168 Hours plus or minus 10 percent
- Thread starter atpollard
- Start date
).And while we're at it, it would be SO nice if Marc could be persuaded to make jump limits a function of tidal force >>Wistful sigh<<.Originally posted by Malenfant:
but given that Marc is vaguely contactable, why not just ask him again (or more likely get robject to ask him, since he seems to be in reasonably regular communication with him about T5) and get a final answer from him? If he can make up his mind about it himself, that is (the fact that the designer of the game can't figure out a straight answer himself is really promising...).
Hans
Reading the last part of this discussion, I will have to track down the references again, but....
I had understood after spending time in the T20 book, that the pilot spent MUCH more time and effort on Jump plotting.
That the computer calculated several jump "vectors, that by it's mathamatics all put you in the same place at the same time, with the same varaiable on each.
The pilot then had to sort out the one to use. It seemed to me, and at least one Game master agreed, that there was enough hint to justify that pilot skill and talent would allow picking the most accurate course to pick at least one variable more accuratly, and possably even both.
So for example, a high skill high talent pilot would virtually always come out of Jump near the minimum jump time, and tend to be closer to the center of his target zone then way off. He would be nearly perfect on his arriva time, and bettte than average on his location.
There was even dission on a thread here that the same rules interprition could lead to either truly exotic physics that only certain individuals could grasp, or that jump space navigation was a true metaphysical event.
I will have to run those rules again to get the exact staments that lead to these conclusions, but I reellay did feel there was enough to suggest that pilot skill and talent can allow some determination of the accuracy of Jump duration, exact entry point, or both.
I had understood after spending time in the T20 book, that the pilot spent MUCH more time and effort on Jump plotting.
That the computer calculated several jump "vectors, that by it's mathamatics all put you in the same place at the same time, with the same varaiable on each.
The pilot then had to sort out the one to use. It seemed to me, and at least one Game master agreed, that there was enough hint to justify that pilot skill and talent would allow picking the most accurate course to pick at least one variable more accuratly, and possably even both.
So for example, a high skill high talent pilot would virtually always come out of Jump near the minimum jump time, and tend to be closer to the center of his target zone then way off. He would be nearly perfect on his arriva time, and bettte than average on his location.
There was even dission on a thread here that the same rules interprition could lead to either truly exotic physics that only certain individuals could grasp, or that jump space navigation was a true metaphysical event.
I will have to run those rules again to get the exact staments that lead to these conclusions, but I reellay did feel there was enough to suggest that pilot skill and talent can allow some determination of the accuracy of Jump duration, exact entry point, or both.
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Hi Mr. Tek !
Well, in MT navigation skill does excactly this job, as it reduces in-system travel time significantly.
This could be really interpreted as the pilots/navigators ability to "jump on the point", perhaps even without a careful zero vector
Regards,
TE
Well, in MT navigation skill does excactly this job, as it reduces in-system travel time significantly.
This could be really interpreted as the pilots/navigators ability to "jump on the point", perhaps even without a careful zero vector
Regards,
TE
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Hi again Arthur !
So everything that could be done has to be done before pressing the jump button. But thats something different. Please have a look at Mr. teks post
IMTU a jump targets absolute coordinates. Those have to be defined before the jump begins and nothing could be changed after jump initiation.
So the only chance for the poor astrogator is to assume a jump duration before he makes the actual jump plot, because he naturally needs an assumption for the target worlds position at a time.
Once I made my mind up about "curved jump plots" but Mr. Miller really clarified this stuff -> "straight jump line".
I guess the most important property of jump duration is given frequently in any ruleset: duration always is random and is influenced by nothing (well, except misjumping).
regards,
TE
IMHO there is completely nothing to align AFTER jump initation. The common speech is, that once in jump there is nothing left to manipulate the course of action...
So everything that could be done has to be done before pressing the jump button. But thats something different. Please have a look at Mr. teks post
IMTU a jump targets absolute coordinates. Those have to be defined before the jump begins and nothing could be changed after jump initiation.
So the only chance for the poor astrogator is to assume a jump duration before he makes the actual jump plot, because he naturally needs an assumption for the target worlds position at a time.
Don't be afraid of discussions. That why we are here..Management regrets that it can enter into no discussion on jump masking at this time.
Management also regrets that it will NEVER speculate on the effects (if any) that jump masking has on jump duration.
Once I made my mind up about "curved jump plots" but Mr. Miller really clarified this stuff -> "straight jump line".
