Imperiallines' Calibration Points

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rancke:
...he just decided to try to reconcile that fact with the other fact from Imperium and Dark Nebula.

Reconciling Imperium and Dark Nebula wasn't neccessary. They're wargames and therefore a different catagory of canon, Imperium especially.</font>[/QUOTE]I didn't say it was necessary. I said that Jon, the author, chose to do so. I'm not even saying that you're wrong about it being a mistake. I'm saying that the words you used are loaded with connotations that I think are unjustified. Jon certainly thought about what he was doing.It's not as if he'd just tossed off something unthinkingly and then refused to retcon it later on the grounds that "it's canon".

Imperium originally stated that the Imperium consisted of about 70 systems centered on Capella. No one ever tried to reconcile that canonical 'fact'. It was dropped instead like Leviathan's jump torpedos as a wargame that predates the CT and the OTU was 'massaged' or 'retconned' to fit the rules written afterwards.

No, it was dropped as a fact that contradicted other canonical data, namely statements that the 1st Imperium contained thousands of systems.

There is canon and then there is canon, wargames are special cases. FFW states that a squadron uses all of it's jump fuel when it jumps no matter how far it jumps. Are we to read that and say jump fuel regulators somehow don't exist or are not used between 1107 and 1110? The answer, of course, is that we are not.

Wargames are different cases than text, just as illustrations are different cases. You could get the 'no jump regulator' from reading Book 2 (which a roleplaying book, not a wargame). It should be dumped because it doesn't fit, not because it comes from a wargame.

As for the Vilani 'suppressing' the technique, a copy of AotI or a look at any on-line map site will reveal many three parsec gaps within the confines of the Ziru Sirka. Either the Bureaux have a way of routinely crossing those gaps or the acknowledged economic masters practicing 'Just in Time' manufacturing techniques across 15,000 systems at jump2 speeds are unaccountably accepting detours that can add months to trip times.

Or maybe they didn't practice 'Just in Time' techniques across 15,000 systems. Maybe they thought that the advantages to being the only ones around able to cross 2-parsec gaps outweighed the disadvantages of having to go around 3-parsec gaps.

You always point out that "Canon must make sense" and rightfully so. Which is it then? Are the Bureaux crossing those three parsec gaps or are they detouring? If you choose the former, you've just retconned more brown dwarfs into Traveller astrography. If you choose the latter, do the detours make any sense?

Well, as I said above, maybe they did go around. Though I must say that despite Jon's rejection of the idea, I'm still fond of the artificial jump point notion. Maybe there's some sort of compromise possible. Maybe you need really big asteroids, so big that 1) There aren't many around and 2) They take decades to move into place.

Or maybe you're right and it can't be made to work.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rancke:
...he just decided to try to reconcile that fact with the other fact from Imperium and Dark Nebula.

Reconciling Imperium and Dark Nebula wasn't neccessary. They're wargames and therefore a different catagory of canon, Imperium especially.</font>[/QUOTE]I didn't say it was necessary. I said that Jon, the author, chose to do so. I'm not even saying that you're wrong about it being a mistake. I'm saying that the words you used are loaded with connotations that I think are unjustified. Jon certainly thought about what he was doing.It's not as if he'd just tossed off something unthinkingly and then refused to retcon it later on the grounds that "it's canon".

Imperium originally stated that the Imperium consisted of about 70 systems centered on Capella. No one ever tried to reconcile that canonical 'fact'. It was dropped instead like Leviathan's jump torpedos as a wargame that predates the CT and the OTU was 'massaged' or 'retconned' to fit the rules written afterwards.

No, it was dropped as a fact that contradicted other canonical data, namely statements that the 1st Imperium contained thousands of systems.

There is canon and then there is canon, wargames are special cases. FFW states that a squadron uses all of it's jump fuel when it jumps no matter how far it jumps. Are we to read that and say jump fuel regulators somehow don't exist or are not used between 1107 and 1110? The answer, of course, is that we are not.

Wargames are different cases than text, just as illustrations are different cases. You could get the 'no jump regulator' from reading Book 2 (which a roleplaying book, not a wargame). It should be dumped because it doesn't fit, not because it comes from a wargame.

