Pretty much this.
General What would general purpose freighters look like?
- Thread starter Proneutron
- Start date
Pretty much this.
And regardless of traffic, it never piles up. Get 15 tons going from Planet X to Planet Claire and don't want it? Next week's roll won't have that 15 added in, even if no other ship calls on Planet X in the meantime.
It can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent, but in the long run we're all dead (so figuring out what's going on in the short run still matters).
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I would think that larger freighters, say starting around 10,000 tons, wouldn't bother carrying passengers just cargo. They'd be as efficient as possible with the smallest crew that can safely operate the ship and basically be all cargo hold with engines.
As cargo increases, the need for passengers to balance the books becomes less and less necessary. It eliminates staterooms and other related areas for those passengers as well as crew to take care of them. It would also reduce the load on the ship's systems since that's that much less space to heat, cool, provide air, water, etc., to.
The way I see it, is that such large freighters operate to a few systems in a subsector that have large populations and are relatively high technologically. Cargo going to smaller systems is broken down there and you see the small freighters with passenger space moving things to these smaller systems where cargo demand and the number of passengers going or coming is small.
Those large pop high tech planets would also see passenger service by dedicated liners rather than small ships hauling a couple hundred tons of cargo and a handful of passengers. In fact, such liners could produce an economy of scale and reduce the cost of passage substantially just as large airliners have done that for the airline industry.
As cargo increases, the need for passengers to balance the books becomes less and less necessary. It eliminates staterooms and other related areas for those passengers as well as crew to take care of them. It would also reduce the load on the ship's systems since that's that much less space to heat, cool, provide air, water, etc., to.
The way I see it, is that such large freighters operate to a few systems in a subsector that have large populations and are relatively high technologically. Cargo going to smaller systems is broken down there and you see the small freighters with passenger space moving things to these smaller systems where cargo demand and the number of passengers going or coming is small.
Those large pop high tech planets would also see passenger service by dedicated liners rather than small ships hauling a couple hundred tons of cargo and a handful of passengers. In fact, such liners could produce an economy of scale and reduce the cost of passage substantially just as large airliners have done that for the airline industry.
Sort of a Dutch Auction (wikipedia) mechanic -- ok, not quite. Maybe a Reverse or Brazillian auction.
For freight, I'd do it via statistical resolution: X% of freight will go via minimum cost, Y% of freight pays up to Z% premium to go faster, etc.
Passengers would roll (based on class, distance and cost premium) to see if they were willing to pay for the shorter-duration trip.
That is, there would be an established fare schedule (based on costs of typical ship traffic) and you'd check passengers' willingness to pay that.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
1. With regard to trucking, likely to get automated, since robots can drive twenty five hours per day, or until the fuel runs out; liability and investment would consolidate the industry in some rather large concerns, like Amazon.
2. If there's over capacity, time to run the competition off the road, by discounting freight rates and passage prices.
3. You could adopt the airline model, and charge rates according to algorithm that figures out the highest likeliest a customer will pay for a cargo or passage slot, for a specific route at a particular time period.
4. Anything left over, could be auctioned, straight or reverse, perhaps a week from departure.
5. RyanAerospace offers really cheap base rate, but oxygen and meals are extra; you also pay for each piece of luggage and there's a pay toilet.
2. If there's over capacity, time to run the competition off the road, by discounting freight rates and passage prices.
3. You could adopt the airline model, and charge rates according to algorithm that figures out the highest likeliest a customer will pay for a cargo or passage slot, for a specific route at a particular time period.
4. Anything left over, could be auctioned, straight or reverse, perhaps a week from departure.
5. RyanAerospace offers really cheap base rate, but oxygen and meals are extra; you also pay for each piece of luggage and there's a pay toilet.
Proneutron
SOC-13
Apples and rocks because we are taking about CREWED SHIPS
Nope. Because of Fed trucking regs they run close to minimum charges required to stay on road.
Nope. Independent truckers don't have the resources for that.
Nope. This is freight. NOT owned cargo
Proneutron
SOC-13
Like the current Earth situation with ocean going freighters. Even larger ships than 10k tons would be the case between certain worlds where pop, industry and TL is sufficient to have large comparative and/or absolute advantage econ wise.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
While i agree with your characterization of the principles of shipping in RL, I don't agree that CT shipping RAW follows that or that my house rules break them.
