Nope. A later decision changed the paint scheme, because otherwise, the Type A2 makes no economic sense as described (as working a route).
That change seems to be in 1984...
Cargo costs
- Thread starter Enoki
- Start date
- Status
Nope. A later decision changed the paint scheme, because otherwise, the Type A2 makes no economic sense as described (as working a route).
That change seems to be in 1984...
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Aramis, I looked along this thread, but I don't think you addressed these matters? If you did, can you point me to the response? Thanks!
I'd like to add to S4 and kilemall's pontsthe matter of unrefined fuel -- which is only available at A and B class starports. Given the hazards of unrefined fuel I assume:
- Starships with higher jump drives will bypass worlds with C or less class starports if they can make a steady run between worlds with refined fuel.
- Starships with Jump Drives of 1 or 2 (especially 1) will be limited their efforts to stick only with refined fuel, often making the runs to worlds that need service for cargo and passengers that larger drive ships never reach.
But that means the these smaller drive ships are picking up the risks listed above the larger drive ships are not.
Has the analysis done on this matter account for all these matters? Or are they usually ignore when crunching numbers?
In a related matter:
I agree with S4, Kilemall, and Mike on the main issue of this thread. However, I'm curious about the underlying logic about the "economics" some people are talking about in terms of cost and time for lower Jump Drive ships vs higher jump ships and the assumption that taking a Jump 1 ship should automatically cost less than a faster ship.
The issue of refined and unrefined fuel alone will be enough to make anyone off those routes be thankful for the Type A merchant that comes along on an irregular basis if they really need to get somewhere. And most Jump 3 ships will never bother visiting most worlds in a subsector due to unrefined fuel, let alone the threats of piracy found in C, D, E, and X starport systems.
Given all of the above in this post, it seems to me that one does not always have the luxury of taking a Jump-3 ship. The fact is, getting from one planet to another (and then another and another) when one is off the beaten track will depend on people willing to go to places lots of people won't go to, taking risks most people won't take, and accepting the fact that because one is off the beaten track it will take longer and be more costly simply because of the "supply" element of supply and demand when it comes to starship availability.
But those are my thoughts on the matter. I would love to hear others in the context of the points above.
Last edited:
Those are two separate and distinct questions. What is best for playing the game (in terms of roleplay potential) may not be what makes the most sense economically.
Economically, the baseline shipping price per ton of cargo per parsec will be set by the operating and capital costs of the most efficient ship available for that particular run, including risk premiums. This can actually be calculated, and has been. It's a bit tedious to do, however.
For playing the game, anything that makes the players take chances and deal with the unexpected is helpful -- and declaring generic cargo to be at best only marginally profitable can accomplish that.
Heh, far as variable cargo rate costs are concerned, everything COULD be variable- maintenance costs, starport fees, fuel costs, crew pay, passage prices, etc.
At MTU fuel way station Faust Vegas, the refined fuel is sold at below cost- for a requirement of docking for 24 hours. The station makes it up by being a sin tourist destination, and a sort of 'nest of spies' situation to boot.
At MTU fuel way station Faust Vegas, the refined fuel is sold at below cost- for a requirement of docking for 24 hours. The station makes it up by being a sin tourist destination, and a sort of 'nest of spies' situation to boot.
Non-optimized ships can hold their own in cases where the cost of optimization (ie, loss of mass production and standardized ship discounts) raises the costs to operate. Just to be pedantic.
But then, one should also point out that fuel prices will vary.
The rules as written are a collection of gross simplifications for playability.
So... median
Standard assumed passenger load is pop 5 to 5; 3.5H 2.5M, 10.5L
Cargo load is 5 lots of an average of 17.5 tons, for 87.5 tons available; Sufficient to fill an A or A2.
An A needs KCr85 for salary and payment, plus KCr15 for fuel, and KCr22 for LS, it can carry 82 tons, but will normally carry 80 (due to no split), plus 3H 2M and 10 L. so income is 80+30+16+10=KCr136 median income. Expenses are KCr122. Spec can drastically improve this if the right DM's exist. If you have a mail contract, add KCr20 income (to KCr156). Boom. Profitable. Up to 23 empty tons can be absorbed
Bk2-81 5-5 is 107.5+Mail mean cargo, same passenger load. size of loads makes for less secure fill. But unused SR are not charged for, either.
Type R's need a higher volume to work than the median 5, but due to subsidies... the KCr81 required (Fuel, salaries, and LS) can easily be met, and return a profit to the operator even on a median pop-5 TL7 pair. YOu lose half the income, so KCr78, under B2-77).
By posting for two jumps out, however, you can fill better... because it doesn't say you can't, and that doubles the available lots.... you're on a route, anyway...
Withe the right skills, the one good spec lot every 2-3 jumps on route can more than make up for the shortfalls.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Thanks for that!
