Examining CT Bk5 Economics

[aramis]

Looking at the costs per ton, again, Basic Boxes, all designed with CT Bk5. All carry one single turret, no weapon installed. All using standard financing.

Findings (WIDE table:


Jn/Pn _ J1 TL9 __ J1 TL13 _ J1 TL15 ___ J2 TL11 ___ J2 TL13 ___ J2 TL15 ___ J3 TL12 ___ J3 TL13 ___ J3 TL15 ___ J4 TL13 ___ J4 TL15 __ J5 TL14 ___ J5 TL15 ___ J6 TL15 ___ Jn/Pn
200 _____ 988 _____ 880 _____ 775 _____ 2,068 _____ 1,753 _____ 1,460 _____ 4,138 _____ 3,329 _____ 2,636 _____ 6,901 _____ 5,038 ____ 26,629 ____ 11,976 ____ 210,376 ___ 200
400 _____ 892 _____ 793 _____ 697 _____ 1,814 _____ 1,533 _____ 1,237 _____ 3,407 _____ 2,740 _____ 2,158 _____ 5,157 _____ 3,790 ____ 13,010 _____ 7,610 _____ 25,921 ___ 400
600 _____ 850 _____ 755 _____ 650 _____ 1,656 _____ 1,396 _____ 1,153 _____ 3,083 _____ 2,479 _____ 1,912 _____ 4,485 _____ 3,234 _____ 9,977 _____ 6,220 _____ 16,535 ___ 600
800 _____ 845 _____ 752 _____ 661 _____ 1,603 _____ 1,350 _____ 1,099 _____ 2,937 _____ 2,329 _____ 1,827 _____ 4,195 _____ 3,043 _____ 8,863 _____ 5,531 _____ 13,798 ___ 800
1000 ____ 814 _____ 723 _____ 634 _____ 1,543 _____ 1,285 _____ 1,057 _____ 2,763 _____ 2,221 _____ 1,721 _____ 3,875 _____ 2,863 _____ 7,639 _____ 5,082 _____ 11,372 ___ 1000
1200 ____ 854 _____ 760 _____ 669 _____ 1,612 _____ 1,358 _____ 1,111 _____ 2,852 _____ 2,287 _____ 1,787 _____ 4,029 _____ 2,959 _____ 8,296 _____ 5,340 _____ 12,619 ___ 1200
1400 ____ 844 _____ 751 _____ 660 _____ 1,594 _____ 1,342 _____ 1,098 _____ 2,843 _____ 2,261 _____ 1,765 _____ 4,007 _____ 2,913 _____ 8,090 _____ 5,227 _____ 12,466 ___ 1400
1600 ____ 837 _____ 740 _____ 650 _____ 1,573 _____ 1,324 _____ 1,089 _____ 2,800 _____ 2,229 _____ 1,739 _____ 3,927 _____ 2,859 _____ 7,842 _____ 5,147 _____ 11,865 ___ 1600
1800 ____ 831 _____ 739 _____ 645 _____ 1,564 _____ 1,315 _____ 1,082 _____ 2,782 _____ 2,229 _____ 1,728 _____ 3,892 _____ 2,835 _____ 7,830 _____ 5,083 _____ 11,625 ___ 1800
2000 ____ 823 _____ 731 _____ 638 _____ 1,558 _____ 1,303 _____ 1,071 _____ 2,754 _____ 2,206 _____ 1,711 _____ 3,841 _____ 2,818 _____ 7,665 _____ 4,992 _____ 11,267 ___ 2000

