Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by far-trader:
So there! As I've said before it can be done under the per jump rates and Book 2 rules. You just have to design the ship properly and choose the right crew and route.
That may even be true, but it misses the point. It's not enough that one carefully designed ship with a carefully selected crew can make it on a carefully selected route. To work, the system must allow all ships run in a reasonable manner to be able to make it along all routes. Note that I'm not talking about those fledgeling lines where 9 out of 10 go under after a while. I'm talking about any route run by an established company. If they can't make money running ships along a particular route, why would they run ships along that route?
Hans </font>[/QUOTE]No, I don't think I missed the point since I was making one or two
We have a set of rules for a trade system and a set of rules for the construction and purchase of ships meant to operate under those trade rules.
The two CAN work together.
The problems noted come about because official designs have failed to follow the rules.
It IS enough that one carefully designed ship with a carefully selected crew can make it on a carefully selected route. That is the requirement for a loan and if it can be done it will be done and a sloppily designed ship with a carelessly thrown together crew that CAN'T make it on the same route (or ANY route) will NEVER be financed under the loan rules. There may be other ways such a ship comes to be built but it won't be as a new mortgaged free merchant.
More to the point, my ship isn't designed to make it "on a carefully selected route" but rather on the only type of trade the rules imply is left for free-traders, that is the worlds off the mains, chiefly all the not class A and B starport systems. Beyond that it was built to run full capacity for the average population roll. It should almost always be turing away passengers (though not always high passengers) and turning down cargo lots. As long as it avoids the usual bad places to trade, low pop worlds and red zones, it should do fine as a free-trader.
I DO believe the system WILL "allow all ships run in a reasonable manner to be able to make it along all routes" provided such ships are properly designed and operated and the tailored to the route. I also DO NOT see any official designs that actually do this and can only blame laziness or creative whim in designing them. This is what causes all the problems with the whole stupid "the trade system can't work and must be wrong" discussions.
That 9 out of 10 and 99 out of a 100 in Book 7 strikes me as a simple off the cuff and not thought out line for the sole purspose of color text. I'm sure it wasn't meant to be statistical except in the "lies, damned lies, and statistics" sense. At that kind of failure rate I doubt anyone would undertake it in the first place and no one would back you if you did. Of course using the official designs those numbers are probably quite optimistic. I'm not sure you could find 1 in 1,000,000 routes where an official design with more than J1 could make a profit.
Originally posted by rancke:
If they can't make money running ships along a particular route, why would they run ships along that route?
They would not. I agree. The point is they can't with the ships as designed but probably could if they were. It's not the rules that are broken but the use (or misuse) of them that has led to the problems. It's not bad enough that most of the official designs are broken in one or more ways but they often aren't even designed to work within the rules.
I don't blame player's and refs for wondering WTF when they are told the trade rules are per jump and then they are given an official desing like the Empress Marava A2 and there isn't a chance they can make the payments.
I do wonder WTH was in the desiner's mind when they came up with it though and tried to present it as a workable design. Why not be honest and describe it as "skip bait". Tell the players up front "you get this cool ship that no one can turn a profit with so you should just run for the border and adventure, maybe turn pirate, and forget about trying to play honest merchants".
I'm not saying player's shouldn't have cool ships if that's what is wanted by the group. I am saying they should not be told through official material that "here is a merchant ship with loan payments you have to make under the trade rules" when in fact it can't.
That is the story of the official standard A2, and in fact all the official merchant ships with more than J1. They can only work under heavy government subsidies.
My point in making the above ship was to show that there will be A2 type ships that can operate under the trade rules. Any ship that needs to operate under some other tweak of the rules can't compete with it. Therefore they will not be built, people will likely build the one that makes the most profit. So even in a per parsec trade tweak my ship will outperform the standard A2 by an order and no one will build the standard A2 except as an "adventuring" ship and it seems unlikely that a creditor would fund such under a business model loan. Some other form of loan perhaps, but not the standard.
And don't get me started on the standard "charter" rates, that is a rule that just makes no sense at all and should be ignored. Charter should be whatever the market will bear or no one will be building those Safari Ships either, and no merchant with a working ship would ever take a charter unless he likes spacing credits.
<sigh>
Sorry for the length, it bugs me more than I should let it.