CT shipping rules with the Cr1000 the same whether J-1 or J-4 should at the very least mean everyone is clamoring to ship as far as fast as possible, just on the principle that they can save costs. So the multiplier of lots available works on that principle and simulates demand for that advantage.
Per-parsec house ruling alone makes sense too on the principle of no shipping entity is going to operate on a losing money basis (unless subsidized).
What I gather your objection/observation is oriented to is using both at once, without a concurrent loss in interest in the faster costs.
I considered going through hoops for a simulationist dynamic shipping market and variable rate structure before I settled on these, but ultimately I just don't think it's worth play value. That alone is good enough reason to keep it simple IMO.
As far as justification, I did that whole analysis on the LCL/parcel economics on Reddit and copied it here where I got into the velocity of cargo AND money. There are payoffs in speed in terms of getting paid faster, getting goods to customers faster, and having less inventory 'in flight' and having less capital/shrinkage/pirate risk tied up in fewer packets of product in the pipeline. More reaction to unexpected demand, more efficient warehousing arrangements per sector, which means more products 'travel better' from the sector's industrial worlds.
Plus, per-parsec means you will pay the same or maybe more going on the slow boat J-1 circuit, and some worlds/routes may literally not be available at J-2. That further justifies a 'norm' of 'going to have to pay for each parsec anyway, might as well get it there faster' and therefore not so much fall-off in paying for the big jumps up front.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
As for a full-blown mercantile game and the OP's original question and going with your to-be-written possibility, perhaps you can EZsim this with an addition to the lots rolls with 100-ton and 1000-ton rolls. They would be similar to the current ones except they would be unavailable to lower end starports AND there would be no J-1 lots available.
That would have the effect of getting us into those big HG cargo ships, but more tightly tied to routes, while the Free Traders and subsidized merchants pick up the scraps of 'local' J-1 distribution. Also room for CT J-2/J-3 1000 ton plus designs.
The shipping RAW on the jump front suggest some things if you take them as gospel about the setting, OTU or otherwise.
As noted, reality eventually intrudes and you won't have market supported ships on these rates past J-1/J-2 and not very big ships either.
The subsidized merchants of course fill a lot of that gap, could be the subsidized liner is a top end commonly seen type if we stay RAW.
But there are other potential forms of subsidy that could form a gritty backdrop to merchant ship types.
We've seen that having no-mortgage ships plus the capitalization to speculate can be a license to print money. Combined with the money sink of computers and weapons, you could see a small proportion of ships custom designed with those higher maneuver/jump numbers, and more combat capable then average patrol/merc/pirate ships. If you are using LBB2-77 encounter tables, they would be the ones going to high end planets for the big payoffs. If later, they could slum in lower end places and hold their own. I think that was the designed endpoint of CT 77 merchants.
Speculation can also pay for a larger ship where several different cargos are effectively warehoused, and not sold right away but only when the prices are rolled high enough. Some of those higher end cargos 'travel well' and can justify several jumps while finding their ultimate high profit destination, perhaps even knowing that perfect market planet is a few jumps away.
As far as the larger/longer jump ships go, they could be further subsidized/made cheaper to support the RAW Cr1000 per trip rate if they have money coming in from other sources then speculation.
One form I can think of is if the megacorps that create products effectively buy their way onto major shipping fast routes, say paying a sector-wide rate that guarantees them an x-parsec-ton percentage of the shipping capacity outside of the cargo rates. This could even take the form of an investment and profits for the megacorps, not to mention seats on the line's board to determine policy and preferences.
Another direction would be the opposite- the shipping line makes for cheap fast travel, but gets a percentage of the profits from whatever the major shipper makes from the sales of their product. The line therefore would be eager to maximize profits- at the expense of local products and shipping.
In both cases, locking out competitors by having products 'travel well' from their industrial worlds and having sector-wide reach and collusion between megacorps and big shipping lines would fit into many campaigns and settings. the Cr1000 per jump 'policy'/standard/tradition is about both subsidizing the local pickup traffic to get everything to every planet possible, AND locking out up and comers from existing/future profit relationships.
So in that case OP, you could expect 'big ship' to mean a megacorps/line cosy 'fix is in' relationship. Probably just a few design mixes so they can get further cost reduction by being standardized.