I guess the most important property of jump duration is given frequently in any ruleset: duration always is random and is influenced by nothing (well, except misjumping).
regards,
TE
No argument from me. We agree that the computer knows the “exact” time a ship should exit jump space at the end of the “week” (from the JTAS). We also agree that the duration of the jump is fixed at the instant the ship enters jump space (from JTAS and MT). The heart of the entire problem is did the computer/astrogator know the approximate (to within an hour) duration of the projected jump when he/she/it ran the final calculations just before pushing the “jump” button. I say yes. Those who talk about the target world being millions of kilometers from the target point at the end of the jump say no. If you say YES, then jumps are accurate in Your Traveller universe. If you say NO, then jumps are inaccurate in Your Traveller universe (since the target world could be 16 hours ahead or behind your jump exit coordinates).Originally posted by TheEngineer:
Hi again Arthur !
IMHO there is completely nothing to align AFTER jump initation. The common speech is, that once in jump there is nothing left to manipulate the course of action...
So everything that could be done has to be done before pressing the jump button. But thats something different. Please have a look at Mr. teks post
I look forward to hearing more specific quotes from Mr. Tek since his post was fascinating.
RandyT0001
SOC-13
If during the jump plotting you make the jump exit coordinates relative to a fixed position above the target planet (ie 110 diameters above the world surface) then it makes no difference if the jump is 16 hours early or late.
Jumps to this exit point are accurate within 3000km (IIRC). IMO, those who think that jumps are plotted from point A above Planet Z to where point B above Planet Y is going to be in a week's time (considering it's orbit around it's star, etc) are the same people that would worry about 'jump masking'. I think that some people mistakenly let our understanding of normal space intrude and constrain the 'handwavium' jump space.
If I can do this with out getting off track as it were.
At this point, I make an assumption. If jump can be consider something related to time travel, then discussing time travel theory becomes very germane.
There are two basic views of time travel in most of the science fiction we read.
Travel in time maintains a fixed relation to the physical surroundings, or it maintains a fixed relation to an absolute physical position.
Star trek, Alan foster, HG Wells and many others maintained the original thesis. They all state that at the end of your travel through time, you arrive at the same physical location in relation to the earth.
The fact that the spot on the earth you started on has moved 1000 miles around the globe for each hour of displacement and 66 miles around it’s obit of the sun, and whatever it’s distance through space the whole solar system moves.
This implies, but does not prove, that the object does not get removed from the physical universe and reinserted so much as that it exists in that location for the duration of it’s travel.
The second thesis is the traveler maintains a specific absolute position, and the universe travels it’s distance and your location is displaced by the distance the universe traveled in the amount of time you displaced.
Actually there was a story in the Years best Science fiction anthology a couple of years ago that proposed your liner displacement was the SQUARE of the distance light would travel during the time of your displacement. This was the author’s solution to the whole causality issue. If your physical distance was far enough that no communications could be transmitted between the two locations in during the time between when you left and when you arrived, then it was not possible to change anything that broke causality, or produced events that could be changed BY the movement through time. No going forward to get tomorrow’s lottery numbers in time to purchase the winning ticket.
Returning to traveler, I think we all agree that Mr Miller and teams, all at some level intended to not open up that can of worms, which is why it takes a physical amount of time to transit jump, and no communications method exists that transmits any way but that same jump transition.
Further I suggest that at least partially jump is intended to reach a specific physical absolute point in space, not a point attached to the target system.
That means you aim for the exact point in space that will be 101 diameters from the surface of planet x in exactly 168 hours. NOT a point 101 diameters from the surface of that planet when ever you happen to arrive.
This means if when you arrive you would come out closer to the planter that you precipitate out at the shadow, but if it is any other position, either ahead or behind you then you arrive at whatever the relative distance is in the difference between when you meant to arrive and when you actually did.
This means that your physical position is always accurate to the exact same amount, and ONLY the time is variable. Under this theory, and increase in accuracy means you arrive closer in relation to the other objects at your destination because they move less in the time you are off by.
A synchronized jump would simply mean that you all arrive with in the same limited amount of time, so you positions relative to one another have less time to be affected by the new gravity and vector changes in the new space.
If the navigator’s skill affects the jump in any way, it would be to more carefully control the duration and therefore your position relative to the e target.
Misjumps mean that you time in jump has departed from what it should have been at your entry into jump space. The mechanic of why that changes is very heavily defined as completely outside the science known within any rules set. Following the logic however seems to indicate that some mechanic DOES change the parameters of the jump AFTER entering jump space, or else something changes during the moment of transition from normal space to jump space. (Honestly I am more comfortable that that would explain why jump tanks being to close at jump would cause a misjump.)
Accept my assumptions, and I think my conclusions are pretty solid. Change any of the assumptions and this is all wrong. I can’t see any violation of cannon, except that if nav skill makes a difference then duration is not completely random. (It would still be random within the more accurate frame, but the discrepancy would be smaller.)
And in at least a couple of cases I was able to explain why cannon works the way it does, so I might have something here.