As for the Vilani 'suppressing' the technique, a copy of AotI or a look at any on-line map site will reveal many three parsec gaps within the confines of the Ziru Sirka. Either the Bureaux have a way of routinely crossing those gaps or the acknowledged economic masters practicing 'Just in Time' manufacturing techniques across 15,000 systems at jump2 speeds are unaccountably accepting detours that can add months to trip times.

Or maybe they didn't practice 'Just in Time' techniques across 15,000 systems. Maybe they thought that the advantages to being the only ones around able to cross 2-parsec gaps outweighed the disadvantages of having to go around 3-parsec gaps.

You always point out that "Canon must make sense" and rightfully so. Which is it then? Are the Bureaux crossing those three parsec gaps or are they detouring? If you choose the former, you've just retconned more brown dwarfs into Traveller astrography. If you choose the latter, do the detours make any sense?

Well, as I said above, maybe they did go around. Though I must say that despite Jon's rejection of the idea, I'm still fond of the artificial jump point notion. Maybe there's some sort of compromise possible. Maybe you need really big asteroids, so big that 1) There aren't many around and 2) They take decades to move into place.

Or maybe you're right and it can't be made to work.


Hans

 

[Plankowner]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:

Marc Miller's JTAS Jumpspace article says jumpdrive's accuracy is 3000km per parsec jumped. Apparently, the accuracy you're talking about is done all the time.

The positions of a deep space fuel cache must be plotted with equisite precision. A navigation error of only a few AU could result in a very long search, especially if the cache doesn't have a beacon(1). Deep space fuel caches are, oddly enough, called 'calibration points' for this very reason. However, jumping into 'empty hexes' and locating fuel caches is relatively routine.

I'll point you to the 'Trade War' section of The Traveller Adventure. The players aboard their elderly Type-R 'subbie' and an Oberlindes scout/courier blithely jump to an Arekut calibration point and capture ships for two weeks. The only concern in this operation was bribing the location of the calibrations out of some Arekut employee. Once the location was known, the March Harrier jumped to the claibration point with about as much concern as she did jumping between Zila and Pysadi.

Making deep space jumps and finding calibration points are no big deal. Never have been either.


Have fun,
Bill

1 - It seems most caches don't have beacons. The agencies or organizations that placed the cache don't want someone else using their fuel understandably.

Well, I stand corrected. I must admit that I haven't read JTAS in decades. If the accuracy of a Jump Drive is 3000km, OK. I will back off and admit that there is no reason to use a star/brown dwarf/planet for a calibration point.

I may like it from a role-playing point of view, but it obviously doesn't make finding the cache any easier as I thought.

I will admit that this whole disagreement probably stemmed from my desire to see more stars in the traveller universe that don't have planets and using the calibration point as a way to use that. My personal pet-peeve. IMTU only 50% of stars have planetary systems. In the OTU obviously the number is much closer to 100%.

Started playing Traveller in October 1977, they don't get much "ACOT" or "ACOOT" -ier than me

 

[Plankowner]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:

Marc Miller's JTAS Jumpspace article says jumpdrive's accuracy is 3000km per parsec jumped. Apparently, the accuracy you're talking about is done all the time.

The positions of a deep space fuel cache must be plotted with equisite precision. A navigation error of only a few AU could result in a very long search, especially if the cache doesn't have a beacon(1). Deep space fuel caches are, oddly enough, called 'calibration points' for this very reason. However, jumping into 'empty hexes' and locating fuel caches is relatively routine.

I'll point you to the 'Trade War' section of The Traveller Adventure. The players aboard their elderly Type-R 'subbie' and an Oberlindes scout/courier blithely jump to an Arekut calibration point and capture ships for two weeks. The only concern in this operation was bribing the location of the calibrations out of some Arekut employee. Once the location was known, the March Harrier jumped to the claibration point with about as much concern as she did jumping between Zila and Pysadi.

Making deep space jumps and finding calibration points are no big deal. Never have been either.


Have fun,
Bill

1 - It seems most caches don't have beacons. The agencies or organizations that placed the cache don't want someone else using their fuel understandably.

Well, I stand corrected. I must admit that I haven't read JTAS in decades. If the accuracy of a Jump Drive is 3000km, OK. I will back off and admit that there is no reason to use a star/brown dwarf/planet for a calibration point.

I may like it from a role-playing point of view, but it obviously doesn't make finding the cache any easier as I thought.