Max _____ 988 _____ 880 _____ 775 _____ 2,068 _____ 1,753 _____ 1,460 _____ 4,138 _____ 3,329 _____ 2,636 _____ 6,901 _____ 5,038 ____ 26,629 ____ 11,976 ____ 210,376 ___ Max
Mean ____ 857.8 ___ 762.4 ___ 667.9 ___ 1,658.5 ___ 1,395.9 ___ 1,145.7 ___ 3,035.9 ___ 2,431 _____ 1,898.4 ___ 4,430.9 ___ 3,235.2 __ 10,584.1 ___ 6,220.8 ___ 33,784.4 _ Mean
Median __ 844.5 ___ 751.5 ___ 655 _____ 1,598.5 ___ 1,346 _____ 1,098.5 ___ 2,847.5 ___ 2,274 _____ 1,776 _____ 4,018 _____ 2,936 _____ 8,193 _____ 5,283.5 ___ 12,542.5 _ Median
Min _____ 814 _____ 723 _____ 634 _____ 1,543 _____ 1,285 _____ 1,057 _____ 2,754 _____ 2,206 _____ 1,711 _____ 3,841 _____ 2,818 _____ 7,639 _____ 4,992 _____ 11,267 ___ Min

Std Dev _ 50.4 _____ 45.5 ____ 41.7 _____ 163.6 _____ 143.5 _____ 121.8 _____ 435.8 _____ 356 _____ 292.1 _____ 956.3 _____ 698.3 _____ 5,872.8 _____ 2,174.2 _ 62,206.4 _ Std Dev

Basal __ 895 ______ 797 _____ 697 _____ 1,762 _____ 1,490 _____ 1,220 _____ 3,283 _____ 2,630 _____ 2,068 _____ 4,974 _____ 3,634 ____ 14,066 _____ 7,458 _____ 74,749 ___ Basal


The Cr1000/ton for this is pretty close to the costs for low-end.

These are the same tonnage breakpoints I used for looking at MGT; note the multiple columns for all but J6, by TL. TL13 and 15 are PP breakpoints.

 

[aramis]

The Cargo Tonnage Equivalent costs for passages are also somewhat less, due to stewards handling more passengers, and only HP; Medical share is tiny, but present, too.

Here's the worksheet:

Item _______ MPSO ______ MPDO ______ HPSO ______ HPDO ___ Unit
SR CTE _____ 4.000 _____ 2.000 _____ 4.000 _____ 2.000 __ CTE
Baggage ____ 0.000 _____ 0.000 _____ 1.000 _____ 1.000 __ CTd
Stwd SR ____ 0.000 _____ 0.000 _____ 0.500 _____ 0.500 __ CTE
Medic SR ___ 0.033 _____ 0.033 _____ 0.033 _____ 0.033 __ CTE
LS, Pass ___ 2.000 _____ 2.000 _____ 2.000 _____ 2.000 __ KCr
LS, Stwd ___ 0.000 _____ 0.000 _____ 0.250 _____ 0.250 __ KCr
LS, Medic __ 0.017 _____ 0.017 _____ 0.017 _____ 0.017 __ KCr
MP, SR _____ 1.042 _____ 0.521 _____ 1.042 _____ 0.521 __ KCr
Maint, SR __ 0.021 _____ 0.011 _____ 0.021 _____ 0.011 __ KCr
Totals
CTE ________ 4.033 _____ 2.033 _____ 5.533 _____ 3.533 __ CTE
KCr Flat ___ 3.080 _____ 2.549 _____ 3.330 _____ 2.799 __ KCr


Jump _______ 1 ______ 1 ______ 1 ______ 2 ______ 2 ______ 2 ______ 3 ______ 3 ______ 3 ______ 4 ______ 4 _______ 5 ______ 5 _______ 6
TL _________ 9 ______ 9 ______ 9 _____ 11 _____ 13 _____ 15 _____ 12 _____ 13 _____ 15 _____ 13 _____ 15 ______ 14 _____ 15 ______ 15
Basal ____ 895 ____ 797 ____ 697 __ 1,762 __ 1,490 __ 1,220 __ 3,283 __ 2,630 __ 2,068 __ 4,974 __ 3,634 __ 14,066 __ 7,458 __ 46,327
MP SO __ 6,690 __ 6,295 __ 5,892 _ 10,187 __ 9,090 __ 8,001 _ 16,321 _ 13,687 _ 11,421 _ 23,141 _ 17,736 __ 59,809 _ 33,159 _ 189,917
MP DO __ 4,369 __ 4,170 __ 3,967 __ 6,132 __ 5,579 __ 5,030 __ 9,224 __ 7,896 __ 6,754 _ 12,662 __ 9,937 __ 31,146 _ 17,712 __ 96,732
HP SO __ 8,283 __ 7,740 __ 7,187 _ 13,080 _ 11,575 _ 10,081 _ 21,495 _ 17,882 _ 14,773 _ 30,852 _ 23,437 __ 81,158 _ 44,596 _ 259,658
HP DO __ 5,962 __ 5,615 __ 5,262 __ 9,025 __ 8,064 __ 7,110 _ 14,398 _ 12,091 _ 10,106 _ 20,373 _ 15,638 __ 52,495 _ 29,149 _ 166,473