At this point, I make an assumption. If jump can be consider something related to time travel, then discussing time travel theory becomes very germane.
There are two basic views of time travel in most of the science fiction we read.
Travel in time maintains a fixed relation to the physical surroundings, or it maintains a fixed relation to an absolute physical position.
Star trek, Alan foster, HG Wells and many others maintained the original thesis. They all state that at the end of your travel through time, you arrive at the same physical location in relation to the earth.
The fact that the spot on the earth you started on has moved 1000 miles around the globe for each hour of displacement and 66 miles around it’s obit of the sun, and whatever it’s distance through space the whole solar system moves.
This implies, but does not prove, that the object does not get removed from the physical universe and reinserted so much as that it exists in that location for the duration of it’s travel.
The second thesis is the traveler maintains a specific absolute position, and the universe travels it’s distance and your location is displaced by the distance the universe traveled in the amount of time you displaced.
Actually there was a story in the Years best Science fiction anthology a couple of years ago that proposed your liner displacement was the SQUARE of the distance light would travel during the time of your displacement. This was the author’s solution to the whole causality issue. If your physical distance was far enough that no communications could be transmitted between the two locations in during the time between when you left and when you arrived, then it was not possible to change anything that broke causality, or produced events that could be changed BY the movement through time. No going forward to get tomorrow’s lottery numbers in time to purchase the winning ticket.
Returning to traveler, I think we all agree that Mr Miller and teams, all at some level intended to not open up that can of worms, which is why it takes a physical amount of time to transit jump, and no communications method exists that transmits any way but that same jump transition.
Further I suggest that at least partially jump is intended to reach a specific physical absolute point in space, not a point attached to the target system.
That means you aim for the exact point in space that will be 101 diameters from the surface of planet x in exactly 168 hours. NOT a point 101 diameters from the surface of that planet when ever you happen to arrive.
This means if when you arrive you would come out closer to the planter that you precipitate out at the shadow, but if it is any other position, either ahead or behind you then you arrive at whatever the relative distance is in the difference between when you meant to arrive and when you actually did.
This means that your physical position is always accurate to the exact same amount, and ONLY the time is variable. Under this theory, and increase in accuracy means you arrive closer in relation to the other objects at your destination because they move less in the time you are off by.
A synchronized jump would simply mean that you all arrive with in the same limited amount of time, so you positions relative to one another have less time to be affected by the new gravity and vector changes in the new space.
If the navigator’s skill affects the jump in any way, it would be to more carefully control the duration and therefore your position relative to the e target.
Misjumps mean that you time in jump has departed from what it should have been at your entry into jump space. The mechanic of why that changes is very heavily defined as completely outside the science known within any rules set. Following the logic however seems to indicate that some mechanic DOES change the parameters of the jump AFTER entering jump space, or else something changes during the moment of transition from normal space to jump space. (Honestly I am more comfortable that that would explain why jump tanks being to close at jump would cause a misjump.)
Accept my assumptions, and I think my conclusions are pretty solid. Change any of the assumptions and this is all wrong. I can’t see any violation of cannon, except that if nav skill makes a difference then duration is not completely random. (It would still be random within the more accurate frame, but the discrepancy would be smaller.)
And in at least a couple of cases I was able to explain why cannon works the way it does, so I might have something here.
You assume that the jump calculation involves merely simple known physical quantities like where A and B are going to be. If we assume their are other datum related to (handwaves gone wild here) the energy patterns in hyperspace (which may have some form of weather that isn't directly related solely to its relationship to our physical dimension) or similar sorts of things, it may be impossible to know at jump entry with absolute certainty how fast/how well you are going to progress through hyperspace. Perhaps this is just a larger version of Heisenberg kicking in. Various possibilities exist and you may be jumping not with an absolute certainty but just a statistically likely certainty.
That neatly explains a misjump... your 1% accuracy 19 times in 20 turned out to be not so this time. It wasn't that something went *very wrong* - perhaps everything worked just like it does every other time, but when you make these sorts of probabalistic assumptions, you know that each time there is a chance they'll not work out quite that way. Worse and worse misjumps are just examples of statistically more or less likely occurences. So rather than having screwed up, you may have done everything right and STILL misjump. Your odds may, of course, go up if you don't do everything right.
That neatly explains a misjump... your 1% accuracy 19 times in 20 turned out to be not so this time. It wasn't that something went *very wrong* - perhaps everything worked just like it does every other time, but when you make these sorts of probabalistic assumptions, you know that each time there is a chance they'll not work out quite that way. Worse and worse misjumps are just examples of statistically more or less likely occurences. So rather than having screwed up, you may have done everything right and STILL misjump. Your odds may, of course, go up if you don't do everything right.