I will admit that this whole disagreement probably stemmed from my desire to see more stars in the traveller universe that don't have planets and using the calibration point as a way to use that. My personal pet-peeve. IMTU only 50% of stars have planetary systems. In the OTU obviously the number is much closer to 100%.

Started playing Traveller in October 1977, they don't get much "ACOT" or "ACOOT" -ier than me

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by rancke:
Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Jon certainly thought about what he was doing. It's not as if he'd just tossed off something unthinkingly and then refused to retcon it later on the grounds that "it's canon".

Hans,

I'm not suggesting he chose to make a mistake or that he didn't care about making a mistake. I am saying a mistake has been made and it was made primarily because of a failure in the playtest.

Jon and the others were working under a deadline. They had an entire book to write crammed full of many new things and all of it compatible to a new game system that wasn't even fully released yet. (And still isn't fully released yet.) They did a superb job. GT:IW ranks right up there with Survival Margin, Path of Tears, and the rest.

A mistake was made however and it was made because the playtest failed. The thread that should have alerted the authors to the consequences of their decision was derailed by a long, tedious and completely unneccessary refutation of mass precipitation requirments. Because that thread bogged down and because new 'clean' thread wasn't started to return to the topic a mistake was made.

No, it was dropped as a fact that contradicted other canonical data, namely statements that the 1st Imperium contained thousands of systems.

Yes, it contradicted other canonical data much like other canonical data contradicts the idea of jump lines. Jump lines, like the fuel rule in FFW, are an artifact to aid play and not canonical descriptions.

You could get the 'no jump regulator' from reading Book 2 (which a roleplaying book, not a wargame). It should be dumped because it doesn't fit, not because it comes from a wargame.

LBB:2's 'No Fuel Regulators' was dumped from Traveller roleplaying rules in LBB:5 well before FFW was published. That wargame then used something like 'no fuel regulators' as an aid for game play, just as jump lines in Imperium and Dark Nebula are aids for game play.

We have an example of information in a Traveller wargame being redacted from canon; the Capella quote in Imperium, and we have an example of canon-ignoring material being inserted into a Traveller wargame; the fuel rule in FFW, and we have other examples of the 'low' level of canonicity of Traveller wargames; Mayday's missiles, Snapshot's deckplans, etc. so why all of a sudden are the jump lines in Imperium holy writ? Why was an attempt made to explain them? An attempt that resulted in a (IMHO) major error in canon?

Or maybe they didn't practice 'Just in Time' techniques across 15,000 systems.

The economic consequences of a 'Thin On The Ground' Ziru Sirka - an explanation you helped create in order to explain the Confederation's victory - are well known. The Ziru Sirka deliberately fostered economic and industrial helplessness among its subject worlds even going to the length of limiting their populations. Aside from a very few exceptions, the worlds of the Ziru Sirka relied utterly on interstellar trade to maintain many parts of their planetary infrastructure. The disruption of this trade, and the disruption of the caste system which handled what domestic production a world did enjoy, by the Terran victory led directly to the Long Night.

The Vilani restricted planetary technology and population in return for interstellar order. They made sure each world didn't have all the pieces to the puzzle and used the trade in those needed pieces to control an empire. You now want me to believe that they also accepted longer trade routes for those pieces, trade routes along which more breakdowns could occur, trade routes that could fail more easily, trade routes whose nature would work against the system of control the Vilani had put in place?

As you've suggested many times; Canon also has to make sense.

Or maybe you're right and it can't be made to work.

I don't know if I'm right. I believe I may be, but part of that belief comes from pointing out what I believe is a mistake and being told pretty much; The book is finished, you can't change it, so forget about it. Another reason I believe I may be right in calling this a mistake and a matter of errata is that the book has been out for only two months and we've already seen mass precipiation appear both here and at SJGames.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by rancke:
Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Jon certainly thought about what he was doing. It's not as if he'd just tossed off something unthinkingly and then refused to retcon it later on the grounds that "it's canon".

Hans,

I'm not suggesting he chose to make a mistake or that he didn't care about making a mistake. I am saying a mistake has been made and it was made primarily because of a failure in the playtest.

Jon and the others were working under a deadline. They had an entire book to write crammed full of many new things and all of it compatible to a new game system that wasn't even fully released yet. (And still isn't fully released yet.) They did a superb job. GT:IW ranks right up there with Survival Margin, Path of Tears, and the rest.

