Piracy Redux

[far-trader]

Any technology that would make fencing starships impractical would also make fencing pirated goods impractical...

I have to disagree. For an analogy think rfid chips in stores. They put it in merchandise that warrants the expense, not everything in the store (yet). No rfid candy bars (yet) though they are very widely pocketed.

A ship worth 10s of MCr is worth putting some pretty sophisticated protection into. Think lowjack is the cat's meow for high end cars now, think next gen tech and something worth a lot more.

The cargo, worth what, maybe 10s of Kcr total is not going to have the same protection, and it'll probably be on the shipping container. Oh sure some might be embedded in the cargo depending on what it is, but it'll still be pretty easy to for the fence to move it.

 

[far-trader]

If you can get the ship to a port in the first place, so you can sell hot goods, you can sell the ship, because any port that will let a known pirate land (and it takes one witness to turn you into a known pirate) doesn't care about skips. If nothing else, a chop shop can turn it into spare parts and sell the parts.

I tend to think hot goods won't be sold in a port from a known pirate or skip ship :smirk:

The pirate or skip, if known, will arrange a meet somewhere else with a fence, who will then launder the goods before taking through a port.

Or the port will be pirate and skip friendly port that looks the other way.

I expect even the parts of a ship, the ones worth anything at least, will all be indelibly stamped, just like car parts are now, only harder to erase, remove, and/or fake.

 

[dean]

Most likely, a pirate has a ally in a semi-legitimate merchant who takes on the odd hijacked cargo or ten and uses the proceeds to line his pockets. They meet at a backwater planet just off the main, and do their business with the transponders turned off near the local unrefined fuel source...

And, for anyone living anywhere within four to six hours of the Mexico border, if your car is stolen and remains unrecovered, you can bet it had the serial numbers shaved off and ws retitled south of the border. Heck, vehicles used in the primitve areas don't even have registrations, never mind titles. Ships move between the Vargr states and the Imperium frequently, I'd guess.

If money can be made doing it, it's generally done.

Happy Travelling!

 

[pendragonman]

If money can be made doing it, it's generally done.

Exactly. Worse, not everyone who tries piracy reaches even break-even on expenditures; or even survives their first attempt. What drives the pool is that there are a very small number of moderately successful pirates, and a microscopic number of highly successful pirates.

You know, the guys who hit the jackpot on one big score, and stop pirating? Exceedingly rare, but existent.

 

[Brillig]

It would seem to me that the greatest impediment to piracy (guns blazing, board and take the prize variety of piracy, that is ) is that the price of the Pirate vessel is so great compared to that of the Prize. The key consideration is Repair, the ultimate Pirate cost of doing business.

In the Book 2 'verse 1 hit to engine plant can cost up to 120% of total value to repair, or 100% assuming the crew have good facilities and etc. to do the work themselves. Those pips of damage which would require large expenses to repair are not ever going to get repaired.

A pirate would of necessity end up being a patched together cripple, and even a Pirate Cruiser which has been at it's trade for any length of time would be no match for a well maintained vessel of half it's tonnage.

Pirate ship captains must of necessity be forever obsessed with replacing engine parts. AND, replacing Engineers.

The way to stop piracy is strategically - to build Q-ships. A Q-ship might be a 200 ton SDB built as a special hull, to look externally EXACTLY like a Free Trader (of whatever stripe) - the purpose of this vessel is simply to put a few pips of damage on the Pirate 's drives, and then hunker down until the relieving fighters show, and run the wounded pirate away. It (the SDB) gets slagged, but it does not matter, not a bit. The pirate has lost. The 'good guys' Win by Attrition.

The SDB selects drives, and fires until he can no longer fire.

Consider the effect on the Pirate of encountering such a beast even once. The likely outcome is a Pirate engine room with hits on each drive, costing on average about half of the total cost of the new drive to repair, if the crew assists. Further such repair has to be done in primitive conditions, unless they have a base to repair in. Field repairs should be 'temporary' at best.

A Q-ship built under a rules set allowing armor will generally not even take crew hits. - the drives are likely toast, but it will not be captured.

Economically, the Pirate cannot afford to exchange damage, and cannot afford to just destroy his prizes, as he needs to recoup his losses - he has to have them 'intact'. So, the guns blazing attack option is not a player.

It seems to me that the Pirate simply cannot embrace the model under discussion, the surprise attack/board/loot and scoot. It is too easy to counter.