One slightly off topic question, has anyone calculated the maximum jump error (in distance) for a Traveller world? If we are discussing a maximum error of "it will take 2 extra days to reach Earth" then this discussion is worth it. If we are talking about a maximum error of "it will take 2 extra hours to reach Earth" then count me out of this debate.
I believe that jumping from the 100-diameter limit of one world to the 100-diameter limit of another world is the basic intent of the Traveller rules. Knowing how much time a jump will take before jumping makes this possible. Not knowing how much time a jump will take before jumping makes this unlikely. Without a clear rule that says “jumps are inaccurate”, I choose to believe the first option.
Be excellent to one another.
Arthur
[PS Randy: Your idea works. I like it and would push it even further. Unfortunately, like so much of what is debated, it lacks a rules reference one way or the other. Knowing the jump duration has at least a "little" evidence.]
I believe that jumping from the 100-diameter limit of one world to the 100-diameter limit of another world is the basic intent of the Traveller rules. Knowing how much time a jump will take before jumping makes this possible. Not knowing how much time a jump will take before jumping makes this unlikely. Without a clear rule that says “jumps are inaccurate”, I choose to believe the first option.
Be excellent to one another.
Arthur
[PS Randy: Your idea works. I like it and would push it even further. Unfortunately, like so much of what is debated, it lacks a rules reference one way or the other. Knowing the jump duration has at least a "little" evidence.]
Hi Guys,
I did some more research about jump space durations in CT. I also intended to follow up with a commentary about random jump durations regarding two ships from the same relative location (ie only 2 km apart from each other) jumping at the same time - how can it be possible that things have changed so much that they can arrive hours apart from each other.
First, the research. I can't find mention anywhere in my books for CT where a game mechanism exists for jump space duration. It specifies a week - but no game mechanic for determining how long it actually takes. Marc's statement in High Guard was along the lines of 150 hours to 175 hours - but it still specified 1 week's duration of jump FIRST. Secondly, book 2 of the little black books indicates the following information:
Jump space duration is 1 week for normal jumps, but can last up to 1d6 weeks during a misjump (page 6 of STARSHIPS). Notice that the duration is irrespective of the actual distance traversed while misjumping, which in and of itself, can be anywheres from 1 parsec to 36 parsecs. It isn't until GDP that we get data on how to resolve variable jump durations with a game mechanic to derive such values. TNE also has a set game mechanic - but it also manages to cause one minor little problem that those who like variable jump durations seem to be ignoring...
Regardless of whether a ship enters jump space or no - planets move using normal laws of physics, as do stars themselves. In order to predict where a star shall be, and a planet within that star system, you need to know where it is now, where it was in order to predict where it will be. You need to know what forces are acting upon those stars at any given time in order to predict where it will be at a given time.
So the question in its rawest form becomes this:
Is astrogation (ie Navigation in CT) the skill of getting your ship to a point in space that is defined as X,Y,Z - or is it the skill of getting your ship to a point in space AND time defined as X,Y,Z,T?
Marc Miller in the earliest days of Traveller didn't have a Pentium V computer with 1 Gig of Ram etc <g>. He didn't post rules for what happens if a ship comes out of Jump space early or late relative to where the navigator and/or pilot intended to be regards to the main world (or location they wanted to arrive at). The simplest explanation at THAT time was that the GM was expected to choose a time that was between 150 hours and 175 hours to match "about one week". This value was the same regardless of whether the ship traversed 1 parsec's distance or 6 parsec's distance. The variable in time spent in Jump space was "normal jump" versus "Misjump". If you look at the rules closely, it isn't even possible to misjump as a result of a bad navigational plot or even a bad adherence to the plot by the pilot (ie, the pilot was drunk, suffering an epileptic seizure, and banged his head on the control board one time too many before hitting the engage button). Misjumps per the rules only occur when the following is true:
The ship is jumping from within 100 diameters for any and all ship types (civilian, navy, or scout), a civilian ship uses unrefined fuel, or a military ship uses unrefined fuel without having a fuel processor aboard. There are no other rules for misjumps within the CT body that I am aware of (gotta leave some wiggle room there!).
So, to recap:
Jump durations last from 1 week to 6 weeks per the CT book 2 rules. It isn't until HIGH GUARD that the rules indicate that jumps take approximately 1 week - and in a parenthetical aside, mentions a time span of 150 hours to 175 hours). GDP created/crafted a game mechanism of 150 hours plus (IIRC) 4d6 hours. This gives a range between 154 hours and 176 hours centered around 164 hours average.
As for me? I had to ask myself "If I were a scientist in a Traveller Universe, what experiments would I conduct to prove or disprove how navigation works?" The results of those thoughts on my next post...
I did some more research about jump space durations in CT. I also intended to follow up with a commentary about random jump durations regarding two ships from the same relative location (ie only 2 km apart from each other) jumping at the same time - how can it be possible that things have changed so much that they can arrive hours apart from each other.
