Suggestion for T5SS and stellar data

[maksimsmelchak]

...based on your above examples the bolded stars should be the primary in each system respectively:

'Dark_Nebula.txt: 2511 Lima M3 V M8 V M6 V M0 V
'Empty_Quarter.txt: 0426 Marhaban G4 V M0 V M2 V M6 V
'Empty_Quarter.txt: 1729 Hemant M0 V M6 V M3 V M7 V
'Solomani_Rim.txt: 1440 Capella G8 III G1 III M1 V M5 V

You could perhaps suggest that the first star is always the star about which the mainworld orbits (whether or not it is the actual system primary).

I think it makes the most sense, in an intuitive way, to just lists the stars in order of appearance. !., 2. ,3., 4. ...and so on.

1. Primary
2. Near Companion
3. Far Companion
4. Farther Companion
5. Even farther companion
6. Farthest Companion
...and so on.

I know of one sextenary star system: Castor/Gemini (Solomani Rim 2339)

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Castor_(SR_2339)_(world) )

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[whulorigan]

I think it makes the most sense, in an intuitive way, to just lists the stars in order of appearance. !., 2. ,3., 4. ...and so on.

1. Primary
2. Near Companion
3. Far Companion
4. Farther Companion
5. Even farther companion
6. Farthest Companion
...and so on.

The problem, though, is that that assumes all stars in the system have the primary as their "center" of orbit.

T5 has four classes of "companion" stars:

1) Companion (Well inside orbit 0 - perhaps almost touching)
2) Close Star (In the Inner System - Orbits 0-5)
3) Near Star (In the Outer System - Orbits 6-11)
4) Far Star (In the Remote System - Orbits 12-17)
​

It is possible under T5 for each star in the system to have its own "Companion", and even stars that are Near or Far might have thier own respective "Close" stars, for example. How would you clearly differentiate the configurations of two different systems with the exact same types of stars, but with different respective orbital configurations?

For example, the Marhaban system above:

[FONT=arial,helvetica]0426 Marhaban G4 V M0 V M2 V M6 V[/FONT]
​

If G4V is the primary, is M0V a respective Companion Star, with M2V a Near Star and M6V a Far Star, or is M0V a Near Star with M2V as a respective Close Star of the M0V (and M6V a distant Far Companion of the entire system)?

I know of one sextenary star system: Castor/Gemini (Solomani Rim 2339)

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Castor_(SR_2339)_(world) )

This is actually a good example. The real-universe Castor star system is a system of 3 binaries:

Castor Aa A1 V
Castor Ab M5 V
​

Castor Ba A2 V
Castor Bb M2 V

Castor Ca M0.5 V
Castor Cb M0.5 V​

 

[dalthor]

It might be easiest to just generate random stellar data from scratch, but that'll REALLY tick off the masses, and wreak havock on the OTU.

As far as I'm concerned, simpler is better; my original suggestion is just one possibility. I just feel we need to do SOMETHING, and am looking for ideas and alternatives.

If not something like the ({[ suggestion above, maybe placeholders, like dash or dot for empty stellar positions.

To continue with 0426 Marhaban G4 V M0 V M2 V M6 V

maybe

0426 Marhaban G4 V . M0 V M2 V M6 V . . .

where the dots are empty stellar positions. The above would then be primary G4 V with no companion, close M0 V with companion M2 V, near M6 V with no companion, and no far star or far companion.

There should be some way to do this, keeping original stellar data, and upgrading to T5 standards.

Right now there are too many ways to interpret the data.

MWs need to be upgraded to T5 standards as well, but other than existing Ga, As, or Sa codes, most of them could be randomized without a catastrophic effect, unless I'm really missing something.

We ( um OK, The Powers That Be, not including me ) have the power. Lets use it. lol

Don et al, have any discussions led to a possible solution?