 

[R_Chance]

Q ships aren't cheap and wouldn't be deployed everywhere. Any pirate with a brain would change operational areas fairly often just to avoid increased regular naval patrols much less the possibility of Q ships. The Q ship would need to be jump capable to redeploy or be tied to a tender... and if jump capable and able to masquerade as a harmless merchant wouldn't it make a great pirate ship? For that matter wouldn't it make sense to purpose build pirate ships along those lines (assuming you have a dedicated "pirate ship" / raider -- as Traveller does)? The cure could be worse than the problem

 

[Matt123]

The other problem with Q ships of this nature, is getting them near the pirate, if you assume Piracy is rare (not unknown, but rare).

If piracy isn't rare then other measures are likely to be more cost efficient than creating a new class of vessel for the Navy to run & maintain. For example swamping several systems simultaniously with Imperial Navy & taking direct control of all wilderness refueling. Good exercise for the Fleet & very bad for any Pirates/Renegades caught in the net.

Cheers!
Matt

 

[Matt123]

Piracy is all about economics. You yourself have said as much in your own posts when you natter on about people coveting the wealth of others.

Excellent, we have established that justifying the existence of Free Traders is crucial to any discussion on Pirates.

From an economic standpoint, those jump1 mains have "empty" hexes all along them. Trace your finger along a given section and you'll come across a poor, lo-pop world sooner than later. Those worlds won't provide the pax and cargos your free trader requires.

Already discussed in later posts.

Speculation is a role-playing mechanism and not a setting detail mechanism.

Yet surely you accept that spec trade is common in the OTU! Certainly using the CT tables it was hard not to make money (in my Tramp J1 trader), bit unrealistically so I thought. But none the less the inclusion of the role-play mechanism (flawed or not & it even includes Brokers to help you buy & sell!) clearly indicates the authors desire to replicate that aspect of Merchant life.

You really don't know what you're talking about, do you? Try running the numbers for a change instead of simply making things up. An engineer earns all of 4,000Cr per month and a pilot only earns 6,000Cr. You can carry one middle passenger for one jump and pay an engineer for two months.

& you have clearly never run a business. That engineer is sucking 48,000cr a year off your bottom line, much rather it went into my pocket as the owner.

However you ignored the point I was making, I'll re-order the sentance for you. Perhaps you would like to address the whole sentance in your next reply...
"You underestimate the impact of the extra cost on the mortgage & maintenance to pay for those J2 drives, PP & computer and salaries on your bottom line."

The cost that effects a trader's bottom line above all others is the ship's mortgage. The effects of all the other stuff you're roping in is miniscule.

Yes thats kind of obvious, but again you ignore the point being made regards the extra cost of running a J2 trader vs a J1.

You've assumed wrong again. If the "deal" is good enough - either a hold full of freight or that golden spec cargo your scenarios depend on - why wouldn't a Marava captain accept it? Leaving aside his mortgage, his other costs like fuel, salaries, and the like will be about the same as the Beowulf's captain.

I agree, why wouldn't a Marava captain accept it? The OTU assumes spec cargos, why wouldn't both or many ships engage in spec trade? The OTU even has Brokers to assist with spec trade, indicating sizable volume. Well there's not much money in it for a Broker if he's only filling one vessel a week...

And you can't leave mortgages aside. You have ranted enough about it, I'm surprised you would even suggest ignoring it. But, oh, thats right, its larger for a J2 trader what with having to pay for twice the jump drives, PP & Computer. Maybe that fact didn't suit this particular rant.

Try and wrap your head around this. In any given system, a multi-jump ship has more options for destinations than a jump1 vessel. Because it can go more places fast, it can explore more of the passenger lists, freight offerings, and spec cargos that are offered. HOWEVER, if the best offers involve only a jump1 trip, there is nothing that will prevent the multi-jump ship from taking those offers.

Doesn't take much wrapping. Again this has already been discussed. The competitive advantage of a J2 ship is range, That of a J1 ship is capacity & lower costs.

As for the "logic", I can't help you there as your posts have exhibited none. Then again, your posts can't be logical when you fail to grasp the mechanics of the situation under discussion. Your confusion over what cost truly effects a trader illustrates that.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

There's plenty that stops the jump1 trader from making that run. Things like taking longer to cover the route and having to pay more mortgages because you took longer. You know, "inconsequential" things like that.

Are you seriously now trying to say J1 ships cannot undertake a scheduled run between worlds! I'll be generous & assume you shot off your reply without comprehending what you were replying to.

No wonder you can't grasp the problems and time associated with inteceptions! You play the only Traveller ship combat system in which ships don't move. Dust off Mayday or LBB:2 and try your hand at a vector-based movement system. Believe me, it will be a real big bite of that Reality Sandwich for you.

Ahh, what a lovely world you live in. Everyone you meet is one dimensional & can be defined in black & white.