So, in terms of the concerns mentioned by S4, kilemall, and myself, as well as some others I'm adding now:
- pirate encounters
- misjumsps and drive failure due to unrefined fuel
- delays and recovery times for recovering from injuries (average healing time 17 days for Wounded characters)
Does the assumption of the profit you outline (which seems to make sense to me) factor in these other expenses or delays that are presumed to be a part of the game?
Last edited:
I don't know that I think of my point as a concern.
If we look at the game design as a whole, with a LOT of content baked in and as I theorize an actual path/adventure to upgrading your 'ship as character', that a lot of the game content are are chances to win big or also have 'money sinks', they are deliberate, and that when we don't apply the WHOLE design or substitutes, players can find themselves much richer or poorer then the design intends.
So, more about look at all the intersecting subsystems before settling on an 'answer'.
Which to me is an important subskill of the ref/ATU/tinkerer, to make informed rules choices.
If we look at the game design as a whole, with a LOT of content baked in and as I theorize an actual path/adventure to upgrading your 'ship as character', that a lot of the game content are are chances to win big or also have 'money sinks', they are deliberate, and that when we don't apply the WHOLE design or substitutes, players can find themselves much richer or poorer then the design intends.
So, more about look at all the intersecting subsystems before settling on an 'answer'.
Which to me is an important subskill of the ref/ATU/tinkerer, to make informed rules choices.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
I agree with you about all of this.
Which is why I am asking these questions. Questions not only about the expenses that aramis did not mention in his analysis, but also about the availability of Jump-3 starships that many people on this thread seem take for granted but I do not. (These questions are found in post #102 above).
When I used the word "concern" I did not mean "a problem for the game" but only in the context of Aramis' analysis, which assumes that trader crew will be in the black, if not flush, all the time with ease.
I think things like limited availability of refined fuel (which can lead to misjumsp and damaged drives if one has to lean on unrefined fuel, and makes certain routes and jump unpalatable those ships that can avoid them), time lost to injuries, repairs needed for encounters with pirates and other combatants GREAT for the game... for all the reasons you stated in your post.
Last edited:
Hard to readily assess, as starport affects encounters, but not revenue-related items in 1E.
It's very easy to make the income; it's not as easy to keep the ship safe.
IN CT 1E, the pirate is on 12, and the throw is 2d±PortMod A=+6, B=+4, C=+2, D=+1, E=–2 X=-4.
18: Patrol §
16-17: Yacht
15: Sub. Merchant (R)
14: Patrol §
13: Sub. Merchant (R)
12: Pirate §
9—11: Free Trader
≤8: No encounter.
§ Patrol and Pirates subtable: 2d6
8-12: "Cruiser" (Type C)
7: Yacht
2-6: Scout
In your typical C-port, that's a nat 10, for 3/36 or 1/12...
Nat 2: immediate attach
≤3: Hostile, attack on 5+
4: Hostile, attack on 8+
5: Hostile, attack if provoked
6+ neutral to friendly, non-threat even from pirate.
None of the mods to reactions make sense to apply.
The text does mention the reaction roll indirectly... when talking about friendly or better free traders...
And any hostile, pirate or not, is a threat and can attack.
So, on any encounter, the odds of being attacked are 1/36 + (2/36 * 30/36) + (3/36 * 15/36) = 141/1296. (≅10.9%)
If system pop B+, there's a DM-1, making that 1/36 + (5/36 * 30/36) + (4/36 * 15/36) = 246/1296 (≅19.0%)
Pirate adds 4/36 in Pop 0-A systems, which is likely to attack only if the target it weak... In a type A, that means type C so 4/36*15/36= 60/1296 added, for 201/1296 ≅15.5%
We'll ignore the unrollable pop B+...
Odds of encounter per "entry to system"
| SP | NP Chance | Pirate Chance | Cbt Chance |
| A | 30/36 | 5/36 | 5235/46656 ≅ 11.2% |
| B | 27/36 | 5/36 | 4812/46656 ≅ 10.3% |
| C | 21 | 3/36 | 3564/46656 ≅ 7.6% |
| D | 15 | 2/36 | 2517/46656 ≅ 5.4% |
| E | 3/36 | 0 | 423/46656 ≅ 0.9% |
| X | 0 | 0 | 0/46656 ≅ 0% |
Noting that we don't go to X ports in a trader, because there's no place to trade...
6/35
9/35 = B
11/35 = C
4/35 = D
5/35 = E
| SP | Port Chance | Cbt Chance | Odds of Trouble[/td |
| A | 6/35 | 5235/46656 ≅ 11.2% | 31410/1632960 ≅ 1.9% [/td |
| B | 9/35 | 4812/46656 ≅ 10.3% | 43308/1632960 ≅ 2.7% [/td |
| C | 11/35 | 3564/46656 ≅ 7.6% | 39204/1632960 ≅ 2.4% [/td |
| D | 4/35 | 2517/46656 ≅ 5.4% | 10068/1632960 ≅ 0.6% [/td |
| E | 5/35 | 423/46656 ≅ 0.9% | 2115/1632960 ≅ 0.1% [/td |
| 126106/1632960 ≅ 7.7% |
So now, figure by 25 jumps per year at 2 rolls each... (92.3%^50)= 98% chance of at least one combat per year. And most of those will be short - 1 good hit should dissuade a non-desperate (nat 2) pirate.
