Discussing the vanilla CT combat system...

[Supplement Four]

But really, appeals to 1001 Characters, Supplement 13 or any other lst of pregenerated characters is wasted on me.

Two questions, then:

1: When I (or anyone) generate characters using the exact rules as mentioned in LBB1, I get characters representative of what is found in 1001 Characters. When I (or anyone) generate characters using the exact rules as mentioned in LBB4, I get characters representatibe of what is found in Sup 13.

The question is: Why do you get different results?



2: Sup 13 specifically states that the characters in it were created using LBB4 rules. Sup 13 specifically states that the characters in it are suitable for use as player characters.

The question is: Why do you think the authors of that book are lying?

 

[Supplement Four]

Marines are more interesting. Book 1 Marines survive 72% of the time. An END of 8+ gets a +2, so I'll assume no modifier. Book 4 Marine life is more dangerous due to having Ship's Troops assignments instead of several Garrison assignments. They survive each 4 year term about 87% of the time.

So Marine life is actually more dangerous in Book 1 than in Book 2 for most Marines.

Incorrect.

Let's assume an average character: 777777

An average Marine, under Book 1, has a 72% chance of survival each term.

Going two terms, he's got a 52% chance of survival.

Going three terms, he's got a 37% chance of survival.



(BTW...see the decreasing percentages? THAT'S why smart players will end character generation early...because you've only got to fail once, and your character is dead. If you like your character, would you subject him to a 48% chance of dying on Term 2? A 63% chance of dying on Term 3?)



Book 4 is a little more complicated, as you say. But, it's easy to work out.

First, we make a weighted average of the survial throws needed each year.

Raids occur 8% of the time and have a Surival Throw of 6+
Counter Insurgencies occur 17% of the time and have a Survial Throw of 5+
Internal Security occurs 11% of the time and has a Surival Throw of 4+
Ship's Troops occurs 28% of the time and has a Survival Throw of 4+
Garrison Duty occurs 17% of the time and has a Survial Throw of 2+
Training occurs 11% of the time and has a Surival Throw of 2+
Police Actions occur 8% of the time and have a Survival Throw of 5+

Therefore, each year, the average Marine must beat a Survival Throw of 4+. So, that's a 92% chance of survival each year.

Year 1: 92%
Year 2: 85%
Year 3: 78%
Year 4: 72%

As you can see, for Term 1, the average Marine has about the same chance of survival as the Book 1 character.

Year 5: 66%
Year 6: 61%
Year 7: 56%
Year 8: 52%

Hey! Look at that! It's the same as for Book 1 characters!

Year 9: 47%
Year 10: 43%
Year 11: 40%
Year 12: 37%

Again...exactly the same as Book 1 characters. Those GDW guys aren't so dumb after all, are they.




I must admit, by eyeballing it before, I would thought the Book 4 characters had a higher chance of passing away over the Book 1 characters.

As my own math proves, that assumption was incorrect.



But...the point of my statement stands...

If you've got a hot character, then why tempt the fates and get him killed? A marine character only has a 37% chance of surviving three terms, on average, during chargen.

That's a 63% chance he'll be killed and not played.

If you've survived through Term 2, with a Combat Rifleman-4 and high stats...why would you want to go on to Term 3 and risk killing him?

Again, only a fool would select Book 1 over Book 4 (assuming he knew the probabilities.

I'm going to have to agree with that, given the analysis.

You know what I need to do? I need to do the same analysis on the number of skills gained each term between the two systems.

The results may surprise both of us.

 

[Supplement Four]

You know what I need to do? I need to do the same analysis on the number of skills gained each term between the two systems.

The results may surprise both of us.

Now that we know the survival in either Book 1 or Book 4 is about the same, let's go ahead and compare the acquisition of skills.

We'll do the same average Marine, since I've already worked out some of the math.