First, the research. I can't find mention anywhere in my books for CT where a game mechanism exists for jump space duration. It specifies a week - but no game mechanic for determining how long it actually takes. Marc's statement in High Guard was along the lines of 150 hours to 175 hours - but it still specified 1 week's duration of jump FIRST. Secondly, book 2 of the little black books indicates the following information:
Jump space duration is 1 week for normal jumps, but can last up to 1d6 weeks during a misjump (page 6 of STARSHIPS). Notice that the duration is irrespective of the actual distance traversed while misjumping, which in and of itself, can be anywheres from 1 parsec to 36 parsecs. It isn't until GDP that we get data on how to resolve variable jump durations with a game mechanic to derive such values. TNE also has a set game mechanic - but it also manages to cause one minor little problem that those who like variable jump durations seem to be ignoring...
Regardless of whether a ship enters jump space or no - planets move using normal laws of physics, as do stars themselves. In order to predict where a star shall be, and a planet within that star system, you need to know where it is now, where it was in order to predict where it will be. You need to know what forces are acting upon those stars at any given time in order to predict where it will be at a given time.
So the question in its rawest form becomes this:
Is astrogation (ie Navigation in CT) the skill of getting your ship to a point in space that is defined as X,Y,Z - or is it the skill of getting your ship to a point in space AND time defined as X,Y,Z,T?
Marc Miller in the earliest days of Traveller didn't have a Pentium V computer with 1 Gig of Ram etc <g>. He didn't post rules for what happens if a ship comes out of Jump space early or late relative to where the navigator and/or pilot intended to be regards to the main world (or location they wanted to arrive at). The simplest explanation at THAT time was that the GM was expected to choose a time that was between 150 hours and 175 hours to match "about one week". This value was the same regardless of whether the ship traversed 1 parsec's distance or 6 parsec's distance. The variable in time spent in Jump space was "normal jump" versus "Misjump". If you look at the rules closely, it isn't even possible to misjump as a result of a bad navigational plot or even a bad adherence to the plot by the pilot (ie, the pilot was drunk, suffering an epileptic seizure, and banged his head on the control board one time too many before hitting the engage button). Misjumps per the rules only occur when the following is true:
The ship is jumping from within 100 diameters for any and all ship types (civilian, navy, or scout), a civilian ship uses unrefined fuel, or a military ship uses unrefined fuel without having a fuel processor aboard. There are no other rules for misjumps within the CT body that I am aware of (gotta leave some wiggle room there!).
So, to recap:
Jump durations last from 1 week to 6 weeks per the CT book 2 rules. It isn't until HIGH GUARD that the rules indicate that jumps take approximately 1 week - and in a parenthetical aside, mentions a time span of 150 hours to 175 hours). GDP created/crafted a game mechanism of 150 hours plus (IIRC) 4d6 hours. This gives a range between 154 hours and 176 hours centered around 164 hours average.
As for me? I had to ask myself "If I were a scientist in a Traveller Universe, what experiments would I conduct to prove or disprove how navigation works?" The results of those thoughts on my next post...
M
Malenfant
Guest
I think the astrogation roll obviously must be the skill of getting your ship to a fixed X/Y/Z and T. Though when you're factoring in things like the proper motion of the stars, the ephemerides of the planets around it (already on record somewhere on the ship, or derived from distant observations from nearby systems if the target is unknown) then the skill boils down to entering the right parameters into a computer (which has all this in an internal astrogation database) to figure all this out. And frankly I'd be amazed if the tech at this stage hasn't progressed to telling the computer "we want to jump to X planet from here, so go figure it out and get us there" - quite where any more input is required for a roll is not clear to me.
Ok, so you're a physist on Earth during the start of an era that will be later known as "The interstellar wars". Earth is just now developing its jump technology and it is ALL new. Some dufus at a college (probably a college professor or some such) claims that he has the math that proves jump space exists and that jump space travel is possible. Some engineer team spent years working out the principles and actually created a prototype. As luck would have it, the first 8 prototypes failed and either didn't work, or disappeared, or exploded (that is why they pay you the big bucks to work outside of Mars orbit on the jump theory). The ninth try however resulted in a success. After that, by trial and error, you determine just how navigation works and you have your first working and repeatable example of Jump-1 drives.
So now the questions to ask are:
Which form of navigation worked? One form of navigation is that you have a universal frame of reference such that you can have an X,Y,Z coordinate that is true for all stars at the same time. At one moment in time, a star might occupy location 451,500,-754 and then 100 time units later, occupy location 450,492,-600. If you cannot control the time element of your exit into the universal frame of reference, but you can control the fact that you will exit at point 450,492,-600, then whether you exit at time frame 99 or 101 means you missed being a specified distance from that object by one time unit's worth of motion. The Universal time frame of reference is still in motion regardless of whether your ship occupies jump space or normal space.