I've changed basal.
It's lowest of:
__ Min+2*StDev
__ Mean+StDev
__ Median+StDev
__ Mean+Median

A taller sample (bigger ships) should reduce the StDev of J6.

 

[Matt123]

Can you explain the basis behind the spreadsheets a little? An idiots guide if you like.

Matt (trainee idiot...)

Ahh, found the spreadsheet in the file library. Ta.

Can you explain the concept of basal, Wikipedia claims it as either a skin growth or a small village in Hungary. Neither seems to fit...

 

[aramis]

By looking at what it actually costs to operate a starship under a given ruleset, we can judge whether or not the pricing is broken.

If the costs for a given mode (for example Cargo Ton doing J3) exceed the price of that same mode, then the rules are in fact broken; no such shipping would occur.

Taking the above numbers and the CT shipping rates:
Cargo ships at Cr1000 per jump (no matter distance). Therefore, NO shipping of J2 or more should exist for cargo in the OTU, except when owned by the person owning the cargo (for whom timeliness may exceed the accepted rates of remuneration), and filling leftover space in such ships.

On the other hand, it's profitable for jump 1 cargo tonnage, and ironically, for jump 2 passengers, at book rates as well.

So we know that the prices in Bk2 are broken. We have 5 data points where they work: J1 Cargo, J1 MP, J1 HP, J2 MP, J2 HP. (while not above, J1-3 LP also work.)

Now, for Mongoose, the ship designs are different, and so the numbers in the tables differ. I've posted the basic figures here, but I'll point out that only the J1 freight makes money; further, J1 & J2 cargo and J2 HP are the only ones which actually make any money on the best fit ships...

In essence, CT works just fine if you use list price for J1 only.

Looking at the results for cargo alone (above), one can see that 1j6 (46,327/Td) is well more than 2j3 ( 6,566=3,283 x2 ), by a factor of about 7x; comparing USPS flat rates, $10 vs $4 for a doubling of mailing speed (overnight vs 2nd day), and similar pricing schemes for UPS, Fexex, and DHL... there really should be no commercial J6 shipping, and J4 and J5 will be major route only, and special cases, and usually, most will route the J2+j3 instead.

 

[Icosahedron]

I'm curious about this Aramis, but I've always found that costing these things out like you've done exceeds my boredom threshold.

Have you (or anyone else) worked any similar tables to see if converting the book prices to 'per parsec' fixes the problem, or opens up a new can of worms?

I wonder if T5's design team have done this sort of stuff?

 

[aramis]

I'm curious about this Aramis, but I've always found that costing these things out like you've done exceeds my boredom threshold. Have you (or anyone else) worked any similar tables to see if converting the book prices to 'per parsec' fixes the problem, or opens up a new can of worms?

that's easy; it's both valid (for J1-2), iffy for 3, and not valid for J4+. Here's a table where I've bolded the good ones.

Jump _______ 1 ______ 1 ______ 1 ______ 2 ______ 2 ______ 2 ______ 3 ______ 3 ______ 3 ______ 4 ______ 4 _______ 5 ______ 5 _______ 6
TL _________ 9 ______ 9 ______ 9 _____ 11 _____ 13 _____ 15 _____ 12 _____ 13 _____ 15 _____ 13 _____ 15 ______ 14 _____ 15 ______ 15
Basal ____ 895 ____ 797 ____ 697 __ 1,762 __ 1,490 __ 1,220 __ 3,283 __ 2,630 __ 2,068 __ 4,974 __ 3,634 __ 14,066 __ 7,458 __ 46,327
MP SO __ 6,690 __ 6,295 __ 5,892 _ 10,187 __ 9,090 __ 8,001 _ 16,321 _ 13,687 _ 11,421 _ 23,141 _ 17,736 __ 59,809 _ 33,159 _ 189,917
HP SO __ 8,283 __ 7,740 __ 7,187 _ 13,080 _ 11,575 _ 10,081 _ 21,495 _ 17,882 _ 14,773 _ 30,852 _ 23,437 __ 81,158 _ 44,596 _ 259,658