 

[whulorigan]

Suppose we use brackets around the affected object(s) and prefix the bracket with:

1) [ ] = Companion
2) c[ ] = Close Star (or star group)
3) n[ ] = Near Star (or star group)
4) f[ ] = Far Star (or star group)
​

So using the Marhaban example:[FONT=arial,helvetica] 0426 Marhaban G4 V M0 V M2 V M6 V

It could be (for example): [/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]G4 V c[M0 V] n[M2 V] f[M6 V][/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]G4 V Primary with no Companion, an [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]M0 V Close Star, M2 V Near Star, and an M6 V Far Star; [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
​

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]or alternatively:

G4 V [M0 V] n[M2 V c[M6 V]][/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica]G4 V Primary with a M0 V Companion, and an M2 V Near Star with its own M6 V Close Star. [/FONT]
​

If desired, you could even (optionally) put the number of the orbit after the "c", "n", or "f":

[FONT=arial,helvetica]G4 V [M0 V] n:7[M2 V c:0[M6 V]][/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]

 

[dalthor]

I posted something similar in another thread, short form below --

With the possibility of 8 stars in a system, I've been using the following, based on my keyboard, and using the asterisk (*) as the center. When you work away from the * on the KB, you get (, {, and [ in that order.

Essentially I group stars and their companions, using those characters.

It kinda looks like this:

Primary Companion (close comp) {near comp} [far comp]

Finally, I use an * to tell me which star the MW orbits.

Some examples:

*K6-III (M1-V) {K0-V K6-V} >> Primary, Close, and Near with Companion
F7-V {M1-VI} [*F5-VI] >> Primary, Near, Far, no companions
M0-V *M7-V >> Primary and Primary companion

Simple but effective, and it works for me.

See http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=32539

I haven't seen EDG's thing that may have used something similar. He mentioned it in the thread above, before he was banned again, in post #33

I don't know that format or reference (don't have the book) so I'm not sure what his version was. I ordered the CD set for T4, waiting for it to arrive so I can check it out.

 

[whulorigan]

I posted something similar in another thread, short form below --

With the possibility of 8 stars in a system, I've been using the following, based on my keyboard, and using the asterisk (*) as the center. When you work away from the * on the KB, you get (, {, and [ in that order.

Essentially I group stars and their companions, using those characters.

It kinda looks like this:

Primary Companion (close comp) {near comp} [far comp]

Finally, I use an * to tell me which star the MW orbits.

Some examples:

*K6-III (M1-V) {K0-V K6-V} >> Primary, Close, and Near with Companion
F7-V {M1-VI} [*F5-VI] >> Primary, Near, Far, no companions
M0-V *M7-V >> Primary and Primary companion

Simple but effective, and it works for me.

See http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=32539

I haven't seen EDG's thing that may have used something similar. He mentioned it in the thread above, before he was banned again, in post #33

I don't know that format or reference (don't have the book) so I'm not sure what his version was. I ordered the CD set for T4, waiting for it to arrive so I can check it out.

EDG's system was very similar, and I would be quite happy using the system you decribed above as well, as long as it is not going to be an isssue with EDG.

The system devised by EDG for TNE:1248 was basically:

1) In multi-star systems, the asterisk (*) notes the star that the primary world orbits.

2) The square brackets ([]) denote distant stars. Each can have their own planetary systems, and they are too far away to directly influence each other. They are effectively independent star systems in the same hex. It usually takes a micro-jump to travel between them. { = T5 Far Star}

3) The parentheses (()) denote close companions. They are in such close proximity that the planetary systems orbits the combination. { = T5 Companion Star}

4) Stars simply listed in order have the smaller stars orbit the larger stars. The smaller stars can have their own system, but they all play together (meaning that each planetary system will often have some hard limits on their sizes). They could be fairly close (e.g. have Jupiter replaced by a star in the Sol system) or pretty distant (e.g. put a star where Neptune is, or just outside that, in the Sol system). It is always at least theoretically possible to travel between the stars using normal space. { = T5 Close Star & Near Star }

 

[dalthor]

In post 33 of the thread I linked, EDG wrote

First, as far as I am aware, there is no longer any obstacle (from me) preventing T5 from using the bracketed Stellar Format that I came up with and that was used in Bearers of the Flame.

Don't know what other permissions might be needed, if any.

My method, though similar, is grouped differently, and uses additional characters, i.e. the curly braces.

 

[whulorigan]

In post 33 of the thread I linked, EDG wrote

First, as far as I am aware, there is no longer any obstacle (from me) preventing T5 from using the bracketed Stellar Format that I came up with and that was used in Bearers of the Flame.

Yes, I remember the post, but that was before he was re-banned. I do not know if that changes anything or not (i.e. I do not know if there was any dialogue behind the scenes that may have an impact, or any apprehension on the part of the Game Designers as a result of such an interaction).