In all three cases, the entity providing the subsidy is going to expect a large degree of control, whether that is governmental changing routes in a subsector for politics or influence, or embargoing competitors from using the subsidized big fast ships.
That would have the effect of getting us into those big HG cargo ships, but more tightly tied to routes, while the Free Traders and subsidized merchants pick up the scraps of 'local' J-1 distribution. Also room for CT J-2/J-3 1000 ton plus designs.
The shipping RAW on the jump front suggest some things if you take them as gospel about the setting, OTU or otherwise.
As noted, reality eventually intrudes and you won't have market supported ships on these rates past J-1/J-2 and not very big ships either.
The subsidized merchants of course fill a lot of that gap, could be the subsidized liner is a top end commonly seen type if we stay RAW.
But there are other potential forms of subsidy that could form a gritty backdrop to merchant ship types.
We've seen that having no-mortgage ships plus the capitalization to speculate can be a license to print money. Combined with the money sink of computers and weapons, you could see a small proportion of ships custom designed with those higher maneuver/jump numbers, and more combat capable then average patrol/merc/pirate ships. If you are using LBB2-77 encounter tables, they would be the ones going to high end planets for the big payoffs. If later, they could slum in lower end places and hold their own. I think that was the designed endpoint of CT 77 merchants.
Speculation can also pay for a larger ship where several different cargos are effectively warehoused, and not sold right away but only when the prices are rolled high enough. Some of those higher end cargos 'travel well' and can justify several jumps while finding their ultimate high profit destination, perhaps even knowing that perfect market planet is a few jumps away.
As far as the larger/longer jump ships go, they could be further subsidized/made cheaper to support the RAW Cr1000 per trip rate if they have money coming in from other sources then speculation.
One form I can think of is if the megacorps that create products effectively buy their way onto major shipping fast routes, say paying a sector-wide rate that guarantees them an x-parsec-ton percentage of the shipping capacity outside of the cargo rates. This could even take the form of an investment and profits for the megacorps, not to mention seats on the line's board to determine policy and preferences.
Another direction would be the opposite- the shipping line makes for cheap fast travel, but gets a percentage of the profits from whatever the major shipper makes from the sales of their product. The line therefore would be eager to maximize profits- at the expense of local products and shipping.
In both cases, locking out competitors by having products 'travel well' from their industrial worlds and having sector-wide reach and collusion between megacorps and big shipping lines would fit into many campaigns and settings. the Cr1000 per jump 'policy'/standard/tradition is about both subsidizing the local pickup traffic to get everything to every planet possible, AND locking out up and comers from existing/future profit relationships.
So in that case OP, you could expect 'big ship' to mean a megacorps/line cosy 'fix is in' relationship. Probably just a few design mixes so they can get further cost reduction by being standardized.
In all three cases, the entity providing the subsidy is going to expect a large degree of control, whether that is governmental changing routes in a subsector for politics or influence, or embargoing competitors from using the subsidized big fast ships.
Last edited:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Anyway OP, bottom line you need to figure out what you want your universe to be like. Those market considerations, layout of the subsector with worlds and traffic determining profitable routes, danger levels with pirates and wars, what the politics are re: economics and power and privilege and markets, will largely determine what and how big those freighters are.
I would do it in one of two directions.
If this is more a backdrop universe setting question and not a primary play value question, then determine your setting first and then select/design a few ship types to give flavor and otherwise they are part of the scenery and occasional 'action sets'.
If you are looking to run a mercantile shipping line campaign, you want to pay particular attention to having difficulties and a path for your players to claw their way up the ladder.
Ship design AND economics are a big part of that, setting will support the functional ships, so the setting should be tailored for the purpose of mercantile action and vice versa, ships designed to support a nuanced player campaign.
I would do it in one of two directions.
If this is more a backdrop universe setting question and not a primary play value question, then determine your setting first and then select/design a few ship types to give flavor and otherwise they are part of the scenery and occasional 'action sets'.
If you are looking to run a mercantile shipping line campaign, you want to pay particular attention to having difficulties and a path for your players to claw their way up the ladder.
Ship design AND economics are a big part of that, setting will support the functional ships, so the setting should be tailored for the purpose of mercantile action and vice versa, ships designed to support a nuanced player campaign.