The green entries are below book x parsecs. The problem is that the J2 and J3 numbers are so far different that the price WILL have to drop closer to cost. Cargo: To wit J1 cargo is between 105 and 303 credits of profit AT BOOK RATE. Using it per parsec, however, the margin for J2 is 248 to 780 Cr below 2x book rate. J3 is from 283 over (TL12) to 832 under (TL15) bk x 3 J4 is 974 over to 366 under Bk x4 J5 is 9066 to 2458 over. J6 is 16K over.

Note that the costs DO NOT INCREASE LINEARLY; under NO traveller edition is the cost of J2 going to be 2x that of J1. Nor is the cost per ton linear for a given jump over a range of sizes; every system has fixed overhead systems, which reduces in percentage as the ship climbs in size. Some systems are more profound than others; Bk2 has lower costs for the ship, and thus the payment contributes less, as does maintenance, to the costs per ton of cargo.

I wonder if T5's design team have done this sort of stuff?

I doubt it highly; not many of us are wonky enough to enjoy DOING it, tho many more are interested in the results. The spreadsheet was about 6 hours of work; the sheet can be extended upwards, as it's extremely formulaic. (Heck, you could easily use it for other simple HG designs in parallel; it doesn't have weapons, not turret cost calcs, nor a bunch of other stuff that block merchants don't need.) (Formatting the tables for posting was about 30 min more.) The numbers in Mega, TNE, and T4 are bloody hard to work out, BTW, and are recursive to figure, which spreadsheets dislike....

Also, my choices on what constitutes basal pricing for the market are high-end of average costs; some ships can't make money at those, most will, and low cost ships will make lots. Me, I find it interesting to do this stuff, IF the system is simple enough to spreadsheet like I've done for MGT basic and for CT HG. Oh, and I forgot to mention, but it's noted in the sheet: all the ships are flattened spheres for minimum cost streamlined hulls.

Also, as a side note: the breakpoints in HG result in massive cost drops; anyone who can afford a TL13 PP is going to recoup far more on their investment in even a J1 merchant. People who just "Oh, just multiply by parsec" really don't understand the nature of ship design. Any such rule of thumb only works for a narrow range. Also, almost half the cost of a HP is a fixed cost with no relation to distance by jump: the Maint cost; fraction of payment; life support costs; fraction of steward and medic's LS, salaries, Stateroom fractions of maintenance and monthly payment. Essentially, these are unit-time costs. Only the space costs (counting the payload space lost from cargo by installing staterooms (including the medic and steward staterooms), plus HP baggage climb in cost with distance travelled in one jump.

Given the costs, even at lowest, I don't think there will be any scheduled J6 shipping; a 7:1 cost increase for 1/2 the time taken (vs 2x J3) means a J3 ship can beat the price, undercut it by a large margin, and still charge more than cost.

 

[rancke]

Given the costs, even at lowest, I don't think there will be any scheduled J6 shipping; a 7:1 cost increase for 1/2 the time taken (vs 2x J3) means a J3 ship can beat the price, undercut it by a large margin, and still charge more than cost.

I'd say the only J6 shipping you would have is the scheduled kind. Not much freight, if any, but there are people -- government officials, company executives, millionaires -- who will be willing to pay seven times the price to get where they're going in half the time. Only a few high-population worlds would generate enough traffic to warrant a jump-6 liner connection, but there would be some.

Couple of related matters: Jump-6 drop tank traffic will be a lot cheaper, relative to jump-3 drop tank traffic, and canoncally drop tank traffic has been building up in the core for a couple of decades. In 1105 there's at least one line servicing Rhylanor, presumably from further corewards (via Mora). The Trimkhana Brilliance disaster put a temporary stop to further expansion into the Marches, but it would still exist closer to the Imperial core.