A mistake was made however and it was made because the playtest failed. The thread that should have alerted the authors to the consequences of their decision was derailed by a long, tedious and completely unneccessary refutation of mass precipitation requirments. Because that thread bogged down and because new 'clean' thread wasn't started to return to the topic a mistake was made.

No, it was dropped as a fact that contradicted other canonical data, namely statements that the 1st Imperium contained thousands of systems.

Yes, it contradicted other canonical data much like other canonical data contradicts the idea of jump lines. Jump lines, like the fuel rule in FFW, are an artifact to aid play and not canonical descriptions.

You could get the 'no jump regulator' from reading Book 2 (which a roleplaying book, not a wargame). It should be dumped because it doesn't fit, not because it comes from a wargame.

LBB:2's 'No Fuel Regulators' was dumped from Traveller roleplaying rules in LBB:5 well before FFW was published. That wargame then used something like 'no fuel regulators' as an aid for game play, just as jump lines in Imperium and Dark Nebula are aids for game play.

We have an example of information in a Traveller wargame being redacted from canon; the Capella quote in Imperium, and we have an example of canon-ignoring material being inserted into a Traveller wargame; the fuel rule in FFW, and we have other examples of the 'low' level of canonicity of Traveller wargames; Mayday's missiles, Snapshot's deckplans, etc. so why all of a sudden are the jump lines in Imperium holy writ? Why was an attempt made to explain them? An attempt that resulted in a (IMHO) major error in canon?

Or maybe they didn't practice 'Just in Time' techniques across 15,000 systems.

The economic consequences of a 'Thin On The Ground' Ziru Sirka - an explanation you helped create in order to explain the Confederation's victory - are well known. The Ziru Sirka deliberately fostered economic and industrial helplessness among its subject worlds even going to the length of limiting their populations. Aside from a very few exceptions, the worlds of the Ziru Sirka relied utterly on interstellar trade to maintain many parts of their planetary infrastructure. The disruption of this trade, and the disruption of the caste system which handled what domestic production a world did enjoy, by the Terran victory led directly to the Long Night.

The Vilani restricted planetary technology and population in return for interstellar order. They made sure each world didn't have all the pieces to the puzzle and used the trade in those needed pieces to control an empire. You now want me to believe that they also accepted longer trade routes for those pieces, trade routes along which more breakdowns could occur, trade routes that could fail more easily, trade routes whose nature would work against the system of control the Vilani had put in place?

As you've suggested many times; Canon also has to make sense.

Or maybe you're right and it can't be made to work.

I don't know if I'm right. I believe I may be, but part of that belief comes from pointing out what I believe is a mistake and being told pretty much; The book is finished, you can't change it, so forget about it. Another reason I believe I may be right in calling this a mistake and a matter of errata is that the book has been out for only two months and we've already seen mass precipiation appear both here and at SJGames.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[boomslang]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Marc Miller's JTAS Jumpspace article says jumpdrive's accuracy is 3000km per parsec jumped. Apparently, the accuracy you're talking about is done all the time.

Which claim itself is sadly entirely bogus, given that in the 33 hour and 36 minute temporal margin of error MWM cites in that article ("168 hours ± 10%"), a life-zone planet (such as Terra) can move on the order of a million kilometers with respect to its main-sequence primary (Sol) and the rest of the galaxy (the star is moving too, remember); navigational "accuracy" as such is totally out the window under that model... millions of kilometers (as well as a day-and-a-half on the clock) is a relatively gigantic margin of error, I would tend to think...

In order to hit the exit point with a 3000km/psc degree of accuracy, the arrival time will have to be known much more precisely than ±10%, I figure. Otherwise, things will move, and aren't going to be where you plotted them to be originally.

(Note that the assumption of a fixed frame of reference is assumed in the assertion that ships decelerate before jumping so as to be stationary. This notion of "stationary" with respect to the origin and destination worlds is also nonsensical; objects in space all generally have relative motion. If you set yourself stationary to one of them, you'll still be likely to be moving with respect to other things.)

 

[boomslang]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Marc Miller's JTAS Jumpspace article says jumpdrive's accuracy is 3000km per parsec jumped. Apparently, the accuracy you're talking about is done all the time.

