RabidVargr
SOC-13
or 100,000 hoojiggets of energy.
Biiiiiiggg baddaboom
RV
Biiiiiiggg baddaboom
RV
Jump-Gates
- Thread starter manley_t
- Start date
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
Or in FF&S translation...
Tera watts of energy in joules (trillions of (TW)!)
Thats a lot of power in a structure say (to move 10ktns of ship(ping) at a burst of 15Ktn displacement (Mostly HPG generators, and high effciency solar energy collectors, and Fusion reactors.)
KAWHAM!
heretic with a hammer,
Tera watts of energy in joules (trillions of (TW)!)
Thats a lot of power in a structure say (to move 10ktns of ship(ping) at a burst of 15Ktn displacement (Mostly HPG generators, and high effciency solar energy collectors, and Fusion reactors.)
KAWHAM!
heretic with a hammer,
Bishop Odo
SOC-12
When discussing jump-gates and other technology we approach the problem with our heads in this reality and our imagination living in a fictional and therefore flawed universe. I not trying to be contrary or preaching to the choir, just urging a little flexibility in our concepts. So, what is final judge of future technology if natural laws cannot be depended upon and the fictional rules established twenty-five ago are lacking. Go to the basics, all advances in technology have sociological and the political ramifications. You have to project the ramification and decide if that’s where you want your universe to go.
We can debate the power needed for jump-gate technology, or the cost of this or that, but what of political will. If there is the Political will, cost and power becomes mute. If it can be done, needs to done, and there is sufficient political will too do so, then it will be done. Look at the Apollo program. Do any of you really think we would not be on Mars right now, if in there was a need and the political will to do so.
I believe that technology should be look at as a tree instead of the ladder, i.e. branches instead of levels. I know this is hard to do, takes up a lot of book space and I’m breaking Traveller cannon, may the psychic projection of Marc Miller not strike me down, but think about it.
An example of one problem created with the current TL timeline and it’s monolithic nature or the upward ladder approach, is that as technology progress, old costly and dangerous devices could become safer and practical. Look a Nuclear power, what TL is it available at 8 or 9, I don’t have the book in front of me know, yet by TL 10 there unpractical in favor of safer fusion tech. Flowing the ladder model and approach we move on. This is where things get complicated, but if we just backtracked and followed another branch when the time, i.e. new materials and new elements are found, we could reuse the technology. What is old become new again. Are there really technological dead-ends? Or are those dead-ends limited only to the current tech level?
Following cannon the longest controlled jump possible is 6. What if there was a fork in the branch, so to speak, longer jumps to the right and, Jump-gates to left, but where is the fork at TL9, 16 or 21. With so many version of Traveller out there, and the only attempt at a comprehensive listing of future techs is Mega traveler which in itself is twenty to fifteen year old I find it suspect to depend or rely on that version as cannon. Things change!
We can debate the power needed for jump-gate technology, or the cost of this or that, but what of political will. If there is the Political will, cost and power becomes mute. If it can be done, needs to done, and there is sufficient political will too do so, then it will be done. Look at the Apollo program. Do any of you really think we would not be on Mars right now, if in there was a need and the political will to do so.
I believe that technology should be look at as a tree instead of the ladder, i.e. branches instead of levels. I know this is hard to do, takes up a lot of book space and I’m breaking Traveller cannon, may the psychic projection of Marc Miller not strike me down, but think about it.
An example of one problem created with the current TL timeline and it’s monolithic nature or the upward ladder approach, is that as technology progress, old costly and dangerous devices could become safer and practical. Look a Nuclear power, what TL is it available at 8 or 9, I don’t have the book in front of me know, yet by TL 10 there unpractical in favor of safer fusion tech. Flowing the ladder model and approach we move on. This is where things get complicated, but if we just backtracked and followed another branch when the time, i.e. new materials and new elements are found, we could reuse the technology. What is old become new again. Are there really technological dead-ends? Or are those dead-ends limited only to the current tech level?