The only other frame of reference where navigation works is if you can plot a course that will hit the location of X,Y,Z, T where T = time. With that kind of navigation, you will be able to appear within 3,000 km of a moving object.
So, what determines the time spent in Jump Space? Is it the conditions of the Natural "Universal" frame of existence? If so, then two ships occupying nearly the same location in space - both jumping for nearly the same destination, should have nearly identical jump durations. If the jump duration is random based on events within the Jump space frame of reference - then accuracy is already a moot point. If you can't predict what variables are going to affect your navigational plot, then at best, you can hope for is a narrow range of results - and navigation becomes an art. But if it becomes an art, the question remains one of whether or not computers can handle the "art" portion of it.
All together, navigation-1 is no more meaningful than navigation-5 in the Traveller Universe. The only factors affecting whether one jumps successfully or misjump seem to be the location from which one jumps or the fuel type used in the jump.
Per CT rules:
Misjump occurs when you roll 13+ on 2d6. Using unrefined fuel is worth a +1 penalty to the die roll. Jumping within 100 diameters is worth +5. Jumping within 10 is worth +10 penalty. If using a scout ship with engines specially designed to handle unrefined fuel, one gets a -2 bonus to the die roll. Naval ships gain a -1 bonus to the die roll.
If a ship has gone without maintenance past a set time, there is a chance for drive failure - not misjump. So where does that leave us in the CT universe trying to reconcile the rules for jump space duration of voyage?
Because time is stated to be synchronous in the Traveller Universe as well as the Jump Universe - jump duration has to be something that is realatively fixed in order for one to be able to aim for a moving target and still be accurate. Since I don't think Marc intended for a GM to have to calculate where a ship ends up relative to a moving star with moving planets within it - the simplest method for jump space navigational accuracy would be that ships are accurate for moving targets. Since time is synchronous, that implies that time in space has to be controlable not random.
So now the questions to ask are:
Which form of navigation worked? One form of navigation is that you have a universal frame of reference such that you can have an X,Y,Z coordinate that is true for all stars at the same time. At one moment in time, a star might occupy location 451,500,-754 and then 100 time units later, occupy location 450,492,-600. If you cannot control the time element of your exit into the universal frame of reference, but you can control the fact that you will exit at point 450,492,-600, then whether you exit at time frame 99 or 101 means you missed being a specified distance from that object by one time unit's worth of motion. The Universal time frame of reference is still in motion regardless of whether your ship occupies jump space or normal space.
The only other frame of reference where navigation works is if you can plot a course that will hit the location of X,Y,Z, T where T = time. With that kind of navigation, you will be able to appear within 3,000 km of a moving object.
So, what determines the time spent in Jump Space? Is it the conditions of the Natural "Universal" frame of existence? If so, then two ships occupying nearly the same location in space - both jumping for nearly the same destination, should have nearly identical jump durations. If the jump duration is random based on events within the Jump space frame of reference - then accuracy is already a moot point. If you can't predict what variables are going to affect your navigational plot, then at best, you can hope for is a narrow range of results - and navigation becomes an art. But if it becomes an art, the question remains one of whether or not computers can handle the "art" portion of it.
All together, navigation-1 is no more meaningful than navigation-5 in the Traveller Universe. The only factors affecting whether one jumps successfully or misjump seem to be the location from which one jumps or the fuel type used in the jump.
Per CT rules:
Misjump occurs when you roll 13+ on 2d6. Using unrefined fuel is worth a +1 penalty to the die roll. Jumping within 100 diameters is worth +5. Jumping within 10 is worth +10 penalty. If using a scout ship with engines specially designed to handle unrefined fuel, one gets a -2 bonus to the die roll. Naval ships gain a -1 bonus to the die roll.
If a ship has gone without maintenance past a set time, there is a chance for drive failure - not misjump. So where does that leave us in the CT universe trying to reconcile the rules for jump space duration of voyage?
Because time is stated to be synchronous in the Traveller Universe as well as the Jump Universe - jump duration has to be something that is realatively fixed in order for one to be able to aim for a moving target and still be accurate. Since I don't think Marc intended for a GM to have to calculate where a ship ends up relative to a moving star with moving planets within it - the simplest method for jump space navigational accuracy would be that ships are accurate for moving targets. Since time is synchronous, that implies that time in space has to be controlable not random.
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Hi !
One of he most magical aspects of Traveller jumpdrive is really, that time "during jump" is synchronized to the time in "normal space"
If often thought of breaking thins synchronization and lets the "in-jump" time just melt down to a tiny fraction, perhaps just a few hours, so that travelling keeps you younger compared to the rest of the universe (just like cold sleep passangers).