Jump-6 traffic is that expensive because a ship uses 6% of its tonnage for power plant fuel tankage, leaving only about 9% for payload. Assume realisitc power plant fuel consumption rates and prices would "only" be about four times that of jump-3. And even if the canonical fuel consumption rates are accepted, there are still some assumptions that would help. If you assume that power plants would be going at minimum rates (or not at all) while in port, you cut down fuel consumption by a third[*]. If you assume that a power plant-6 isn't going to run at full capacity while maneuvering at 1G, a bit more is saved, and if you assume that it isn't going to run at full rated while actually in jumpspace, you're probably down to 1% of tonnage or even less.

[*] If you accept that ships spend five days out of every 14 in port; I don't, but if you do, you have the abovementioned one thirds saving on PP fuel.​

Hans

 

[Matt123]

The focus of LBB bk2 trade is on the travellers J1 Free Trader, J1 Subsidised Merchant and J3 Subsidised Liner. Arguably the prices indicated, relate to what free traders can expect to earn on the Spinward Main whilst competeing with World Govt Subsidised Traders. Other routes may vary depending on the supply & demand for available shipping.

But having said that, I did find the spreadsheet interesting, but the results weren't surprising.

Whats a basal (or the basal concept)???

 

[Matt123]

Jump-6 traffic is that expensive because a ship uses 6% of its tonnage for power plant fuel tankage, leaving only about 9% for payload. Assume realisitc power plant fuel consumption rates and prices would "only" be about four times that of jump-3. And even if the canonical fuel consumption rates are accepted, there are still some assumptions that would help. If you assume that power plants would be going at minimum rates (or not at all) while in port, you cut down fuel consumption by a third
[*]. If you assume that a power plant-6 isn't going to run at full capacity while maneuvering at 1G, a bit more is saved, and if you assume that it isn't going to run at full rated while actually in jumpspace, you're probably down to 1% of tonnage or even less.

[*] If you accept that ships spend five days out of every 14 in port; I don't, but if you do, you have the abovementioned one thirds saving on PP fuel.​

& this approach (powering down PP's) has been adopted in Don's CT Consolidated Errata, making it cannon.

 

[aramis]

The focus of LBB bk2 trade is on the travellers J1 Free Trader, J1 Subsidised Merchant and J3 Subsidised Liner. Arguably the prices indicated, relate to what free traders can expect to earn on the Spinward Main whilst competeing with World Govt Subsidised Traders. Other routes may vary depending on the supply & demand for available shipping.

At book rate, the J3 SubLiner loses money hand-over-fist.

At book*parsecs, it makes money hand over fist on long jumps, and needs no subsidy.

But having said that, I did find the spreadsheet interesting, but the results weren't surprising.

Whats a basal (or the basal concept)???

A cost point at which the majority of merchant vessels will be operating at or below the listed value; kind of a hedge. Most ships are not going to be the optimal (tonnage-wise) cargo-only single-turret-just-for-regs designs I used.

 

[Matt123]

At book*parsecs...

Whilst its a good 'quick fix', I can't see an economic justification for a linear increase in shipping charges.

Shipping is a very transparent industry. Whilst the need for shipping companies to generate a profit is obvious, the amount of profit they are making is very easy to establish, giving freight forwarders the advantage of knowing each shipping companies bottom line before negotiations start.

Given a J1 merchant can transport a 1 ton cargo 2 parsecs for 2,000 Cr, I cannot see that a J2 Trader would compete solely on a time benefit and charge 2000 Cr (importers are used to lead times & an extra week is 'only' the opportunity cost of the money tied up in the manufacturing cost of the cargo). Equally I cannot see the J2 trader competing by halving the price charged by thier J1 competitor. The 'truth' is somewhere in between and is determined by the supply of cargo space, influenced by the willingness of the freight forwarding industry to pay a premium that allows profits.

A look back at your spreadsheet and I can easily deduct from your data, the cargo profit margins.