Raids occur 8% of the time; Skill on 5+
Counter Insurgencies occur 17% of the time; Skill on 8+
Internal Security occurs 11% of the time; Skill on 13+
Ship's Troops occurs 28% of the time; Skill on 6+
Garrison Duty occurs 17% of the time; Skill on 13+
Training occurs 11% of the time; Skill on 7+
Police Actions occur 8% of the time; Skill on 7+

Weighted average of gaining a skill is a throw of 8+ per year.

Thus, 42% of 4 is 1.68.

That means, the maine will average about 2 skills per term using Book 4.

Term 1: 2 Skills, 72% chance of survival
Term 2: 3 Skills, 52% chance of survival
Term 3: 5 Skills, 37% chance of survival

Term 4: 7 Skills
Term 5: 8 Skills
Term 6: 10 Skills
Term 7: 12 Skills

*Actual skill totals will be a bit higher due to the effects of Special Duty, Mustering Out, and such.



(BTW, is this your experience with Book 4 characters? It is mine. And, it's representative of what you see in Sup 13.

If this isn't representative of your Book 4 characters, then I do believe you aren't following the rules as-written somewhere.)



Now, let's look a Book 1. It's easy to figure.

The Marine receives 2 skills for the 1st term, plus 1 skill for every additional term.

Term 1: 2 Skills, 72% chance of survival
Term 2: 3 Skills, 52% chance of survival
Term 3: 4 Skills, 37% chance of survival

Term 4: 5 Skills
Term 5: 6 Skills
Term 6: 7 Skills
Term 7: 8 Skills

*Actual skill totals will be a bit higher due to the effects of Automatic Skills, Mustering Out, and such.


What does this tell us?

Interesting. I would have sworn that Book 4 characters average more skills than Book 1 characters...but that isn't the case, is it?

The longer the characters are in the career, Book 4 will eventually take Book 1. But...again...don't forget the Surival Rule. Because either character (from either Book 1 or Book 4) only has a 37% chance of Surviving through past Term 3. After Term 3, it gets a lot worse, and it is highly unlikely a character will survive.



As I've been saying...you've got to enforce the Surival Rule. It is the great equalizer.

Enforcing the Surival Rule makes Book 4 and Book 1 characters about the same. (Two term characters are virtually identical. Three term characters see Book 4 average one skill higher, but Survival chance has already dropped to 37%). Thus, most successful characters (if the rules are followed) will be either 1 or 2 term characters (because 3 term characters are likely dead).

1 and 2 Term characters, from either Book, are virtually identical in skills and survival chance.


I'm glad I did this exercise. I used to think Book 1 characters needed a "crutch" to make them "equal" to Book 4 characters. I can see that the numbers don't lie. Book 1 and Book 4 can be used interchangably.

 

[Supplement Four]

(BTW...see the decreasing percentages? THAT'S why smart players will end character generation early...because you've only got to fail once, and your character is dead. If you like your character, would you subject him to a 48% chance of dying on Term 2? A 63% chance of dying on Term 3?)

I should clarify, before someone starts reading this wrong: A marine has a 37% chance of surviving three terms from the beginning of chargen.

If he is successful early, then he's beaten the odds a bit, and his chances go up. For example, if a marine survives two terms, then the chance he'll survive term 3 is 72%, just like in Term 1.

*And, the chance is a little higher, too, because in this analysis, it's hard to figure the effects of some conditional DMs.

 

[tbeard1999]

OK, then. Why not just go down the "No Armor" column on the weapon matrix and make non-armored characters harder to hit.

You could...say...reduce all the numbers in the column by -2.

Same objection. This doesn't seem any better than the solution I proposed. It also doesn't handle the problem of improbably high to hit modifiers against armor.

 

[tbeard1999]

I should clarify, before someone starts reading this wrong: A marine has a 37% chance of surviving three terms from the beginning of chargen.

A Book 1 Marine character survives each term on a 6+ (72%). If he has an END of 8+, he gets a +2, making his survival chance 92%.

So, low endurance marines survive 3 terms 37% of the time, but high END marines (about 41% of all characters, statistically, and presumably a greater percentage of Marines, since high END characters are more survivable) survive 3 terms 77% of the time. Book 4 Marines survive about 88% of the time each term, so they survive 3 terms about 68% of the time.