Proneutron
SOC-13
I'm simply designing what would be sensical based on what it would be like if the RAW trade scene existed. I think I figured it out. Not quite like the OTU presents as financial institutions aren't likely to finance much of what is supposedly flying around "trading". There will lots of modified for additional cargo space old Scout ships and subsidized vessels that have been sold off when old, etc.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I did an economic analysis system based on UPC's a while back. While a bit rough, it pretty much invariably came back with a subsector with 1 to 4 really economically strong worlds another say half dozen that were sustainable and the rest were pretty much basket cases.
I'd think such a subsector would work on a basis of the economically strong worlds being where 80 to 90% of imports and exports arrive or leave from. The smaller economies rely on something akin to a few subsidized freighters and maybe one larger regular ship coming in to move goods. The basket cases are left to "independent" or contract haulers using free and far traders who are just getting by. But these small operators can't compete with or even get into operations at the larger starports / worlds because the larger companies operating out of them won't let them. These companies limit the small fry to hauling goods to places they don't want to go themselves because there's really no money in it.
Probably to help drive the trading game to the basket case systems unless there was a real need to visit the economic powerhouses. I did read through and play with GURPS Far Trader and its massive volume of trade and ships and you get similar trade routes based on the population, tech level and some trade codes. For my personal TU I tend to divide by at least 10 as I don't want a high traffic universe, at least for the hinterlands. Maybe in Core.
Now I need to re-read that and start playing with the numbers again - I had it all in code at one point based on the UWP, hopefully I can find that (it was probably 20+ years ago so & pre-Github so may no longer have that code)
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
You create demand, like inventing some holiday that relies on imported goods.
One where you give gifts to children, like Tickle Me Emperor, or imported delicacies associated with aphrodisiacs, for one dedicated to lovers.
One where you give gifts to children, like Tickle Me Emperor, or imported delicacies associated with aphrodisiacs, for one dedicated to lovers.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
What mine does is make the typical Traveller game more like Firefly where the largest systems with the highest tech and most trade are only intermittently visited because they are:
Expensive for consumers
Not trade friendly to the small business guy
There's too much established competition for a causal newcomer to work the market(s).
Instead, the small free / far trader ends up mostly in the systems with low pop, low law, but still needing imported goods if not in quantity. You might hit a world that has a niche product that is in demand but volume is low so a small trader can make that work for them. Otherwise, the players are scrambling to make a living.
One I also allow is for players who are merchants or doing trade after retiring is to contract / be hired by a corporation as either an employee or contractor. This means you get assigned trade and routes, but you can run side scams and businesses if you want to. Out of sight, out of mind... Just don't get caught doing illegal stuff because the corporation will fire you and you get blackballed PDQ.
Proneutron
SOC-13
That's seems logical and probable based on that world type distribution.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
A lot of that is reasonable for frontier and not much population areas. But I would say the banking deal is propped up BY the Cr1000 and Passage standards, precisely so they make bank AND having plenty of Free Traders and such running about doing small packet/passage trade.
I figure a few things are happening outside of the expressed trade rules to help with that.
Part of the mortgage is being used by the banks to buy insurance against the loss of the ship per se, or more accurately the means by which the money loaned is to be paid.
The insurance goes strictly to the bank and assumes the ship owner/debtor is cleared of any wrongdoing or negligence, and is in fact lost.
The debtor is cleared of all requirement to pay/service the debt, but also gets no compensation for the loss of the payments they have made. Any such arrangement will require additional insurance they let out.
Another bulwark against loss by the bank is the repo trade. Being so tardy on payments as to trigger repossession proceedings means there is a great deal of interest, pardon the pun, in regaining the collateral of the ship itself.
Regaining the ship in reasonable shape means it can be repaired, re-certified and put back onto a loan at a reduced 'sales' price, or sold at auction. It may even work out to be somewhat profitable, a greater sum realized between down payment and payments made plus the sale of the ship, and the bank has it's principal back to loan again.
The insurer bond companies may send their own repo teams out to make sure they don't have to pay on a claim of loss by the bank. Or in your universe, it may be declared piracy and therefore naval/patrol vessels or privateers that gain a salvage/prize reward for a percentage of salvage auction.
The repo trade should justify a newer set of used ships available at lower costs.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Proneutron
SOC-13
Even at those rates it is almost impossible to run a freighter at a profit. That's the problem and why banks wouldn't make loans for new ships like that.