Using the (basal) costs of J1 shipping shows the profit margins are;
TL9+ 10%, TL13+ 20%, TL15+ 30%.

If you considered the Imperium to average around TL13, then 20% profit can be considered the norm for the trade. (quick & dirty assumption)

That gives the TL15 Trader room to move on price in order to fill his hold. If need be, he can undercut lower tech competitors, charging only 900Cr for the J1 and still make the same as the TL13+ trader. Fortunately for the TL13 J1 traders there are not many TL15 J1 traders about and those that are will be contracted out under long term shipping contracts.

Using these profit margins on J2, you get;
TL11+ 10% 1958 Cr, TL13+ 20% 1863 Cr, TL15+ 30% 1742 Cr
This means J2 cargo costs 1850 Cr per ton, assuming the TL13+ J2 trader is the norm. TL11+ J2 traders cannot compete unless they are subsidised (there will be many subsidised traders) & TL15 J2 traders have a competitive price advantage, again normally meaning they will be first in line to get the long term shipping contracts.

For J3, you get
TL12+ 10% 3647 Cr, TL13+ 20% 3288 Cr, TL15+ 30% 2954 Cr
Clearly your average J3 ships under TL13 are not viable, but the TL13 2000 ton bulk Freighter is still viable, given 20% profit, shipping is 2757 Cr per ton. Competitive vs the J2 + J1 option costing 2850 Cr, J3 cargo costs 2750 Cr per ton.

J4 is the limit of viable commercial cargo ships. The cost of J3 + J1 shipping is 3750 Cr. Small TL15 cargo ships cannot compete and make a reasonable profit. Large TL15 cargo ships however can.

The TL15 2000 ton J4 cargo ship has costs per cargo ton of 2818 Cr, given a 20% profit margin, this equates to 3523 Cr. J4 cargo costs costs 3500 Cr per ton.

As a 'rough' guide then a multiparsec jump might cost 1000 Cr * parsec *0.9 per cargo ton, give or take 100 Cr or so. Depending on the intensity of competition and the involvement of the bulk freighters. (ie: add 100 Cr if competition is weak and/or there are no bulk freighters)

 

[robject]

Taking the above numbers and the CT shipping rates:
Cargo ships at Cr1000 per jump (no matter distance). Therefore, NO shipping of J2 or more should exist for cargo in the OTU, except when owned by the person owning the cargo (for whom timeliness may exceed the accepted rates of remuneration), and filling leftover space in such ships.

Doesn't this sort of "work", given that (1) any shipping which takes a week to get anywhere is basically some kind of controlled, semi-speculative trade, and (2) these rules tend to support player actions in small tramp or subsidized traders?

 

[aramis]

Doesn't this sort of "work", given that (1) any shipping which takes a week to get anywhere is basically some kind of controlled, semi-speculative trade, and (2) these rules tend to support player actions in small tramp or subsidized traders?

2 isn't a given, Robject, and 1 is immaterial.

The costs of running a ship mean that, whether it's speculation or demand, the cost of shipping must exceed the cost or it doesn't remain stable. Now, speculation ala CT Bk2, MGT, T20 (due to variable densities) make J2 and J3 speculation potentially profitable (and high risk), and risk attracts some people.

And I've said repeatedly, tramping really does make more money that route work for J2-J3 ships. But also note, their costs don't decrease much when jumping short, so short legs are losing propositions for them.

 

[aramis]

So what should the numbers be? You've proven the existing ones are wrong, but where do you take it from there?

Actually, I've proven them to be "Right for certain values of J & TL"... Namely J1 at TL9-12, and J2 at TL 15.

IMTU? I take the base numbers from CT as J1. I then use a multiplier by distance, but it's not linear. KCr 1, 2, 3.5, 6, 15, 50 for cargo...
MP SO is KCr 8, 13, 20.5, 33, 48, 153
HP SO is KCr 10, 16, 25, 40, 94, 304
LP would work out to KCr 1, 1.5, 2.25, 3.5, 8, 25.5

MP DO would be KCr 5, 7.5, 10.6, 17.5, 40, 127.5
HP DO would work out to 6.5, 9.75, 14.65, 22.75, 51.75, 165.75

This presumes only standard staterooms, and the DO limit is due to scrubber capacity limit.