But my original point remains -- Book 1 Marines are at far more risk than Book 4 Marines if the Book 1 Marine have END of 7-. If they have END of 8+, they are at slightly less risk. So Book 4 is the way to go for any rational player who is mindful of the probabilities. In my experience *no* knowledgable Traveller player has ever chosen Book 1 over Book 4.

 

[tbeard1999]

I'm glad I did this exercise. I used to think Book 1 characters needed a "crutch" to make them "equal" to Book 4 characters. I can see that the numbers don't lie. Book 1 and Book 4 can be used interchangably.

My numbers show the opposite.

I designed a spreadsheet to calculate the average number of skills per term a Book 4 character can expect, taking into account all assignments, including special assignments.

The results uncovered some things that I never knew, but they do confirm that Book 4 characters can expect get far more skills on average than Book 1 counterparts, with one exception (noted below).

And please read the whole analysis before jumping in and talking about survival rolls. I'll handle that at the end.

1. Normal Assignments

A weighted average of assignment probabilities and skills rolls shows that an Army character will average .263 skills per year. A marine does far better at .464 skills per year. This is due to the fact that Ships Troops replaces Garrison on the Marine assignment chart. Ship's Troops has a skill roll; garrison does not.

Surprise #1 -- Marines get significantly more skills than Army characters in Book 4. Since I've the opposite is true in Book 1, there will be a greater disparity between Marine characters than Army characters.

2. Special Assignments

This is where it got interesting. A character will average 1.45 skills per special assignment. Characters with EDU 8+ get a special assignment 1/3 of the time; others get a special assignment 1/6 of the time. (Yes, officers can "buck for command" and reduce the chance of a special assignment, but that's a foolish option as it dramatically reduces the amount of skills the character gets. I've *never* done that and neither have any of my players. So, Special assignments yield (on average) 6 times the number of skills as normal assignments.

Note: a lucky player can get *far* more skills in special assignments -- a Commando can roll for EIGHT skills (1/3 chance of each), for instance. This can cause the not uncommon Book 4 character with 20+ skills.

Surprise #2 -- Characters with Education 8+ get many more skills, because they can double their chance of getting skill-rich special assignments.

3. Blending it together.

Taking the averages above, and then weighting them appropriately, here are the statistical averages for Book 4 characters. Numbers are Weighted Avg of Skills From Special Assignments + Weighted Avg of Skills from Normal Assignment = Avg Number of Skills per year.

Army, Edu 7-: .268+.219 = .488 skills/year
Army, Edu 8+: .563 + .175 = .712 skills/year
Marine, Edu 7-: .268+.386 = .655 skills/year
Marine, Edu 8+: .536+.309 = .845 skills/year

Also, every Book 4 character gets 2 skills in year 1 of the first term.

By contrast, a Book 1 Marine gets 2 (3 if commisioned; 4 if promoted) skills the first term and 1 (2 if promoted) each term after that. He gets Cutlass-1 (and maybe Revolver) and has a very small chance of a commission (28%) unless he has EDU 7+ (raising it to 58%). Promotions are also hard (9+; Soc 8+ gives +2). A weighted average yields an average of 2.56 skills in term 1 and 1.28 skills per term subsequently (if he has Soc 8+, its 1.61 per term). So, he'll average 6-7 skills in 4 terms depending on whether he has Soc 8+.

His Book 4 counterpart will average 12.6 skills (EDU 7-) or 14.6 skills (EDU 8+). And he'll have a much better chance of surviving than his counterpart, or nearly as good a chance if his counterpart has END 8+. Clearly, only a fool would choose Book 1 over Book 4 for Marine characters.

Surprise #3: Book 1 really cheats Marines, due to the fact that skills are awarded for commissions and promotions. The slightly better Marine reinlistment rolls are offset by the higher survival rolls.