But back to your assertion, have you read ATPollards second post yet or worked out the vectors for yourself to test your own assumptions?

So, you don't have the stones to back up your arguments? I figured as much. I'm debating in a vacuum here because you're making assertions you can't be bothered to test.

sigh. Its an old debating trick (& one of your favourites I notice) to call for specifics only to be able to shoot them down in flames. No I won't play, go play it on newbies.

Meantime I'm still waiting on your referances to old posts dating 7-8 years ago where 'all this was thrashed out' & 'nothing new remains to be discovered'.

Whats that? Silence....

No, read my post again and pay attention this time. I was referring to that fact that astrographic jump1 mains aren't economic jump1 mains you blithely assume they are.

ok...

1) Jump1 mains are the exception, not the rule

Now, which part of that did I mis-understand?

No. Both Hans and I have addressed this. Multi-jump provides far more economic options. Your mistaken belief arise from the fact that you've never worked out the actual costs involved, as illustrated by your statement that salaries are an important cost when mortgages trump all.

You needed help to figure this out! Again the competitive advantage of J2 ships is range, J1 ships is lower costs & capacity.

I'll spell it out. Over a J1 journey, the J1 Trader is cheaper & it carries more. And no you cannot with any 'Intellectual Honesty' selectively exclude the mortgages in your reply.

No. The economics support the idea of jump1 vessels only working in regions that can provide them with the pax, freight, and cargo they require and the game itself supports the idea with the canonical jump1 subsidized trader.

Thats a non-statement, you could have said that about J2 ships & still been correct.

That's because you can't rationally explain a man out of a position he arrived at irrationally. When you begin to look at the situation for what it is and not what you beleive it to be, what's been told to you in this thread will make sense.

Again my opening two sentances in the post that started this, were;
"Your being a little harsh on J1 tramp traders. They won't compete with multi jump capable ships, but they were never intended to."

Despite making an arguement over it, you are closer to my opinion than ever. Your whole debate is that J1 ships cannot compete with J2 ships and that J1 ships would be daft to try.

[quote... that J1 trading vessels are not present in sufficient numbers to service out of the way places and put themselves at risk, albeit low, of piracy. /quote]

I never said that.

Then what are you trying to say? The conclusion of my original post was that;
"J1 traders will as a consequence be everywhere, not trying to compete with J2 traders, but picking up the pieces & doing the jobs they don't want. Of course this will mean travelling through lightly defended systems on occasion, refuelling at Gas Giants risking pirates & mis-jumps. But if the job covers the mortgage & crews wages, the next system might have that big paying cargo that every now & again puts a grin on your captains face..."

Your position appears to be that J1 traders will lose out consistently to multi-jump traders. The consequence to that would be less J1 traders as they are un-competitive. I think I summarised your position pretty well.

I'm not looking forward to your's because it will be full of tedious opinions about how you think the Traveller setting works and not how it actually does.

Ahh, yes sorry your eminence & recepticle of all Traveller knowledge.

Not having fun

Yes but most of the time its you being harsh on the posts of others. Its never so much fun when the spotlight is turned back.

I'm still waiting for referances to your lost scrolls, sorry lost threads.

Cheers!
Matt

 

[Anthony]

Yet surely you accept that spec trade is common in the OTU! Certainly using the CT tables it was hard not to make money (in my Tramp J1 trader), bit unrealistically so I thought.

Spec trade is common in the OTU. It does not use the CT tables, and in general for any competitive route will rapidly devolve to being similar in profitability to contract freight.

"You underestimate the impact of the extra cost on the mortgage & maintenance to pay for those J2 drives, PP & computer and salaries on your bottom line."

It's simple: the J2 ship has, relative to its cargo space, about 180% of the cost of the J1 ship, and takes 50% as much time. Thus, it costs about 90% as much.

 

[R_Chance]

Spec trade is common in the OTU. It does not use the CT tables, and in general for any competitive route will rapidly devolve to being similar in profitability to contract freight.

It's simple: the J2 ship has, relative to its cargo space, about 180% of the cost of the J1 ship, and takes 50% as much time. Thus, it costs about 90% as much.

Er... I just stumbled into this battl... discussion, but a jump distance of one parsec is covered in the same amount of time regardless of whether your drive is rated 1 or 2 or 6 for that matter. So by your math, the J1 ship is better at J1 routes. And the J2 ship is better at J2 routes. Big surprise. I suspect that the superiority of either would depend on the nature of the main being travelled on (the number of jump 1 and jump 2 connections) and that the ships would stick to areas where they had the advantage in costs.

 

[Matt123]

It's simple: the J2 ship has, relative to its cargo space, about 180% of the cost of the J1 ship, and takes 50% as much time. Thus, it costs about 90% as much.