Which claim itself is sadly entirely bogus, given that in the 33 hour and 36 minute temporal margin of error MWM cites in that article ("168 hours ± 10%"), a life-zone planet (such as Terra) can move on the order of a million kilometers with respect to its main-sequence primary (Sol) and the rest of the galaxy (the star is moving too, remember); navigational "accuracy" as such is totally out the window under that model... millions of kilometers (as well as a day-and-a-half on the clock) is a relatively gigantic margin of error, I would tend to think...

In order to hit the exit point with a 3000km/psc degree of accuracy, the arrival time will have to be known much more precisely than ±10%, I figure. Otherwise, things will move, and aren't going to be where you plotted them to be originally.

(Note that the assumption of a fixed frame of reference is assumed in the assertion that ships decelerate before jumping so as to be stationary. This notion of "stationary" with respect to the origin and destination worlds is also nonsensical; objects in space all generally have relative motion. If you set yourself stationary to one of them, you'll still be likely to be moving with respect to other things.)

 

[aramis]

Bill, Hans:

Imperium PREDATES CT. Therefore, any changes to it's setting are in fact redactions from it's canon in the creation of CT and later canon.

In Imperium, specialized ships can skim stars.
In Imperium, High-speed N-space travel is possible for ALL ships; one Imperium hex per 6 months!

It's a different set of assumptions about the universe than CT. And the prototype of the setting, not the "Real OTU."

 

[aramis]

Bill, Hans:

Imperium PREDATES CT. Therefore, any changes to it's setting are in fact redactions from it's canon in the creation of CT and later canon.

In Imperium, specialized ships can skim stars.
In Imperium, High-speed N-space travel is possible for ALL ships; one Imperium hex per 6 months!

It's a different set of assumptions about the universe than CT. And the prototype of the setting, not the "Real OTU."

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by boomslang:
Which claim itself is sadly entirely bogus, given that in the 33 hour and 36 minute temporal margin of error...

Boomslang,

No it isn't. If you search the site you'll find a thread discussing this very topic which includes myself and Hans. It occurred this year. (We disagreed over the issue.)

IMTU, the jump exit point selected to the 3000km/parsec jumped tolerance is done relative to the origin system. You select a point out a certain distance along a certain X, Y, and Z axis and jump to it. When you arrive is unknown so the position of the various planetary bodies around that point can only be known within the 33.6 hour window you brought up. Where you arrive is plotted relative to the origin system to within a 3000km per parsec jumped accuracy.

I like this model. Aside from 'explaining' the 'time sensitive' and/or 'one-use' nature of jump tapes and making jump masking more of a bother, it makes navigators and engineers earn their pay, especially navigators. If he plots well, your time variation is minor and you can plan on emerging closer to your destination. Why else would a navigator actually be worth the 5,000 credits they get a month? They hardly do anything else.

Hans prefers a model in which the jump drive somehow 'fiddles' you exit point for you. You jump for a certain point relative to the various bodies in the destination system, the drive takes into account the time variation, and you exit at the point selected.

Hans points to the 'spooky' nature of jump drive and the color text in various adventures which mentions 'hitting' the 100D limit. I point to a literal application of MWM's article. You can choose either and be equally correct while still keeping the 3000km/parsec jumped accuracy.

This notion of "stationary" with respect to the origin and destination worlds is also nonsensical...

Which is why in my model the exit point is plotted relative to the origin system only and why in Hans' model the exit point is plotted relative to the destination system only. Neither model presumes the exit point is a relative to both the origin and destination systems. That, as you correctly point out, is nonsense.

If you set yourself stationary to one of them, you'll still be likely to be moving with respect to other things.

Which, of course, is why there are adventures in which ships must be on certain vectors before jumping. There is an MT adventure in which this is an important part of the plot. TNE also mentions it severral times. One striking example is the color text featuring a female RCES member discussing the 'thrill' she feels when she's plotted a jump so well that the vessel's vector before jumping will help them on a refueling pass through a gas giant.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by boomslang:
Which claim itself is sadly entirely bogus, given that in the 33 hour and 36 minute temporal margin of error...

Boomslang,

No it isn't. If you search the site you'll find a thread discussing this very topic which includes myself and Hans. It occurred this year. (We disagreed over the issue.)