A Book 1 Army character has it much easier. He gets Rifle-1 (and probably SMG) and is commissioned easily (83%; 91 if END 7+) and promoted easily (72%; 92% if EDU 7+). So he'll average 3.5 skills in term 1 and 1.7 skills per term after that. After 4 terms, he'll have 8.6 skills. ~9 if he's got EDU 7+.

His Book 4 counterpart will have 9.3 skills if EDU 7- or 12.8 skills if EDU 8+. And he'll have a somewhat less chance of surviving than his Book 1 counterpart. So if he has EDU 8+, Book 4 is preferable.

And every Book 4 character can take Combat Rifleman skill, each level of which is theoretically equal to FIVE Book 1 gun combat skills. Thus, it's trivially easy for a Book 4 character to be a better shooter than his Book 1 counterpart.

So your point is valid when talking about characters whose attributes are not well suited to the Army. (Of course, sensible players would tend to choose careers that their attributes are suited for, so this point may not have much real game relevance). Also, the Army is the most skills-rewarding career in Book 1, due to very high chances of commissions and promotions (and excellent survival chance; this is offset somewhat by the very high reinlistment roll). I suspect that Books 5+ offer similar degrees of superiority to their Book 4 counterparts.

In any case, have you *ever* had a knowledgable Traveller player choose Book 1 over Book 4 for Army/Marine characters? I haven't, in the ~25 years since Book 4 came out. As a player, I would *never* choose Book 1 over Book 4, for the simple reason that Book 4 generates lots more skills. And now I've done the math to prove it.

I've also inadvertently uncovered the fact that Book 1 cheats Marines in skills. It also cheats Scout and Other. By effectively doubling the number of skills received each term if a promotion is gained, this system will shaft careers that have no ranks (Scouts, Other) or very hard promotion rolls (Marines, Merchants).

 

[Supplement Four]

Same objection. This doesn't seem any better than the solution I proposed. It also doesn't handle the problem of improbably high to hit modifiers against armor.

As I said...you're not considering damage. The to hit numbers aren't improbably high when you roll damage that's not a gunshot wound. They're not improbably high when damage is low.

What you don't understand is this (I'll use D&D in an example):

You have a naked character with 40 hit points.

An archer fires his bow at that character, doing 1d6 damage per arrow. It takes about 13 arrows, on average, to kill that character.

Now, if that archer hit every time (a 100% to-hit), does it really take 13 arrows, on average, to kill that man?

Or, are some of the arrows actually "missing" the target with only a few hitting and killing him?

Would you say the archer has an "improbably high" to-hit modifiers?

You see, it's an abstract system. Traveller's combat system also has an abstract quality to it.

You seem to not understand the abstract quality of the CT system.

"Improbably high to-hit modifiers" does not equal improbably high successful gunshot wounds.

Once you stop correlating a successful to-hit with a gunshot wound on the victim (just like the archer above), you'll understand the system better than you are displaying now.

 

[Supplement Four]

ASo, low endurance marines survive 3 terms 37% of the time....

No. My example used average stat marines with stats 777777.

In my experience *no* knowledgable Traveller player has ever chosen Book 1 over Book 4.

BTW, I'm not sure where this came up. I didn't start a debate about which Book players prefer.

In my experience, it's been either (mostly Book 4). Players like the extra background detail that Book 4 brings. But, I've had some players want a more general character (plus Book 1 is a bit quicker), so LBB1 was used.

 

[Supplement Four]

My numbers show the opposite.

Looks to me like your numbers match up with mine. Of course, I only did the Marine with 777777 stats, by hand. You can see my math above.

As a side note, though, I'm enjoying this discussion because its made me take a hard look at the CT chargen system.

I don't think either one of us has "coverted" the other (and I still think I'm right, of course!), but I do think its clear that we've both experienced some surprises we didn't know about the systems.

I think this is interesting stuff.

Merry Christmas to you, btw. I'm not sure if I can keep popping in here today and tomorrow with all the holiday stuff going on, but I wish you well.

 

[Supplement Four]

The single term Marine

My numbers show the opposite.

Interesting analysis, but you do seem to pick and choose what you analyze.