In my own humble view - and according to the rules - navigation skill focussed on jumping is just good for pressing a jump button. All the rest is done by the computer. This is expressed also by the rules statement, that the level of navigation skill has no influence on the jump duration.
Navigation in MT influences the in-system travel times, so a nav-5 guy is much faster than a nav-1 newbie. (Though I see no reason why even this isnt handled better by this monster computer doing the jump calculations..)
Traveller is not very detailed, when its about navigation and stuff, maybe its expected to be a standard procedure just like visiting the toilette. You just don't set up rules for stuff like that. During years of gaming 99% of all insterstellar travels were done by the refs sentence "Ok. You're going from Rhylanor to Porozlo. You're there...." even without caring much for in-system travel times.....
So - as often - we are approaching Traveller up to surface contact, discussing about high resolution details, based on vague hints of the Traveller documentation. We develop nifty theories about some cool details.
Well and the details disappear anyway, as we step a bit away for actual gameplay.
Life is tough. But that fun.
Anyway it still would be very interesting (IMHO) to have a Global Unified Jump Theory, which incorporates and respects all the given "facts" from the rules and fills up some holes for the nifty players...
Best regards,
TE
One of he most magical aspects of Traveller jumpdrive is really, that time "during jump" is synchronized to the time in "normal space"
If often thought of breaking thins synchronization and lets the "in-jump" time just melt down to a tiny fraction, perhaps just a few hours, so that travelling keeps you younger compared to the rest of the universe (just like cold sleep passangers).
In my own humble view - and according to the rules - navigation skill focussed on jumping is just good for pressing a jump button. All the rest is done by the computer. This is expressed also by the rules statement, that the level of navigation skill has no influence on the jump duration.
Navigation in MT influences the in-system travel times, so a nav-5 guy is much faster than a nav-1 newbie. (Though I see no reason why even this isnt handled better by this monster computer doing the jump calculations..)
Traveller is not very detailed, when its about navigation and stuff, maybe its expected to be a standard procedure just like visiting the toilette. You just don't set up rules for stuff like that. During years of gaming 99% of all insterstellar travels were done by the refs sentence "Ok. You're going from Rhylanor to Porozlo. You're there...." even without caring much for in-system travel times.....
So - as often - we are approaching Traveller up to surface contact, discussing about high resolution details, based on vague hints of the Traveller documentation. We develop nifty theories about some cool details.
Well and the details disappear anyway, as we step a bit away for actual gameplay.
Life is tough. But that fun.
Anyway it still would be very interesting (IMHO) to have a Global Unified Jump Theory, which incorporates and respects all the given "facts" from the rules and fills up some holes for the nifty players...
Best regards,
TE
One of the ideas for traveller navigation that might prove useful in the long run is the concept that high navigation skills DO lower the time required in Jump.
Here is one way of doing it...
A normal success in navigation means that you will target your exit point in jump space for a given "TIME" as well as location. This takes the standard time of 168 hours. For each reduction in applicable skill on navigation, you can reduce the actual planned time in jump space to a percentage equal to 2% per point you reduce your navigational skill by. Someone with Navigation 5 can reduce their planned time in jump space by 10%. They only get this bonus if they make their navigation roll at Straight 8+. If one fails to make their navigational roll, they increase the time duration in jump space by 2% for every point they missed their roll by.
Task takes 10 minutes per course plot - which means that a wise navigator will pre-plot his course repeatedly. If he takes the time to do three course plots, he rolls 3 times and records his results. The GM smiles saying "Ok, you want to see if you can pick out the best course you created - roll an uncertain task difficult, against your navigation skill." or what ever the GM-speak regarding tasks are <g> (I'm a GURPS player by nature)
The idea here is that you can never reduce your navigation skill to lower than Navigation 0. The idea is also that the duration of jump space is not random - if you succeed at your navigational skill, you will hit where you aim WHEN you aim. As a consequence of this - you KNOW when you are expected to come out of jump. If your navigation is counting on 158 hours of journey within Jump space, if you were successful in your navigation - then it will be 158 hours when you finally DO exit. The only time it will take longer than 158 hours is when you tried for 158 hours, and instead got 174 hours (or worse).
I've got an interesting question that I will ask on another thread <evil grin>
Here is one way of doing it...
A normal success in navigation means that you will target your exit point in jump space for a given "TIME" as well as location. This takes the standard time of 168 hours. For each reduction in applicable skill on navigation, you can reduce the actual planned time in jump space to a percentage equal to 2% per point you reduce your navigational skill by. Someone with Navigation 5 can reduce their planned time in jump space by 10%. They only get this bonus if they make their navigation roll at Straight 8+. If one fails to make their navigational roll, they increase the time duration in jump space by 2% for every point they missed their roll by.
