AstroSynthesis v2.0
- Thread starter Enoff
- Start date
It may make Traveller in 3D possible as well.
I have the trial version of Astrosynthesis and am considering getting the full deal.
IFOS (It's full of stars) is another program that has some of that capability.
This is actually my biggest gripe with traveller - because of the difficulty with 3D we're stuck with an OTU that's 2D. Software could change that.
I have the trial version of Astrosynthesis and am considering getting the full deal.
IFOS (It's full of stars) is another program that has some of that capability.
This is actually my biggest gripe with traveller - because of the difficulty with 3D we're stuck with an OTU that's 2D. Software could change that.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Software only changes that if you can figure a decent model for Jump Drive that works in 3d and you can get the proper spread of systems. When you go 3D with Traveller you either greatly expand the number of systems in the 3rd Imperium, or greatly reduce communication time. You can do it with a decent jump drive formula but you would have to scrap the rich History of the OTU, as it doesn't work.
BetterThanLife - Sounds like you've thought this trough a bit.
I like alternate TU settings along with OTU. ATUs don't have the same depth as OTU, but they're not limited by that depth either.
Personally I think 3D would be an enhancement. But as you said, density issues are alot different.
Enoff
SOC-13
The software runs quite well on my old home PC.
I was having fun testing some 3rd party screen capture software to make animations. The animator in the software seems a little constrained.
Takes some time to setup a specific star map.
From another website I got all the 3d star information for H. Beam Piper's Terro-Federation.
I was having fun testing some 3rd party screen capture software to make animations. The animator in the software seems a little constrained.
Takes some time to setup a specific star map.
From another website I got all the 3d star information for H. Beam Piper's Terro-Federation.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
BetterThanLife - Sounds like you've thought this trough a bit.
I like alternate TU settings along with OTU. ATUs don't have the same depth as OTU, but they're not limited by that depth either.
Personally I think 3D would be an enhancement. But as you said, density issues are alot different. </font>[/QUOTE]We ran a thread on it. I gave up after a while. The closest that we came up with for a jump formula was Jump distance = (Jn + 2) * 0.6 pc which would cross an equivalent sized Imperium in the same time frame for X-Boats. Yet also, in general keep the Jump 1 and Jump 2 engines viable.
If you adopt that Jump Formula then you run into the Density issue. As in the Traveller rules only a Jump-1 ship is inherently profitable. In a typical sector a Jump-2 ship can get to almost every system, eventually and a Jump-3 ship can get to everywhere, generally in a straight line. You also have to set it up so that a Jump-4+ ship won't just blow through a Sector like it wasn't there.
Jump-1 Merchants have to stay viable, equivalents to Mains or large clusters, have to exist. Clusters are important and where most of the trade will be located.
Like I said I gave up on the concept as I couldn't make it work and keep the 3rd Imperium. If I wanted to write the History of the Universe I would probably use a different Economic basis and a different Hyper Drive.
BetterThanLife - Sounds like you've thought this trough a bit.
-clip-
Personally I think 3D would be an enhancement. But as you said, density issues are alot different. </font>[/QUOTE]We ran a thread on it. I gave up after a while. -clip-
Like I said I gave up on the concept as I couldn't make it work and keep the 3rd Imperium. -clip- </font>[/QUOTE]Thanks for the link to the other thread. I stepped through it and I pretty much agree, Cannon OTU locations and economics can't be salvaged if the only mod you make is 3D.
An alternate TU would need different rules for commerce - but if you get rid of the imperium, that should be a given anyway. I still think the software is great and that using it for 3D traveller would be way cool - but I also agree you can't really shoe horn the OTU or OTU economics into it.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Where it would come in handy is if we ever got the Honorverse going. (That is a 3D Universe from the beginning.)
Scott Martin
SOC-13
I'm considering an alternate universe built from the ground up: what are peoples general opinions of this software package?
Scott Martin
Scott Martin
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
It is well written. It has good support. If you learn the scripting language you can get it to turn out a Universe fairly close to what you are looking for. And if you have Fractal Terrains, CC2 and Cosmographer you can turn out Traveller style world maps all day long. That combination will do most of what H&E 2 was intended to do, but in 3D.
You will need to script it to put your populations where you want them instead of where it thinks they should be, and to add things like Government Codes, etc.
On a reasonable machine it will run up a 200 parsec by 200 parsec section of the galaxy in less than an hour.
Scott: Same here - Just got the full version of Astrosynthesis.(Christmas present - we tend to handle those on Christmas eve.) I liked what I saw in the trail version and I'm happy with the commercial software so far.