Following cannon the longest controlled jump possible is 6. What if there was a fork in the branch, so to speak, longer jumps to the right and, Jump-gates to left, but where is the fork at TL9, 16 or 21. With so many version of Traveller out there, and the only attempt at a comprehensive listing of future techs is Mega traveler which in itself is twenty to fifteen year old I find it suspect to depend or rely on that version as cannon. Things change!
Reliance upon MT as canon is often hazardous to your credibility... (I know from personal experience; it's my favorite ruleset.)
Also, when considering alternate FTL tecchnologies, note that there are a whole bunch more "Methodologies" than FF&S considers... some of which break the T&C concepts.
FF&S supports:
Jump (NHN, non-steerable, no interactions except at transition)
Jump Projector (HT version of Jump)
Jump Gate (Again NHN, non-interaction)
Stutterwarp (N only, interaction with N-space)
Keyhole (NHN, triggers natural wormhole.) Vorkosiverse or Honorverse style wormholes. (The keyhole drive is the necklin rods / jump sails respectively).
Several other methods not mentioned (IIRC; I can't get to my FF&S 1 nor 2)
StarTrek style Warp (N, Interactive); differs from stutterwarp in several details of the interaction... plus has spin-off technologies galore...
Starfire Style Warp Points/Wormwholes (NHN, instant, limited interaction within wormhole)
Wing Commander style (NHN, non-interactive, no keyholes required {or they're really small!}, not always open.)
Star Frontiers style (NHN, non-interacctive, no special drive needed, translate to Hyperspace by n-space accelleration)
BattleTech style (NHN, non-interactive in jump; must jump from specially calculated warp points, but no targeting restrictions)
B5 Style: Drive opens gate to hyperspace... hyperspace uses normal flight... interaction only witihin hyperspace
StarWars: NHN, one way interaction implied (N-space items block h-space routes!)
Lensman (NN'N... interactive) Inertialess! Without inertia, though.... Doc Smith postulates that the C limit is bypassed by the activation of the Inertialess system... you can accelerate until the pressure of the exhaust is euqla to the medium resistance... IIRC, he underestimated gass densities (and thus overestimated speeds...), but heck, it's a fun idea. the n' is "Modifid N-space", or N-space where inertia has been suspended.
Fading Suns style Gates (NHN, fixed end, some interaction with hyperspacce).
considerations not mentioned: Size of drives, fuel requirements, power requirements, realism levels, etc.
Note that interaction is reference to interactions while in hyperspace... Traveller is totally non except for end-points. Vorkosiverse seems to be limmited; the navigaor does, but so long as he does the job right, you traverse the hole; you don't interact with other ships in the hole. HH is apparently instant or nearly so, so innteraction is minimal. Starfire transits are instant, and you can interact with other items transiting the point... possibly fatally!
Just some thoguhts on variations to consider.
Also, when considering alternate FTL tecchnologies, note that there are a whole bunch more "Methodologies" than FF&S considers... some of which break the T&C concepts.
FF&S supports:
Jump (NHN, non-steerable, no interactions except at transition)
Jump Projector (HT version of Jump)
Jump Gate (Again NHN, non-interaction)
Stutterwarp (N only, interaction with N-space)
Keyhole (NHN, triggers natural wormhole.) Vorkosiverse or Honorverse style wormholes. (The keyhole drive is the necklin rods / jump sails respectively).
Several other methods not mentioned (IIRC; I can't get to my FF&S 1 nor 2)
StarTrek style Warp (N, Interactive); differs from stutterwarp in several details of the interaction... plus has spin-off technologies galore...
Starfire Style Warp Points/Wormwholes (NHN, instant, limited interaction within wormhole)
Wing Commander style (NHN, non-interactive, no keyholes required {or they're really small!}, not always open.)
Star Frontiers style (NHN, non-interacctive, no special drive needed, translate to Hyperspace by n-space accelleration)
BattleTech style (NHN, non-interactive in jump; must jump from specially calculated warp points, but no targeting restrictions)
B5 Style: Drive opens gate to hyperspace... hyperspace uses normal flight... interaction only witihin hyperspace
StarWars: NHN, one way interaction implied (N-space items block h-space routes!)