 

[DonM]

IMTU? I take the base numbers from CT as J1. I then use a multiplier by distance, but it's not linear. KCr 1, 2, 3.5, 6, 15, 50 for cargo...
MP SO is KCr 8, 13, 20.5, 33, 48, 153
HP SO is KCr 10, 16, 25, 40, 94, 304
LP would work out to KCr 1, 1.5, 2.25, 3.5, 8, 25.5

MP DO would be KCr 5, 7.5, 10.6, 17.5, 40, 127.5
HP DO would work out to 6.5, 9.75, 14.65, 22.75, 51.75, 165.75

This presumes only standard staterooms, and the DO limit is due to scrubber capacity limit.

For those of us whose brains must move between numerous versions of Traveller several times a day, can you explain this slower?

Because my response is something akin to: "And this means?"

I want a table telling me what good numbers are to charge for passages based on number of jumps, or something similar, and charges for Cargo, etc. Or a way to build a table like that for use IMTU.

 

[far-trader]

Something like this?

KCr Service/Jump: 1       2       3       4       5       6

Freight/Ton       1       2       3.5     6      15      50

Low Passage       1       1.5     2.25    3.5     8      25.5

Middle Passage    8      13      20.5    33      48     153

High Passage     10      16      25      40      94     304

Middle Shared     5       7.5    10.6    17.5    40     127.5

High Shared       6.5     9.75   14.65   22.75   51.75  165.75

 

[aramis]

For those of us whose brains must move between numerous versions of Traveller several times a day, can you explain this slower?

Because my response is something akin to: "And this means?"

I want a table telling me what good numbers are to charge for passages based on number of jumps, or something similar, and charges for Cargo, etc. Or a way to build a table like that for use IMTU.

Category	J1	j2	j3	j4	j5	j6
Cargo 1Td	KCr1	KCr 2	KCr3.5	KCr6	KCr15	KCr50
Middle Passage Single Occupancy	KCr8	KCr13	KCr20.5	KCr33	KCr48	KCr153
High Passage Single Occupancy	KCr10	KCr16	KCr25	KCr40	KCr94	KCr304
Low Passage	KCr1	KCr1.5	KCr2.25	KCr3.5	KCr8	KCr25.5
Middle Passage Double Occupancy	KCr5	KCr7.5	KCr10.6	KCr17.5	KCr40	KCr127.5
High Passage Double Occupancy	KCr6.5	KCr9.75	KCr14.65	KCr22.75	KCr51.75	KCr165.75

[tc=7]Bk2 design costs by distance for optimized carriers[/tc] [tc=7][/tc]

That better for you? Price is per jump of a given range. Note that reduced costs for shorter jumps in longer ranged ships could be worked out, but that the markets will not bear the higher prices.

 

[Matt123]

Wow, you obviously have a very long todo list. This is a 2 1/2 year old thread!

Ta for the table tho', consider it stolen

 

[McPerth]

Wow, you obviously have a very long todo list. This is a 2 1/2 year old thread!

Ta for the table tho', consider it stolen

I guess what took so many time was to have the table possibility active in the forum

It's something I asked hunter to implement back in about 2004. He didn't. I finally put it in a few weeks ago.

[table][tr][tc=3]wide[/tc][/tr][tr][td]A1[/td][td]A2[/td][td]A3[/td][/tr][tr][td]B1[/td][td]B2[/td][td]B3[/td][/tr][/table]
gives

A1	A2	A3
B1	B2	B3

[tc=3]wide[/tc]

 

[aramis]

Wow, you obviously have a very long todo list. This is a 2 1/2 year old thread!

Ta for the table tho', consider it stolen

No, I just tend to lose track of what I have to get done because of this, that, and the other crisis.

Note that the prices above are specifically only good for a pure HG universe... a mixed HG & Bk 2 universe, the Bk2 5kTd is cheaper for J1, and 2kTd for J3+, are the cheapest cost per ton. Still well more than a linear progression...