Only over J2 routes. Extrapolating from your figures a J2 ship 'competeing' in J1 routes, has 180% of the J1 ships costs. A J1 ship 'competeing' in J2 routes has 111% of the J2 ships costs.

Of course none of this excludes J2 ships taking on J1 cargo, but there again it also doesn't exclude J1 ships taking on J2 cargo. It just means the respective ships are less competitive if they don't use thier advantages.

I agree with your comment on spec trade tho. If theres a dollar to be made, I would have thought someone else will likely try to make it & turn those spec goods into standard cargo. But the mechanics as written allow spec cargo to be available to merchant captains.

Having said that the oportunities do exist in real life. I've looked with interest at buying cheap second hand mining equipment from Oz to import into NZ, its worth little in the middle of nowhere & many times that price sitting in NZ. Owning a ship (a Pinace would do!) however would make it easier by getting me on the spot to examine the goods & in getting the goods back to NZ. If the ships basic costs are covered by cargo, this spec trade would be all cream.

Cheers!
Matt

 

[mbrinkhues]

Er... I just stumbled into this battl... discussion, but a jump distance of one parsec is covered in the same amount of time regardless of whether your drive is rated 1 or 2 or 6 for that matter. So by your math, the J1 ship is better at J1 routes. And the J2 ship is better at J2 routes. Big surprise. I suspect that the superiority of either would depend on the nature of the main being travelled on (the number of jump 1 and jump 2 connections) and that the ships would stick to areas where they had the advantage in costs.

The only point where it gets interesting are J1 mains with "empty" systems. That is you HAVE a continous J1 route but there are unsettled systems in between. A J2 ship can make time there since it can jump over that system, having one week less travel time on that leg and will not have to face the potential dangers of that system

 

[Matt123]

The only point where it gets interesting are J1 mains with "empty" systems. That is you HAVE a continous J1 route but there are unsettled systems in between. A J2 ship can make time there since it can jump over that system, having one week less travel time on that leg and will not have to face the potential dangers of that system

Which brings us back to the Piracy debate. Without Pirates you remove most of the potential (I think it should be remote anyway) risk to J1 Traders moving through an 'empty' system. Without risk its just a numbers game, fill the hold by offering discounts for non-time sensitive cargos. Your cargo is as safe as a J2 ships. Assuming as the captain you want to cross the gap & not just return back down the J1 main.

Pirates add security as a competitive advantage to J2 traders. No Pirates, no competitive advantage involving security.

Cheers!
Matt

 

[Anthony]

Er... I just stumbled into this battl... discussion, but a jump distance of one parsec is covered in the same amount of time regardless of whether your drive is rated 1 or 2 or 6 for that matter. So by your math, the J1 ship is better at J1 routes. And the J2 ship is better at J2 routes. Big surprise. I suspect that the superiority of either would depend on the nature of the main being travelled on.

The problem with your logic here is that mains are irrelevant -- what matters is the distance you're covering, not the shape of the main. Any main transversible by J1 is also at least as doable by J2 (often, it is not only doable by J2, it's shorter by J2). For any trips above 1 parsec, optimal is nearly always either J2 or J3 (under rare conditions, J1 can be optimal on a 5 parsec route). If there's an 'empty hex', it's not only safer to bypass it with a J2 ship, it's cheaper.

 

[R_Chance]

The problem with your logic here is that mains are irrelevant -- what matters is the distance you're covering, not the shape of the main. Any main transversible by J1 is also at least as doable by J2 (often, it is not only doable by J2, it's shorter by J2). For any trips above 1 parsec, optimal is nearly always either J2 or J3 (under rare conditions, J1 can be optimal on a 5 parsec route). If there's an 'empty hex', it's not only safer to bypass it with a J2 ship, it's cheaper.

Excuse me, but the mains aren't just a contiguos group of systems, they are trade routes. That's the whole point to their "shape". Sure you can go through a whole main making a jump 2 every time... you might just be skipping a lot of worlds of course. Some of which might just be worth a few credits to stop at. I don't have my maps right in front of me, but the mains are primarily jump 1 connections IIRC. Jump 2 ships would be best for overjumping a system to deliver cargo to a system 2 parsecs away, but I'd bet on their being plenty of cargo that only needs to travel 1 parsec.

If you're arguement is that jump 2 ships can make more connections, that's true. Of course a jump 3 ship can trump a jump 2 ship then... where does the cut off point in your argument come? Is jump 2 the optimal capability, or is it higher? And what about all those cargos who don't need to travel more than parsec?