Task takes 10 minutes per course plot - which means that a wise navigator will pre-plot his course repeatedly. If he takes the time to do three course plots, he rolls 3 times and records his results. The GM smiles saying "Ok, you want to see if you can pick out the best course you created - roll an uncertain task difficult, against your navigation skill." or what ever the GM-speak regarding tasks are <g> (I'm a GURPS player by nature)
The idea here is that you can never reduce your navigation skill to lower than Navigation 0. The idea is also that the duration of jump space is not random - if you succeed at your navigational skill, you will hit where you aim WHEN you aim. As a consequence of this - you KNOW when you are expected to come out of jump. If your navigation is counting on 158 hours of journey within Jump space, if you were successful in your navigation - then it will be 158 hours when you finally DO exit. The only time it will take longer than 158 hours is when you tried for 158 hours, and instead got 174 hours (or worse).
I've got an interesting question that I will ask on another thread <evil grin>
M
Malenfant
Guest
I'd go the other way myself actually - instead of trying to figure out how Jump works from all the conflicting/nonsensical rules, I'd toss the rules out of the window and start again from scratch to get something sensible and consistent instead. Start with knowing a specific end result that you want to achieve and then figure out how to get to it.
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Arg, failed in another senity check ...:\
Now, this all brings me back to something I saw in the T20 rules.
It said that you got a series of jump plots that to the computer were all equally valid, and it requires some "skill" that the nav tech has to pick from among those possible plots, the most "efficient" as far as the computer could decipher these plots were all exactly the same. From this it seems there is something beyond pure math involved, or the computer would indeed be able to pick the most accurate plot. What that other determination was is never stated.
Any one of those plots would bring you in to your destination accurately to with in the 168 hours +- and the target distance.
The navigators skill allows them to pick a specific plot that is more accurate that the others.
When this came up in another thread, I conjectured several possibilities. So sort of “connection” to jumpspace that the nav tech has that allows him to assess variables that don’t translate into realspace math, or some sort of psi effect or metaphysical effect. Regardless, at least by t20 rules, people have a skill at jumpspace navigation that cannot be replicated in a machine. Since it is implied that Nav skill somehow plays a role, that quality can be quantified and trained for in some fashion.
“efficient” was not defined, but there are only two or three possibilities.
Exact time in jump, or distance from target coordinates.
Frankly since target coordinates depend on time, they would be all the same in my mind. The closer you can plan the time in jump, the closer you will be to the point you want when you come back to realspace.
My interpretation of all of this was that if you can control your time in jump space and your target in realspace, a high skill nav tech could, at least on average, decrease the time in jump, and the travel time to the destination.
Consistently shaving significant time from both would potentially gain an extra jump, possible each year. I would have to run some numbers, but save time in jump, save time traveling from the jump point to port, and save time in port – efficient cargo handling, and brokering probably only really possible with a reliable ground crew that stays there, and a very skilled merchant line could get closer to that magical 3 jumps per month.
I will dig out my t20 book this weekend and find those references, but that was what I worked out.
It said that you got a series of jump plots that to the computer were all equally valid, and it requires some "skill" that the nav tech has to pick from among those possible plots, the most "efficient" as far as the computer could decipher these plots were all exactly the same. From this it seems there is something beyond pure math involved, or the computer would indeed be able to pick the most accurate plot. What that other determination was is never stated.
Any one of those plots would bring you in to your destination accurately to with in the 168 hours +- and the target distance.
The navigators skill allows them to pick a specific plot that is more accurate that the others.
When this came up in another thread, I conjectured several possibilities. So sort of “connection” to jumpspace that the nav tech has that allows him to assess variables that don’t translate into realspace math, or some sort of psi effect or metaphysical effect. Regardless, at least by t20 rules, people have a skill at jumpspace navigation that cannot be replicated in a machine. Since it is implied that Nav skill somehow plays a role, that quality can be quantified and trained for in some fashion.
“efficient” was not defined, but there are only two or three possibilities.
Exact time in jump, or distance from target coordinates.
Frankly since target coordinates depend on time, they would be all the same in my mind. The closer you can plan the time in jump, the closer you will be to the point you want when you come back to realspace.
My interpretation of all of this was that if you can control your time in jump space and your target in realspace, a high skill nav tech could, at least on average, decrease the time in jump, and the travel time to the destination.
Consistently shaving significant time from both would potentially gain an extra jump, possible each year. I would have to run some numbers, but save time in jump, save time traveling from the jump point to port, and save time in port – efficient cargo handling, and brokering probably only really possible with a reliable ground crew that stays there, and a very skilled merchant line could get closer to that magical 3 jumps per month.
I will dig out my t20 book this weekend and find those references, but that was what I worked out.