Lensman (NN'N... interactive) Inertialess! Without inertia, though.... Doc Smith postulates that the C limit is bypassed by the activation of the Inertialess system... you can accelerate until the pressure of the exhaust is euqla to the medium resistance... IIRC, he underestimated gass densities (and thus overestimated speeds...), but heck, it's a fun idea. the n' is "Modifid N-space", or N-space where inertia has been suspended.
Fading Suns style Gates (NHN, fixed end, some interaction with hyperspacce).
considerations not mentioned: Size of drives, fuel requirements, power requirements, realism levels, etc.
Note that interaction is reference to interactions while in hyperspace... Traveller is totally non except for end-points. Vorkosiverse seems to be limmited; the navigaor does, but so long as he does the job right, you traverse the hole; you don't interact with other ships in the hole. HH is apparently instant or nearly so, so innteraction is minimal. Starfire transits are instant, and you can interact with other items transiting the point... possibly fatally!
Just some thoguhts on variations to consider.
This isn't strictly true. Some ships in B5 have their own jump engines. So sometimes ships will go through a fixed jump gate, and then use their own jump engines to come back out of hyperspace at the destination, or vice versa. A means of opening a portal is required at BOTH ends.
Ships without jump engines either use gates, or travel in convoy with others that can open a gate and hold it open while the whole convoy passes through.
Of course, the Shadows have a slightly different version of the technology.
For those interested in j gates try this link:
http://www.securityleak.com/slm/issue_03/jump_gates.html
http://www.securityleak.com/slm/issue_03/jump_gates.html
Howdy, y'all.
This here is my first posting, and I thought I'd make it about a topic that I've been thinking about lately. With the release of T20, I've been toying with starting up a Traveller campaign again. And one of the ideas I'm playing with is jumpgates.
The way I was thinking about it was that a ship needs to already have a standard jump drive in order to be able to use a jumpgate. This simplifies the situation immensely, I think. No custom rules, no playing around with changing tonnage, nothing. All of the infrastructure for jumping is already in the ship, so it's ready to go.
To use the jumpgate, the ship enters into the gate, and then goes through the jump procedure. The jumpgate then boosts the jumpfield, burning fuel in the gate, rather than in the ship, and helps to send it on its way. After entering jumpspace, the ship acts normally, reaching its destination, and emerging into normal space just as if it had done the jump on its own.
What's the point of this? Well, it allows a J1 ship to make a J6 jump, if there is a gate available. I would only have a few of these gates around, though. The cost would be a lot less than buying a J6 ship.
I did it so that I could have players with a practical ship (i.e., J2 seems to be the most useful IMTU), but they'd still be able to get places that required longer legs. The idea came to me while reading about misjumps. A J1 ship can conceivably go a lot farther during a misjump than one parsec. So the physics involved is already in place.
My jumpgates will be rather rare. And Imperium controlled. You can use them, but you have to let people know where and when you are going.
I don't have this idea fully worked up, yet. This is what I've got so far, and I thought I'd share it, and get some feedback. Thanks.
Carl
This here is my first posting, and I thought I'd make it about a topic that I've been thinking about lately. With the release of T20, I've been toying with starting up a Traveller campaign again. And one of the ideas I'm playing with is jumpgates.
The way I was thinking about it was that a ship needs to already have a standard jump drive in order to be able to use a jumpgate. This simplifies the situation immensely, I think. No custom rules, no playing around with changing tonnage, nothing. All of the infrastructure for jumping is already in the ship, so it's ready to go.
To use the jumpgate, the ship enters into the gate, and then goes through the jump procedure. The jumpgate then boosts the jumpfield, burning fuel in the gate, rather than in the ship, and helps to send it on its way. After entering jumpspace, the ship acts normally, reaching its destination, and emerging into normal space just as if it had done the jump on its own.
What's the point of this? Well, it allows a J1 ship to make a J6 jump, if there is a gate available. I would only have a few of these gates around, though. The cost would be a lot less than buying a J6 ship.
I did it so that I could have players with a practical ship (i.e., J2 seems to be the most useful IMTU), but they'd still be able to get places that required longer legs. The idea came to me while reading about misjumps. A J1 ship can conceivably go a lot farther during a misjump than one parsec. So the physics involved is already in place.