IMTU, the jump exit point selected to the 3000km/parsec jumped tolerance is done relative to the origin system. You select a point out a certain distance along a certain X, Y, and Z axis and jump to it. When you arrive is unknown so the position of the various planetary bodies around that point can only be known within the 33.6 hour window you brought up. Where you arrive is plotted relative to the origin system to within a 3000km per parsec jumped accuracy.

I like this model. Aside from 'explaining' the 'time sensitive' and/or 'one-use' nature of jump tapes and making jump masking more of a bother, it makes navigators and engineers earn their pay, especially navigators. If he plots well, your time variation is minor and you can plan on emerging closer to your destination. Why else would a navigator actually be worth the 5,000 credits they get a month? They hardly do anything else.

Hans prefers a model in which the jump drive somehow 'fiddles' you exit point for you. You jump for a certain point relative to the various bodies in the destination system, the drive takes into account the time variation, and you exit at the point selected.

Hans points to the 'spooky' nature of jump drive and the color text in various adventures which mentions 'hitting' the 100D limit. I point to a literal application of MWM's article. You can choose either and be equally correct while still keeping the 3000km/parsec jumped accuracy.

This notion of "stationary" with respect to the origin and destination worlds is also nonsensical...

Which is why in my model the exit point is plotted relative to the origin system only and why in Hans' model the exit point is plotted relative to the destination system only. Neither model presumes the exit point is a relative to both the origin and destination systems. That, as you correctly point out, is nonsense.

If you set yourself stationary to one of them, you'll still be likely to be moving with respect to other things.

Which, of course, is why there are adventures in which ships must be on certain vectors before jumping. There is an MT adventure in which this is an important part of the plot. TNE also mentions it severral times. One striking example is the color text featuring a female RCES member discussing the 'thrill' she feels when she's plotted a jump so well that the vessel's vector before jumping will help them on a refueling pass through a gas giant.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Imperium PREDATES CT. Therefore, any changes to it's setting are in fact redactions from it's canon in the creation of CT and later canon.

Aramis,

Yes, that is exactly my point. Imperium predates the OTU and contains many things that were later redacted in order to (clumsily) fit it into canon. We all agree on that.

My question merely builds on the same idea. If the pre-CT Imperium contained so many items that had already been redacted or ignored in canon, why was is felt that it was somehow vitally important to save the idea of jumplines?

Jon Zeigler mentions that Imperium was used to help 'map' the history of the Interstellar Wars found in GT:RoF. I can understand that. I also know that the history in GT:RoF mentions worlds not on the Imperium map so the game wasn't that important.

The jumplines are so obviously an artifact meant to aid game play that I find it difficult to believe that they could be mistaken for canonical descriptions. In trying to explain this, I brought up the FFW fuel rules. They too are an artifact meant to aid game play and no one is suggesting that they somehow trump the fuel regulator.

Why were Imperium's jumplines thought to be so special?


Have fun,
Bill

P.S. Imperium's map isn't so special either. Add a few tweaks for refueling, maintenance, and reaction forces and you can play Imperium on a hex map of the Rim like FFW does with the Marches.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Imperium PREDATES CT. Therefore, any changes to it's setting are in fact redactions from it's canon in the creation of CT and later canon.

Aramis,

Yes, that is exactly my point. Imperium predates the OTU and contains many things that were later redacted in order to (clumsily) fit it into canon. We all agree on that.

My question merely builds on the same idea. If the pre-CT Imperium contained so many items that had already been redacted or ignored in canon, why was is felt that it was somehow vitally important to save the idea of jumplines?

Jon Zeigler mentions that Imperium was used to help 'map' the history of the Interstellar Wars found in GT:RoF. I can understand that. I also know that the history in GT:RoF mentions worlds not on the Imperium map so the game wasn't that important.

The jumplines are so obviously an artifact meant to aid game play that I find it difficult to believe that they could be mistaken for canonical descriptions. In trying to explain this, I brought up the FFW fuel rules. They too are an artifact meant to aid game play and no one is suggesting that they somehow trump the fuel regulator.

Why were Imperium's jumplines thought to be so special?


Have fun,
Bill

P.S. Imperium's map isn't so special either. Add a few tweaks for refueling, maintenance, and reaction forces and you can play Imperium on a hex map of the Rim like FFW does with the Marches.

 

[robject]

Sounds to me like the solution which involves the players more is the better one.