For example, I use the same average character in my analysis above with stats 777777. And, I only studied one career so that we're comparing apples to apples.

You're not only changing stats (Stat 8+), but you're also changing careers (Army and Marines).

Let's look at a single term Marine, with stats 777777, and see how he fares in both Books.

One term. Same character. Same stats. Since Mustering is the same for both careers, we'll ignore that and consider they cancel out.



Book 1 analysis.
---------------
2 Automatic skills for Term 1
1 Automatic Marine Skill (Cutlass-1)
2 8+ (42%) for two Commission Skills (including Revolver-1)
1 9+ (28%) for Promotion Skill
-----
4 weighted average (actual is 4.12)



Book 4 analysis.
---------------
1 Automatic Skill (Combat Rifleman-1)
1 Automatic MOS Skill
1 8+ (42%) Average skill per year (Year 2)
1 8+ (42%) Average skill per year (year 2)
1 8+ (42%) Average skill per year (Year 4)
-----
3 weighted average (actual is 3.26)

But, our Book 4 analysis doesn't include the 17% chance each of the three years that Special Duty is achived. This is a 50% chance that it will occur once during the three years. If it occurs, one of the 8+ throws above evaporates, bringing the weighted average down. But, chances are Special Duty will also make up for that loss in spades. Anywhere from 0-3 additional skills will be scored. Thus, the option of Special Duty brings Book 4 up on par with Book 1.

As you can see: Book 1 and Book 4 characters are on par with each other, skill-wise (at least when comparing Term 1).

The difference is the range.

If our 777777 Book 1 character makes all the rolls, then he'll end up with 6 skills.

If our 777777 Book 4 character gets on a hot streak and rolls for Special Duty three times on Term 1, the number of skills is difficulty to determine given all the possibilities, but it'll certainly put him on par with the Book 1 character and most likley exceed him.

 

[tbeard1999]

Interesting analysis, but you do seem to pick and choose what you analyze.

Not at all. I chose the relevant variations -- in the case of Book 4, Marine and Army characters with an EDU of 8+ and 7-. That's as comprehensive as the analysis needs to be to demonstrate what we've known for 25 years -- you get more skills typically with Book 4 than with Book 1. Your comparison attempts to limit the analysis to the most Book 1-friendly combination -- an Army character that gets all the bonuses on promotion and commission in Book 1, but that gets no skills bonuses in Book 4. And as I noted, in that particlular case, picking Book 1 might make sense (though the Book 4 character still averages slightly more skills). So you're flogging a dead horse.

In every other case stufied -- all Marine characters and Army characters with EDU 8+, Book 4 characters average far more skills. I suspect that the same is true of Navy characters, Scout characters and Merchant characters. But since the discussion is the impact of Book 4+ characters on combat, I think that we can confine the analysis to Army and Marines.

YOU are the one picking and choosing, though possibly unintentionally. Your decision to use a UPP of 777777 effectively compares the best-case Book 1 situation with the worse case Book 4 situation. Additionally, the attempt to limit the analysis to the first term is deceptive; since a character can get 4 skills, plus automatic skills in the first term. After that, the character gets 1 skill, plus 1 if he's commissioned *and* rolls a promotion. So unless the typical Traveller character is 22 years old, your comparison greatly overstates the skills awarded by Book 1.

In any case, I've reviewed my analysis and am comfortable that it fairly assesses the statistical qualities of both character generation systems.

For example, I use the same average character in my analysis above with stats 777777. And, I only studied one career so that we're comparing apples to apples.

An odd comment, since I compared "apples and apples" -- Army characters with Army characters; marine characters with marine characters. What my analysis showed was that there are different "break points" in advantageous attributes. In the case of Book 1 Army characters, the break points happen to be at 7 or less, while in Book 4. the break point is at EDU 8+. Therefore, your test case -- a character with all 7's -- will perform better in Book 1 than in Book 4 simply because he gets all the positive modifiers in Book 1 but none of those in Book 4. The results of your analysis would be profoundly different -- and to Book 4's advantage -- if you used a character with a UPP of 666666 or with 888888. Unlike you, I showed both sides of the break points in both books. I'd also note that the odds of rolling a character with a UPP of 777777 are staggeringly low -- 0.00214%.