At this stage I'm manually editing the properties to get the populations etc where I want them and entering UWP data in the notes section. Maps aren't traveller style because I don't have the Fractural Terrain mapper.
BetterThanLife - How would one go about learning the scripting you're talking about? I'm particularly interested in being able to map sector interfaces - ie the campaign gets to the edge of the star map - what lies beyond? I know how to do this manually with a lot of effort and potential error - would learning the scripting allow this to be done by the computer?
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I have never done any of the scripting. So I am probably not the person to ask on that score. Once you get to the edge of the map, AS2 allows you to merge maps so you can just generate more map. (Or simpler, generate more map than you think you might ever use plus a little more before you ever start and just give your players a small part of it.
)
Someone on the nbos mailing list had a script that was supposed to generate Traveller stats for worlds but it has been about a year and I can't find the post. There are scripting tutorials and sample scripts. (Again I am not sure where.)
Drop a post in the nbos mail list I am sure someone can point you in the correct direction.
Someone on the nbos mailing list had a script that was supposed to generate Traveller stats for worlds but it has been about a year and I can't find the post. There are scripting tutorials and sample scripts. (Again I am not sure where.)
Drop a post in the nbos mail list I am sure someone can point you in the correct direction.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Aside from the fact that you will have to heavily modify the Traveller rules to make it playable, only because Traveller actually relies heavily on a 2D map as the basis for the rules. The software itself is solid and very user friendly.
Scott Martin
SOC-13
Thus the comment on an alternate universe: I have no problem with rebuilding rules sets to get what I want...
Scott Martin
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Thus the comment on an alternate universe: I have no problem with rebuilding rules sets to get what I want...
Scott Martin </font>[/QUOTE]I got that. I was trying to point out the software, for this endeavor, isn't the weak link. The Traveller rules and their reliance, at the very core, on a 2D universe is the weak link. Economics, Starship design and the History of the Universe will all have to be replaced or heavily modified.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Ok - I follow the points on economics and history. These are part of the "setting" and as such I have little trouble changing these in an alternate TU (setting is different anyway.)
I don't follow how starship design is affected. What am I missing?
Steve B </font>[/QUOTE]Jump Drive is based on a 2D map with a rather specific stellar density. On a typical Real Universe map, or one generated by AS, which will generate close to what we know of the Universe, the Jump Drive is not condusive to proper exploration and travel in the Universe.
You need a different mechanic for Interstellar drive. Jump Drive and its fuel is the most expensive in terms of cost and space in a Traveller designed starship so making changes to that will easily require a revamp of Starship design.
Not meaning to be dense about this, but I'm still missing it. If we had a ship that took up 15% of it's volume to travel a parsec in a week, and decided to take up 45% instead - then we could get a route to nearly any star within nearly 20 ly's within one months travel time. I'm not sure how that qualifies as needing redesigned.
When and if we figure out how to travel FTL ITRW, I doubt this will be the method - but then that's the case for anything we postulate right now. If we could get a drive with the specs of traveller jump drives (assuming 3D aiming) - it would open up much of local space.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Not meaning to be dense about this, but I'm still missing it. If we had a ship that took up 15% of it's volume to travel a parsec in a week, and decided to take up 45% instead - then we could get a route to nearly any star within nearly 20 ly's within one months travel time. I'm not sure how that qualifies as needing redesigned.
When and if we figure out how to travel FTL ITRW, I doubt this will be the method - but then that's the case for anything we postulate right now. If we could get a drive with the specs of traveller jump drives (assuming 3D aiming) - it would open up much of local space. </font>[/QUOTE]The problem is starship design is based on the Traveller idea of Jump Drive and for that matter travel time between normal stops. While Jump drive definition can be modified using something similar to the formula that was mentioned before, that formula is far from perfect in terms of actual use. Since Jump Drive is the most expensive and biggest volume item on the starship, changing the Jump Drive changes the rules, and hits several items based on the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Scott Martin
SOC-13
Eeeyup, that thar core engine she's needin some tunin'...
I guess I have less issues with this area than most "grognards" since MTU (since the early '80s) diverged so heavily from the OTU. I'm currently working on a campaign setting which will work best in 3-D not 2-D environment (with "interpenetrating" political groups)
It's a lot easier to stop "incursions" if you're dealing with a 2-D universe, but in 3-space "tendrils" of territory can wrap "above" and "below" your political boundries without entering them and causing a war, which can result in some very bizzarre borders, much like the "arms" in 2300 AD.
I also use some astrological constraints that map better to 3D than 2D space (Shoals, Reefs and a few others not available for players to speculate on...)
Scott Martin