CT-77 is the "easy" one to do the math on...
Like wise one good hit should pretty much send any struggling merchant deep in to the red. Could a merchant make a living getting taking "one good hit" per year, plus any other cargo losses?
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
And in addition wouldn't a good spec lot be a magnet for thieves?
I bring this up not to dog pile, but because it seems that the adventure driven, dangerous environment implied by many of the _Traveller_ rules contain notions the Referee should be acting on -- even if there is not always an obvious rule lever in the text.
I bring this up not to dog pile, but because it seems that the adventure driven, dangerous environment implied by many of the _Traveller_ rules contain notions the Referee should be acting on -- even if there is not always an obvious rule lever in the text.
Yes - the cost of repairing one hit varies by item.
Cost of repairing an item in flight (CT-77) is 2d x10% of new cost; if that's a sandcaster, (KCr250), the cost can be as low as KCr25; that's 2.5 jumps worth of profit on a nearly full A.
A hit to the MD, you're out MCr4...
But note also: payment is made before shipping out; the question is, how much can a pirate claim in cargo? 20 tons on an S,
So, if you're on the hook for the cargo value (averaging KCr5-10 per Td), you're only out about KCr100 to KCr200.
A type C's 80 tons can clean out a Type A.
In the real world, shippers and carriers both insure the cargos... in the OTU, is there pirate insurance? probably.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Jack Burton: I'm gonna tell you about an accident, and I don't wanna hear "act of God"!
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Yes, a hit could be as low as KCr25. And if the Jump Drive is hit it could be as high as MCr110. That's a huge jump. And anyone taking anything in-between could be scrambling for cash (sometimes with their ship dry-docked) for a while.
So while a crew might be socking it away, it seems to me that they better be building a solid nest-egg for that time things go south. And if they don't, get involved with some high-risk/high-reward scheme. (Which is, of course, awesome.)
I guess I don't see merchants having an easy time of it once one takes in all the conditions that could come into play. I can't shake the feeling that you take a sunnier outlook on the risks involved than I do.
As for insurance, I suppose. Given the times and distances involved the money certainly won't be coming quickly -- and so the crew is delayed. Either they are not earning money at all (if the ship is dry-docked) or not traveling with the ship at 100% (which adds further risk). Delays means loss of dengue.
Moreover, if the crew takes it upon itself to travel off main trade routes I can easily see some claims not valid. Which won't bother many traders. But we're talking about PC adventurers here (or at least I am) which means more risks for bigger rewards.
Finally, if we eyeball a premium of .005% of the ship's value that's KCr185 per year for a Type A, more for other ships. And if we assume a deductible of 2% then a drive repair might end up costing hundreds of thousands of Credits. Even with insurance a big chunk of change!
At this point we have to ask, "What are the PCs after?" Because if they have a MCr2 nest-egg ready for an emergency, what more do they need? What are they trying to accomplish? At MCr2 a crew of 6 each could cash out at KCr333. Spread out over thirty years KCr11 a year. That's high living for three decades. Either that's enough for them or it isn't. Which means building a nest-egg without losing it along the way is definitely a goal... and one that could work out well... or not. And if their goal is something else (Revenge, Building a Shipping Empire, Conquering a World, Toppling a Royal House) the money is only there to make sure they can keep pursuing that goal.
Either way the insurance can help... but can't stop a debilitating delay. And the risk of that hangs over the crew if they don't have the money ready and in the bank to handle emergencies.
Last edited:
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
As a side-note, I found this fascinating post about Packet-Boat scams in the 18th century, which seems pertinent in regard to the jaundiced eye insurers might cast on ships trying to claim against lost cargo or even damage. We know insurance companies will do everything they can not to pay out. I see no reason why this would not change in the future.
All of it is grist for the adventure mill in my book. Imagine the PCs needing to track down and capture someone will to confess his crew actually did attack and steal the goods from the PCs ship! Awesome stuff! But it all fits, in my view, with the lack of ease of a merchant crews life amid the stars.
All of it is grist for the adventure mill in my book. Imagine the PCs needing to track down and capture someone will to confess his crew actually did attack and steal the goods from the PCs ship! Awesome stuff! But it all fits, in my view, with the lack of ease of a merchant crews life amid the stars.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Yes, absolutely. Matters can go many different ways -- depending on choices and dice rolls.
Ohhh... that's BEAUTIFUL...
My Whipsnadian synapses are absolutely sizzling. Thank you so much for that link!
- Status
Similar threads