My jumpgates will be rather rare. And Imperium controlled. You can use them, but you have to let people know where and when you are going.
I don't have this idea fully worked up, yet. This is what I've got so far, and I thought I'd share it, and get some feedback. Thanks.
Carl
I think with that limitation, you are better off, and there's some game balance. I would, however, consider making them extremely expensive to use (i.e., on the order of a mortgage payment) -- so that they aren't used for regular commerce, but can be used if need be.
This does, of course, dramatically alter strategic warfare in the Traveller universe, but if you can live with that, that's not a bad suggestion.
This does, of course, dramatically alter strategic warfare in the Traveller universe, but if you can live with that, that's not a bad suggestion.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Howdy Carl, and welcome aboard! Hah, beat old Liam to the punch 
I like your outline.
This will of course make YTU very not OTU but still it'll maintain the flavour IMO. And like you say it keeps all the ships the same.
A couple points:
The gates will presumably also have to have J-drive, power plant, computer, personnel (and of course lots of fuel and fuel shuttles) to handle all that traffic. So you'd build them to accommodate a certain jump range and d-tonnage?
This addresses your control concern. To use the gate you'd need to file a J-flight plan, pay the fee (maybe use the charter rates, your ship d-tonnage and gate J range used), and then wait your turn (I expect the primary usage would be military and noble, it could be a loooong wait
) When you get to the gate they tap your computer and do all the jump configuration. I think the ship computer would still need to be up to the task of the jump involved though.
There are a couple places where it would make a big difference in the OTU (rifts and such) but your limited approach should reduce that impact. Perhaps there are reasons not to use gates everywhere? Strategic vulnerability, lack of abundant fuel, sparse traffic, gravimetric anomalies
Perhaps the ability to produce a jump bubble around another body (relatively safely) is a recent development (TL 16?). You might even consider applying the same (small) misjump risk associated with casting off drained drop tanks.
I'll reign in my imagination for a bit now and see what else is suggested.
Yep, I like the way this is going, keep us posted. I may have to have a couple (perhaps experimental and top secret at first) jump gates in my game after all.
I like your outline.
This will of course make YTU very not OTU but still it'll maintain the flavour IMO. And like you say it keeps all the ships the same.
A couple points:
The gates will presumably also have to have J-drive, power plant, computer, personnel (and of course lots of fuel and fuel shuttles) to handle all that traffic. So you'd build them to accommodate a certain jump range and d-tonnage?
This addresses your control concern. To use the gate you'd need to file a J-flight plan, pay the fee (maybe use the charter rates, your ship d-tonnage and gate J range used), and then wait your turn (I expect the primary usage would be military and noble, it could be a loooong wait
There are a couple places where it would make a big difference in the OTU (rifts and such) but your limited approach should reduce that impact. Perhaps there are reasons not to use gates everywhere? Strategic vulnerability, lack of abundant fuel, sparse traffic, gravimetric anomalies
Perhaps the ability to produce a jump bubble around another body (relatively safely) is a recent development (TL 16?). You might even consider applying the same (small) misjump risk associated with casting off drained drop tanks.
I'll reign in my imagination for a bit now and see what else is suggested.
Yep, I like the way this is going, keep us posted. I may have to have a couple (perhaps experimental and top secret at first) jump gates in my game after all.
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
_________________________________________________
Imperium controlled, meaning military traffic, etc has priority/ station control (ala weber-verse, B-5). Again, excellent reasoning.Go for it!
Keeps the Traveller flavor, and gets around cumbersome refts (and every Sector has a region where a J2 ship just cannae make it across!).
Next question, who else besides the Imperium has this technology? the major races? (a B-5 type of question).
Thanks fer the ideas! ANd once again, welcome here!
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
_________________________________________________Originally posted by far-trader:
Howdy Carl, and welcome aboard! Hah, beat old Liam to the punch
_________________________________________
Who are YOU callin old?I cede the point on first contact, though
_________________________________________
A couple points:
The gates will presumably also have to have J-drive, power plant, computer, personnel (and of course lots of fuel and fuel shuttles) to handle all that traffic. So you'd build them to accommodate a certain jump range and d-tonnage?