You're not only changing stats (Stat 8+), but you're also changing careers (Army and Marines).

Flatly incorrect. I compared Book 4 army characters with Book 1 army characters. I compared Book 4 marine characters with Book 1 marine characters. I distinguished between characters with advantageous attribute levels and those without, in BOTH systems.

What I did not do is rig the test like you did (whether intentionally or not).

 

[tbeard1999]

Incorrect.

I double checked my analysis and revised it with a more detailed methodology.

As epected, the numbers changed a bit but it still seems I'm correct.

Accurately weighting all the possible assignments, a Marine character in Book 4 has a composite 95.412% chance of surviving a year in which he rolls a normal assignment. (This assumes an MOS skill level of 2+; which is trivially easy to get, see below). He has a 100% chance of surviving a special assignment and either a 1/6 (EDU 7-) or1/3 (EDU 8+) chance of getting a special assignment. So if he has an EDU of 7-, he has a composite survival chance of 96.181% per year. If he has an EDU of 8+, he has a composite survival chance of 96.945% per year.

So, a Marine with EDU 7- has a 85.571% chance of surviving a 4 year term. A Marine with EDU 8+ has a 88.328% chance of surviving a 4 year term.

A Book 1 Marine will survive a 4 year term on a 6+, which is 72.22% of the time--much worse than a Book 4 Marine. If he has an END of 8+, he gets a +2 DM, which increases his survival chance to 91.66% -- marginally better than the Book 4 marines. But since the Book 4 Marines get double (or more) the skills, the risk is worth it to use Book 4.

Your player with a hypothetical 777777 Marine is a fool for choosing Book 1 over Book 4. Not only is Book 1 more risky, but it will net him less than half the skills that he'd get with Book 4.

And if you run the probabilities on the first term, and assume that the Character does *not* get level 2 in an MOS skill during that term, the chance of surviving the first term is 77.609% if the Marine has EDU 7- and 81.787% if the Marine has EDU 8+. (So the lesson is "get level 2 in an MOS skill as soon as possible"). I note that Marines and Army Infantry will get level-2 in an MOS skill (Cbt Rifleman) 1/3 of the time in the first year (1/6 of the time if the world is TL12+). But assuming the character rolls on the MOS skill charts, the character will get a level-2 in an MOS skill ~88% of the time. (I did not do the math on this one; rather, I designed a Monte Carlo simulation and rolled the dice 10,000 times and tallied the results). Thus, my assumption that the character has an MOS skill of 2+ is clearly reasonable.

I'm sorry, but now that you've forced me <grin> to do a detailed analysis, I am confident that:

1. The numbers just don't support any contention that Book 1 characters receive (on average) as many skills as Book 4 (other than as noted in my analysis).

2. The numbers do not support worrying overly much about survival. In some cases, Book 1 is a little better; in other cases Book 4 is a little better. But at the end of the day, in most cases, Book 4 will result in characters receiving far more skills than their Book 1 counterparts, despite differences in survival rates.

Of course, most referees I've met don't kill characters in character generation (including you IIRC), so the survival issue may well be moot.

Still, it is a valid point and it's one that I hadn't considered. But at the end of the day, it isn't a big enough deal to make most players choose Book 1. Which explains why I've *never* had a knowledgable player take Book 1 over Books 4+.

 

[tbeard1999]

FYI, I just did an analysis comparing Book 5 High Guard with Book 1's character generation system. I used the Line branch of High Guard, but the skill percentages should be roughly the same for the other Book 5 branches. Survival percentages vary dramatically (see below) between branches.

After weighting the possible assignments, here are the averages, per year:

1. Each character will receive .753 skills per year.

2. Each character has an average 93.98% chance of surviving each year.

3. Pre-Enlistment Options

-4 years at the naval academy will yield 1.5 skills and +1.5 EDU.