 

[robject]

Sounds to me like the solution which involves the players more is the better one.

 

[boomslang]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
I like this model. Aside from 'explaining' the 'time sensitive' and/or 'one-use' nature of jump tapes and making jump masking more of a bother, it makes navigators and engineers earn their pay, especially navigators. If he plots well, your time variation is minor and you can plan on emerging closer to your destination. Why else would a navigator actually be worth the 5,000 credits they get a month? They hardly do anything else.

I've now read that thread, and I am entirely unconvinced that there is any evidence in the canon that a good navigator can reduce the time variation. It would make logical sense, but there's nothing in the Jumpspace article (or much elsewhere) to directly support it.

It's playable, but isn't not consistent to any sort of gearheady standards. Why, for example, are jump tapes only 'one use' if the precise location of bodies at the destination is irrelevant to the calculations? (Planetary axes don't precess that quickly.) And why doesn't the temporal window ever expand for miscalculations, such as during misjump? Again, Jumpspace fails to address this.

As for what navigators do to earn their pay, that's another topic thread perhaps, since they are only "required" on ships over 200 dtons... which means either governement service, corporate ownership, or subsidies are typically involved with their employment conditions.

Likewise, it is worth noting that if Jumpspace is to be taken at face value, Calibration Points themselves are unnecessary, since suitably-electrified starships (cf. the problematic Annic Nova) can dispense with the bother of using jump fuel entirely.

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

 

[boomslang]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
I like this model. Aside from 'explaining' the 'time sensitive' and/or 'one-use' nature of jump tapes and making jump masking more of a bother, it makes navigators and engineers earn their pay, especially navigators. If he plots well, your time variation is minor and you can plan on emerging closer to your destination. Why else would a navigator actually be worth the 5,000 credits they get a month? They hardly do anything else.

I've now read that thread, and I am entirely unconvinced that there is any evidence in the canon that a good navigator can reduce the time variation. It would make logical sense, but there's nothing in the Jumpspace article (or much elsewhere) to directly support it.

It's playable, but isn't not consistent to any sort of gearheady standards. Why, for example, are jump tapes only 'one use' if the precise location of bodies at the destination is irrelevant to the calculations? (Planetary axes don't precess that quickly.) And why doesn't the temporal window ever expand for miscalculations, such as during misjump? Again, Jumpspace fails to address this.

As for what navigators do to earn their pay, that's another topic thread perhaps, since they are only "required" on ships over 200 dtons... which means either governement service, corporate ownership, or subsidies are typically involved with their employment conditions.

Likewise, it is worth noting that if Jumpspace is to be taken at face value, Calibration Points themselves are unnecessary, since suitably-electrified starships (cf. the problematic Annic Nova) can dispense with the bother of using jump fuel entirely.

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by boomslang:
It would make logical sense, but there's nothing in the Jumpspace article (or much elsewhere) to directly support it.

Boomslang,

I prefaced most of what you're taking exception to with IMTU.

The navigator's 'role' in determining jump duration is in MegaTraveller.

Why, for example, are jump tapes only 'one use' if the precise location of bodies at the destination is irrelevant to the calculations?

Their position is not irrevelent, they are where you're travelling to after all. The point in space you're jumping towards is plotted relative to the origin system alone.

You can picture your course as a line or ray in three-dimensional normal space extending from your origin point of 0, 0, 0, out a certain distance to another point whose location can be determine to within 3000km. When you jump, you begin at X0, Y0, Z0 and displaced out to Xx, Yx, Zx in a straight line. All of those points are measured relative to your origin point.

You select your end or exit point while keeping the 33.6 hour long positions of the various bodies in your target system in mind. However, that exit point is still 'measured' from your origin system.

Say you're jump from Regina to Roup. You don't plot an exit point that is 3000km from Roup's 100D limit because the time variation makes that impossible. Instead you plot an exit point 1 parsec from Regina's 100D limit, an exit point that will (hopefully) be close to all the 33.6 hour long positions of Roup's 100D limit. As you can see, IMTU your jump's exit point and distance are measured and plotted relative to your origin system.

Jump tapes thus have a 'best used by' date because the origin system is moving, the destination system is moving, and the various bodies in the destination system you want to exit near are all moving. All that movement means the final Xx, Yx, and Zx coordinates are constantly changing as is the length of the 'ray' or 'line' that marks your jump space course across normal space.