I'd say those 1 parsec cargo runs are the reason for the jump 1 subsidized merchants and the jump 1 free traders. Why waste a high jump capability ship on a short hop?

 

[mbrinkhues]

Even on longer runs a J1 subby can be interesting. IF most of the run is J1 the rare "empty system" does not offer enough benefit to set of the larger costs and smaller cargo bays of the J2 ship.

 

[Anthony]

Excuse me, but the mains aren't just a contiguos group of systems, they are trade routes.

So what? Trade routes are only meaningful if there's business to be done along the route, so if you've got 'dead' systems along the route, you can and will skip them if possible.

Sure you can go through a whole main making a jump 2 every time... you might just be skipping a lot of worlds of course. Some of which might just be worth a few credits to stop at.

If your cargo space is full with a cargo going from world A to world B, stopping at worlds C and D don't get you any money, because you don't have any cargo space available to take advantage of opportunities you might find. If your cargo space isn't full, you're throwing away money.

I'd say those 1 parsec cargo runs are the reason for the jump 1 subsidized merchants and the jump 1 free traders. Why waste a high jump capability ship on a short hop?

Sure. If you're only moving cargo one parsec, you move it by J1 ship. There are certainly an enormous number of J1 ships going between Rhylanor and Porozlo, for example. However, if you're moving a cargo more than one parsec, you move it in the way that has the lowest total cost, and that's either J2 or J3 (depending on ruleset and route).

 

[selunatic2397]

How did a thread on piracy become a thread on the economic feasibility of j1/j2/and j3 traders?

I still think the real money for pirates is in hunting down their fellow pirates...so much more loot than a little free trader.

 

[veltyen]

How did a thread on piracy become a thread on the economic feasibility of j1/j2/and j3 traders?

Yes, but isn't the size of the Pirates computer unrealistic?

I still think the real money for pirates is in hunting down their fellow pirates...so much more loot than a little free trader.

To paraphrase the warriors creed:

When possible trade fairly,
If not possible to pay the bills, smuggle a little bit,
If smuggling is not enough, lift cargo from the docks,
If stealing cargo is not enough, occasionally sell passengers into slavery,
If slavery is not enough, standover low TL planets,
If standover is not enough, become a pirate,
If piracy is not enough, politics might be your game.

 

[R_Chance]

So what? Trade routes are only meaningful if there's business to be done along the route, so if you've got 'dead' systems along the route, you can and will skip them if possible.

If your cargo space is full with a cargo going from world A to world B, stopping at worlds C and D don't get you any money, because you don't have any cargo space available to take advantage of opportunities you might find. If your cargo space isn't full, you're throwing away money.

Sure. If you're only moving cargo one parsec, you move it by J1 ship. There are certainly an enormous number of J1 ships going between Rhylanor and Porozlo, for example. However, if you're moving a cargo more than one parsec, you move it in the way that has the lowest total cost, and that's either J2 or J3 (depending on ruleset and route).

Having trade along the route is the whole point of it being a "main" / trade route... When Traveller first came out there were was a table for creating your own commercial jump routes. The assumption being most Traveller adventurers would travel by commercial ship as owning your own vessel was fairly unlikely (well, that and the fact I think Miller was reading an awful lot of E.C. Tubb's Dumarest books). Long jump connections were rare for anything except A starports to other A starports and the like. Most transport routes were jump 1 or 2. rarely anything longer. There were multiple connections running along routes (ie. to an adjacent system, to a system 2 parsecs away, etc.). Short jump ships work the short ones, long jump ships (rarer and more expensive) work the long ones.

So, as a jump 1 ship you limit yourself to a cluster of jump 1 connections. That's the point. You only make that jump to a dead system if there is something worthwhile on the other side that justifies the dead week. The whole point about this is not about using a jump 1 vessel to do a multiple parsec connection. It is about the viability / profitability of jump 1 ships. *sigh* In short we pretty much agree -- use the ship that is best suited to the distance. My point is not that jump 2 or 3 ships are useless or too expensive. It's that a jump 1 ship is useful and can be profitable in the proper environment (i.e. a mainly jump 1 main). Of course, it may not be the best ship for adventurers, but that's a different concern.

Additionally Jump 1 free traders were intended to work fringe areas without established routes. Another job for a small, cheap ship, even if it means an extra week between cargo loads. That's the whole Norton / "Solar Queen" free trader thing in a nutshell.

Which brings up the fact that this is an RPG designed to support certain role playing ideas / settings. If there is a problem with the numbers on doing so then it's really a problem with the games mechanics / numbers, not the setting / RP ideas at it's core. Sometimes it's too easy to get lost in the number crunching and forget what the game is about.