-4 years in college will yield +2.0 EDU.

-4 years medical school will yield 4 skills (plus 2 if an honors grad) and +1 EDU

-1 year of flight school yields 2.5 skills.

So, a Book 5, 4-term naval character, with no preenlistment choices, will average about 12 skills. He has a 78% chance of surviving a 4 year term--not so good. (As with Book 4, I assume he gets 2 levels of MOS skills in the first term).

A Book 1 naval character gets 2 skills in term 1, plus 1 per term thereafter. He gets a skill if commissioned and a skill if promoted. His chances of being commissioned are very low -- 16.67% (27.78% if he has SOC 9+). Promotions also come slowly -- 41.67% (58.33% if EDU 8+). He gets a +1 social if he reaches captain (virtually impossible within 4 terms).

On average, our Book 1, 4-term character is guaranteed 5 skills. He has about a 50% chance of being commissioned by term 3 (or term 2 if he has SOC 9+) and a very low chance of a promotion in term 3 or 4. Statistically, he'll get 1.21 skills from promotions and commissions.

The Book 2 character has a *much* better survival chance, if he has INT 7+. He'll survive a 4 year term 83.333% of the time. If he has INT 7+, it's 97.22% of the time.

Recap--
4 term Book 1 character -- 6.21 skills; 48% of surviving 4 terms (89% if INT 7+)

4 term Book 5 character -- 12 skills; 37% chance of surviving 4 terms. If he goes to the academy and medical school, 11.5-13.5 skills; +2.5 EDU, 88% chance of surviving 4 terms. If he goes to the academy and flight school, 12.25 skills, +1.5 EDU, 50.52% chance of surviving 4 terms.

Survival percentages vary dramatically between Book 5 branches.

As noted above, Line brach is very dangerous. It has a 93.98% chance of surviving each year; a 78.01% chance of surviving each term and a 37.04% chance of surviving 4 terms.

The flight branch has a 99.92% chance of surviving each year; a 99.69% chance of surviving each term and a 98.7% chance of surviving 4 terms.

The engineering branch has a 97.68% chance of surviving each year; a 91.05% chance of surviving each term and a 68.75% chance of surviving 4 terms.

The technical branch has a 99.92% chance of surviving each year; a 99.69% chance of surviving each term and a 98.7% chance of surviving 4 terms.

So interestingly enough, your argument about survival rolls does carry some validity with Book 5 (but not Book 4) Line branch characters (if the character has INT 7+ and cannot get to flight school or medical school.) But it fails miserably with most other branches. In those cases, Book 5 characters wind up with about twice as many skills and a far greater chance of survival.

 

[Supplement Four]

Of course, most referees I've met don't kill characters in character generation (including you IIRC), so the survival issue may well be moot.

I've done all sorts of things over the years. Played MT as written. Played MT with tweaks. Played CT as written. Played CT with tweaks.

My last campaign (that started two years ago), I went with some house rules that allows characters to join another career after failing surivival in the first one. It's a common enough tweak. Many GMs do it. I tried it.

What I found was that it broke the system. My PCs were over skilled. I learned, through that campaign (the hard way) that the Survival Rule must be respected.

You asked me earlier if I had dropped my house rules. I told you "yes", that I'd dropped most of them and am now playing CT "by the book".

Well, chargen in that last campaign is a major reason I started looking hard at CT and its intricate system. I've made the mistakes, and I realize how utterly important it is to enforce survival (kill PCs in chargen).

It's very important. It keeps skills from bloating. It provides "risk" that some players may not want to take when deciding to do another term of chargen.

I will always keep it in my games now that I realize how important it is.

 

[tbeard1999]

One thing that's come out of all my number crunching is an appreciation for how unbalanced the CT chargen systems are. I always knew that Book 4+ systems awarded far more skills on average than Book 1. But the rot goes far deeper than this.

