• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

RFC: Second Survey and Non-Allegiance (Universal?) Base Codes

robject

SOC-14 10K
Admin Award
Marquis
I've wondered, and maybe someone can explain to me, why it's a good idea to use different letter codes for different base allegiances.

I understand why it was done in the early 1980s, before the Allegiance Code showed up. Before that, there was no way to note that a system was owned by a polity. So alternate codes were invented, e.g. for Vargr base codes, at the same time that the base codes in general were expanded to include other interesting base types.

However, it seems cumbersome, too easy to load up, and too difficult to remember... especially when we now have standardized on four-character and two-character allegiance codes.

I understand there is one world where an Imperial base is on a Solomani world. But, one mainworld out of 2,000 subsectors deserves a Library Data entry; it doesn't make a rule.

Seems to me trivially usefully easy to say


D = any Naval Depot
E = any Embassy
M = any military base
N = any Naval Base
S = any Scout Base


That allows (say) 22 different KINDS of bases, which seems to me more interesting than three or four or five codes that all essentially mean "Naval Base".

(And yeah, I'd keep A = N + S, and B = N + W).
 
Last edited:
Last time this came up I thought Marc wanted to maintain separate codes for Imperial vs. non-Imperial bases.

But I agree that ideally allegiance would be decoupled.

What that wouldn't allow is Imperial bases "squatting" in non-Imperial systems - if that's important enough to consider.
 
What that wouldn't allow is Imperial bases "squatting" in non-Imperial systems - if that's important enough to consider.
Notate adequately on the wiki page for the system about the exception and you're good.

Of course, if absolutely necessary you could extend the base codes to notate when a base type does not correspond to the ruling polity in the system so as to cover that kind of cross-border exception.
 
What that wouldn't allow is Imperial bases "squatting" in non-Imperial systems - if that's important enough to consider.
I noted that in my OP... we have one example of this, out of 2,000 subsectors in Charted Space. If it were commonplace, it would make a good argument. But...
 
Last time this came up I thought Marc wanted to maintain separate codes for Imperial vs. non-Imperial bases.
That makes sense when Imperial is the default assumption almost everywhere on the map.
It makes less sense when outside Imperial space or in regions with lots of pocket empires.

Best to be consistent across all polities and cultures, rather than put the Imperials into a position of privilege with everyone else fighting over the scraps for recognition.
 
I'll quote the chart from Joshua's "data" page, with a pile of my own interpolation.


CodeDescription
A
B
CCorsair Base / Freeport
DNaval Depot.
EEmbassy.
F
G
H
JProspecting Base?
K
LResearch Base
MMilitary Base.
NNaval Base.
P
RClan Base. (e.g. Aslan, Oytrip). ???
SScout/Exploration Base.
THegemonic Base. (e.g. Tlaukhu). .???
U
V
WWay Station.

I am slightly stretching those Imperial codes, because I'm using N and S with the Republic of Regina.

I expanded the "T" code from the very specific "Tlaukhu" to the general "Hegemonic".
 
Last edited:
A letter should be reserved for naval base + military base. This is extremely useful for confederations where you can have smaller local bases and large confederation bases.

Likewise, another letter should be reserved for naval base + Corsair base. This is very common in Vargr space and should be recognized.

The general conceit is that military bases, Corsair bases, scout bases, and way stations are mutually exclusive. That keeps a cap on the combo letters, as you don't need to combine any of these with anything other than naval bases.

But, for the record, I am all for universally base codes in the UWP, and for on-map symbols. When doing it myself, the only exception for the on-map symbols I ever made was for the Zhodani. They kept their diamond symbol despite that piece of inconsistency.
 
FWIW, since I can be a benevolent dictator for the file formats TravellerMap consumes and produces, I support the multi-letter base fields, so no need to waste letters encoding combinations.

Also, I generate symbols based on base type and allegiance, so Zho bases get special symbols just like in the olden days. It's easy enough to do the same for Imperial or any other special cases although it's done in the code, not driven by data files.
 
One of the things I got called on a while back and didn't have a good answer for was "Corsair Base". Reflecting now, these are meant to mirror the various free ports in the Caribbean during the height of the pirates during the age of sail. But a better set of rules and descriptions around these bases would be nice.

For the M1900 setup I would think there would be several/many of these on worlds around the borders of the Republic, not just in Vargr space but off toward the Zhodani and (espeically) along the route to Vland.
 
Interesting... my impression had always been "That's the system with Dread Space Pirate Robject's secret-ish base - stay out!"

Changing it from "If you jump there, you're definitely gonna get plundered" to "You can jump there, and might get some good trading in. Or get plundered, hard to say" increases the gaming possibilities.
 
It seems like at the subsector level, Corsair bases are unaligned. Thus they could be a universal symbol for all of Charted Space.

I’d love to see a rendition with the polities each having distinct symbols for their bases. It would help each region feel more “alien” and unique.

OT, but is there a way for Travellermap to show borders as only surrounding individual worlds, and groups of adjacent worlds? I’ve always wanted to see Charted Space rendered that way, to show how porous the borders can be. I’ve done it for a few home-brewed subsectors and it gives a very different and interesting flavor to frontiers and border areas.
 
Thank you guys for adding some really good conversation points to this thread.

I really like talking over the multi-base codes, because it feels a little difficult to abandon the "A" and "B" codes... of course there's also the original "2" code which I forgot to include there!

Similarly talking about "Corsair" bases. There's a lot of good material lurking here.
 
The Corsair bases as freeports is brilliant. I like the more individual codes, such as J for an independent naval base, though often enough I like them just to remain standard, so I don't have to look them up.
 
Interesting... my impression had always been "That's the system with Dread Space Pirate Robject's secret-ish base - stay out!"

Changing it from "If you jump there, you're definitely gonna get plundered" to "You can jump there, and might get some good trading in. Or get plundered, hard to say" increases the gaming possibilities.
Why is the "secret" pirate base marked on the public map? Is the core of the objection to the Corsair base. But as a Freeport, especially if they offer better services than the host world, it would make sense to mark them. You need to be a member of the exclusive club to use the services, but every one knows they're there.
 
Back
Top