A jump tape will require departure from a certain point in the origin system within a certain time window, otherwise the exit point and jump length it contains will be of little or no practical use.

And why doesn't the temporal window ever expand for miscalculations, such as during misjump? Again, Jumpspace fails to address this.

Jumpspace might, but the rules, especially MT, do not. Blow your jump plot roll and you'll arrive much earlier/later than you want which will force you to make a longer normal space trip.

Likewise, it is worth noting that if Jumpspace is to be taken at face value, Calibration Points themselves are unnecessary, since suitably-electrified starships (cf. the problematic Annic Nova) can dispense with the bother of using jump fuel entirely.

There are a number of non-standard jump drives in canon, all of which would require different operational routines and none of which are mentioned in Jumpspace. That article deals with the standard Imperial jump drive alone and not the Hiver 'meltdown' drive, the early Terran 'fuel-hog' drive, the early Vargr 'barium' drive, or the (seemingly) fuelless Annic Nova drive.

Annic Nova, which is so old it predates much of CT canon, is an uncomfortable oddity like Leviathan's jump torpedos. The Annic Nova drive is usually ignored although Hans Rancke-Madsen has very cleverily (IMHO) suggested she might carry her fuel supply in an Ancients' pocket universe.

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

You can say that again...

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

Yup.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by boomslang:
It would make logical sense, but there's nothing in the Jumpspace article (or much elsewhere) to directly support it.

Boomslang,

I prefaced most of what you're taking exception to with IMTU.

The navigator's 'role' in determining jump duration is in MegaTraveller.

Why, for example, are jump tapes only 'one use' if the precise location of bodies at the destination is irrelevant to the calculations?

Their position is not irrevelent, they are where you're travelling to after all. The point in space you're jumping towards is plotted relative to the origin system alone.

You can picture your course as a line or ray in three-dimensional normal space extending from your origin point of 0, 0, 0, out a certain distance to another point whose location can be determine to within 3000km. When you jump, you begin at X0, Y0, Z0 and displaced out to Xx, Yx, Zx in a straight line. All of those points are measured relative to your origin point.

You select your end or exit point while keeping the 33.6 hour long positions of the various bodies in your target system in mind. However, that exit point is still 'measured' from your origin system.

Say you're jump from Regina to Roup. You don't plot an exit point that is 3000km from Roup's 100D limit because the time variation makes that impossible. Instead you plot an exit point 1 parsec from Regina's 100D limit, an exit point that will (hopefully) be close to all the 33.6 hour long positions of Roup's 100D limit. As you can see, IMTU your jump's exit point and distance are measured and plotted relative to your origin system.

Jump tapes thus have a 'best used by' date because the origin system is moving, the destination system is moving, and the various bodies in the destination system you want to exit near are all moving. All that movement means the final Xx, Yx, and Zx coordinates are constantly changing as is the length of the 'ray' or 'line' that marks your jump space course across normal space.

A jump tape will require departure from a certain point in the origin system within a certain time window, otherwise the exit point and jump length it contains will be of little or no practical use.

And why doesn't the temporal window ever expand for miscalculations, such as during misjump? Again, Jumpspace fails to address this.

Jumpspace might, but the rules, especially MT, do not. Blow your jump plot roll and you'll arrive much earlier/later than you want which will force you to make a longer normal space trip.

Likewise, it is worth noting that if Jumpspace is to be taken at face value, Calibration Points themselves are unnecessary, since suitably-electrified starships (cf. the problematic Annic Nova) can dispense with the bother of using jump fuel entirely.

There are a number of non-standard jump drives in canon, all of which would require different operational routines and none of which are mentioned in Jumpspace. That article deals with the standard Imperial jump drive alone and not the Hiver 'meltdown' drive, the early Terran 'fuel-hog' drive, the early Vargr 'barium' drive, or the (seemingly) fuelless Annic Nova drive.

Annic Nova, which is so old it predates much of CT canon, is an uncomfortable oddity like Leviathan's jump torpedos. The Annic Nova drive is usually ignored although Hans Rancke-Madsen has very cleverily (IMHO) suggested she might carry her fuel supply in an Ancients' pocket universe.

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

You can say that again...

And surely That Way Lies Madness...

Yup.


Have fun,
Bill