1. Book 1 systems are seriously unbalanced. Here are some careers with average number of skills, and survival chance (after 4 terms):

Army -- 8.6-9 skills; 48.2% chance of survival; 88.5 if Edu 5+
Marines -- 6-7 skills; 26.8% chance of survival; 71.6% if Edu 7+.
Navy -- 6.2 skills; 48% chance of survival; 89% if Int 7+.
Scouts -- 9 skills; 11.5% chance of survival; 48.22% if END 9+
Other -- 6 skills; 48.22% chance of survival; 82.34% if INT 9+

You can see that the Army is the best career for both skills and survival; Scouts the best for skills, worst for survival. Mustering out benefits don't help much; especially since easy promotion careers like the Army get more rolls. Starships are a wild card; it's uncertain just how valuable it is to a player to own a ship but be stuck with a crapper character.

2. Book 4 and 5 are also badly balanced, with Marines getting 12.6-14.6 skills (EDU 8+) and Army characters getting 9.3 or 12.8 skills (EDU 8+). Naval Line branch characters will survive 4 terms on 37.04% of the time, while Flight, Medical and Gunnery will survive 98.7% of the time. Engineering will survive 68.5% of the time.

At the end of the day, the sanest approach seems to me to be to divorce the awarding of skills from promotions and commissions in Book 1 and to re-tool the survival rules so that they're similar in most careers. Or do a lot more work and award more skills to the more dangerous careers (something that is *not* done in Book 1).

Book 4 and 5...well, the best approach might be to award the same number of skills per term, regardless of assignments and to rationalize the survival rolls.

And the reenlistment rolls may well render this whole cross-career analysis wrong. I'll work on that later. But I'd note that a Merchant character with Alexander Lacelles Jamison's stats would survive 5 terms (survival and reenlistment) only about 56.71% of the time. An Army character with his stats would make it about 5.9% of the time.

 

[Supplement Four]

One thing that's come out of all my number crunching is an appreciation for how unbalanced the CT chargen systems are. I always knew that Book 4+ systems awarded far more skills on average than Book 1. But the rot goes far deeper than this.

Unbalanced?

Rot?

This isn't a game where all careers are equal. It isn't supposed to be. Otherwise, it'd be like the D6 Star Wars system where all characters start out with the same amount of "dice" (where the careers just re-arrange the same number of dice).

Don't get me wrong. I love the D6 Star Wars game. It's one of the best I've ever played. Fun. Suits Star Wars impeccably.

But, Traveller? It's not supposed to be "fair".

I prefer it that way.

 

[jec10]

And the funny thing is, that in my experience gamers tend to prefer to select the "woeful" Scouts career if given the choice.

 

[atpollard]

FYI, I just did an analysis comparing Book 5 High Guard with Book 1's character generation system.

[snip]

4 term Book 1 character -- 6.21 skills; 48% of surviving 4 terms (89% if INT 7+)

4 term Book 5 character -- 12 skills; 37% chance of surviving 4 terms.

If we assume that 6 skills is 'enough' for a playable character, what is the chance of surviving 2 terms in Book 5 (Line Branch) to gain about the same number of skills as a 4 term Book 1 character?

PS. Thank you both for your hard work on this, and for toning the rhetoric back down to a polite discussion.

 

[atpollard]

And the funny thing is, that in my experience gamers tend to prefer to select the "woeful" Scouts career if given the choice.

Especially if you want to FLY YOUR OWN SHIP in the game.

On average, how many terms in the Army will it take to gain Pilot-1?

On average, how many terms in the Merchants will it take to gain the title to a Free Trader?

Besides, if the character dies you just start over. It's not that big a deal if you start out with the intention of rolling 4 or 5 characters to get one who survives, say, 5 terms. Start with assignments and survival and don't worry about the actual skill rolls until you know that THIS character will survive.

Personally, I find the skill randomization overrated. It hinders 'super-characters' but makes it just as difficult to create a specific 'vision' for a character:
"I really want to play a tank commander - like Patton, but I failed the enlistment, got drafted into the Merchants, and now I have (Engineering, Mechanical, Electrical and Trader). Lets see how fast I can get him killed and roll again" [since we are 100% by the rules in THIS game].