> Mw
>>
>>
>>
>> Surplus power
>>
>> 0.000056
>>
>> Mw
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> It looks like if you add a 70kg troops the suit is automatically moved
>> to
>> an
>> overloaded rating. Or add a fairly light weapon. Etc. Add life support
>> same
>> thing. Also a right pain trying to work out battery endurance if an
>> energy
>> consuming item is added that draws off the same battery. (Fuel celled
>> versions are much more efficient)
>>
>>
>>
>> Antony
>>
>>
>>
>> From:
>> []
>> On Behalf Of Evyn MacDude
>> Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 11:11 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Marketing personality
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:35 PM, <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We did do a design sequence for powered armor somewhere, didn't we?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, yes you did.....
>>
>> --
>> Evyn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _____
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5097 - Release Date:
>> 06/27/12
>>
>>
>
>
>