This addresses your control concern. To use the gate you'd need to file a J-flight plan, pay the fee (maybe use the charter rates, your ship d-tonnage and gate J range used), and then wait your turn (I expect the primary usage would be military and noble, it could be a loooong wait) When you get to the gate they tap your computer and do all the jump configuration. I think the ship computer would still need to be up to the task of the jump involved though.[qb]
_________________________________________________
My .000000125 Mcr input: Jump-Station computer can handle the extra work. Charges? the fuel used for the extra parsec consumption, plus tax/ maintenance fee. Or a small ship will find it prohibitive to use!Say a ship uses 100dtns fuel, but the gate uses anothe 500dtns to make the J-6?
Charge em refined fuel fees, plus the rest. YMMV
_________________________________________________
[qb]There are a couple places where it would make a big difference in the OTU (rifts and such) but your limited approach should reduce that impact. Perhaps there are reasons not to use gates everywhere? Strategic vulnerability, lack of abundant fuel, sparse traffic, gravimetric anomalies
Perhaps the ability to produce a jump bubble around another body (relatively safely) is a recent development (TL 16?). You might even consider applying the same (small) misjump risk associated with casting off drained drop tanks.
I'll reign in my imagination for a bit now and see what else is suggested.
Yep, I like the way this is going, keep us posted. I may have to have a couple (perhaps experimental and top secret at first) jump gates in my game after all.
I have IMTU (prior to rebellion) limited them to focal points of Ancients sites (for reasons the Imp Scientists havenae yet figgered out). But not all have gates at them...expense to build em, and the rare TL knowledge has been centered in Massilia Sector/Geonee region. (and Lucan wanted it/ Margaret/Dulinor wanted it in rebellion.times!)
My thoughts on this topic were to allow for the following.
1) A jump gate would be usable by any ship with a jump engine.
2) The gate would reduce the jump fuel required by ~80% (using the 80/20 rule) by creating the jump bubble around the ship. Thus allowing for additional cargo capacity for merchants.
3) The gate would have the best computer available at its the tech level (replaces ship's computer for jump calc's and contributes positive mods) (Also logs ship's registration and destination)
4) The gate would be capable of supporting the maximum jump available at its tech level.
5) Gate maintenance would always be up to date.
6) Gates are always considered to be using refined fuel. (this would reduce the need for streamlining, fuel scoops, refining, etc. from each ship.)
So, the primary reasons to use jump gates are,
1) reduced jump fuel tankage/increased cargo capacity.
2) reduced chance of misjump.
3) reduced user capital expense.
Additionally, in the case of misjump, the gate could provide some information regarding the destination of the ship, so that rescue could be dispatched, if necessary.
These home brew rules seemed like a balanced trade-off for benefit (more cargo/reduced misjump chances) verses restrictions (had to use jump gate to get benefits, jump would be logged).
Thomas
1) A jump gate would be usable by any ship with a jump engine.
2) The gate would reduce the jump fuel required by ~80% (using the 80/20 rule) by creating the jump bubble around the ship. Thus allowing for additional cargo capacity for merchants.
3) The gate would have the best computer available at its the tech level (replaces ship's computer for jump calc's and contributes positive mods) (Also logs ship's registration and destination)
4) The gate would be capable of supporting the maximum jump available at its tech level.
5) Gate maintenance would always be up to date.
6) Gates are always considered to be using refined fuel. (this would reduce the need for streamlining, fuel scoops, refining, etc. from each ship.)
So, the primary reasons to use jump gates are,
1) reduced jump fuel tankage/increased cargo capacity.
2) reduced chance of misjump.
3) reduced user capital expense.
Additionally, in the case of misjump, the gate could provide some information regarding the destination of the ship, so that rescue could be dispatched, if necessary.
These home brew rules seemed like a balanced trade-off for benefit (more cargo/reduced misjump chances) verses restrictions (had to use jump gate to get benefits, jump would be logged).
Thomas
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
Bishop: Great work! STARS fer you lad!
Similar threads