My method, though similar, is grouped differently, and uses additional characters, i.e. the curly braces.

We would have to modify EDG's notation slightly in order to make the distinction between Close & Near Stars, and it seems to me that your system would work perfectly well. The system I outlined I offer as an alternative that is in the same vein as yours.

I think either could work.

 

[DonM]

The real issue here is that when this was previously discussed, there are really about five people who cared about parsing, and the response of the rest was "Meh, give us more data".

Note that the EDG 1248 structure was not used in all the 1248 books, and most of the stellar data in those books is wildly different from the before data. And even though EDG did give permission to use his structure, the response of the five who cared was three differing suggestions on structure and two new "meh" responses.

Since Marc and Matt (Mongoose) drive the T5SS, and they want more sectors, parsing was passed and time moved on.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Are there any five-star systems?

 

[whulorigan]

The real issue here is that when this was previously discussed, there are really about five people who cared about parsing, and the response of the rest was "Meh, give us more data".

Note that the EDG 1248 structure was not used in all the 1248 books, and most of the stellar data in those books is wildly different from the before data. And even though EDG did give permission to use his structure, the response of the five who cared was three differing suggestions on structure and two new "meh" responses.

Since Marc and Matt (Mongoose) drive the T5SS, and they want more sectors, parsing was passed and time moved on.

Does that mean that the issue is dead, or just on the back-burner?

 

[whulorigan]

The real issue here is that when this was previously discussed, there are really about five people who cared about parsing, and the response of the rest was "Meh, give us more data".
.
.
.
And even though EDG did give permission to use his structure, the response of the five who cared was three differing suggestions on structure and two new "meh" responses.

Another thought about parsing and the TravellerMap data:

Perhaps as far as TravellerMap is concerned, the basic stellar types could be shown just as they currently are in the "Booklet Maker" function, but the extended, parsed stellar-data could be shown on the "pop-out" world data-sheet page (the "more..." link to the world at the bottom of the main TravellerMap page when the map is centered on a particular world).

 

[inexorabletash]

Yeah. Honestly I'd love to show the full system structure, either in linear form (examples in T4 adventures) or full orbit depictions (MT and T5 examples) - *if* we had the data (or, equivalently, a canonical way to synthesize it).

(The world data sheet is also accessible as a separate page through the "download" menu, if the twitchy pop up from "more..." is irritating)

(The current intent of the sheet/pop up is to act as a decoder for those who don't have the data format committed to memory, hence much of the space is used for explanation rather than data.)

 

[dalthor]

Does that mean that the issue is dead, or just on the back-burner?

And to clarify, lets separate the stellar update from the MW update.

If we don't do the stellar part, will we at least be getting updating MW remarks, i.e. determine HZ where needed, and add Hot, Cold and satellite remarks, for example?

My current (just for fun) sector generator reads in data files, and will randomly roll HZ data.

It ignores Garden worlds, and those already asteroid belt or marked as satellite. The rest get randomly rolled per T5 rules.

Logic looks like this:

            ' If this is not an asteroid belt, check existing codes
            If iType <> 3 Then
                ' check for Fr, Ho, Co, Lk, Tr, Tu, Tz, Sa, or Ga in the existing remarks
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Ho") <> 0 Then iHZ = -1
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Tr") <> 0 Then iHZ = -1
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Ga") <> 0 Then iHZ = 0
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Co") <> 0 Then iHZ = 1
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Tu") <> 0 Then iHZ = 1
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Fr") <> 0 Then iHZ = 2
                
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Sa") <> 0 Then iType = 2 ' GG far satellite, orbit N-Z
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Lk") <> 0 Then iType = 1 ' GG near satellite, orbit A-M
                If InStr(1, .Remarks, "Tz") <> 0 Then iType = 0 ' planet
                
            End If

*** In the above, iHZ is the habitable zone, and iType is the type of world, either planet or satellite orbiting a gas giant.

First thing I do upon reading the incoming world line is to randomly roll for HZ and type of MW, i.e. planet or satellite. Then I run the check above against existing remarks, and modify the HZ and planet type accordingly. Finally I generate the new remarks accordingly. It'll add hot/cold/garden and so on as needed.

Seems to work pretty well, and doesn't break existing data. The updated remarks replace most of the functionality of the PoSH field I created. PoSH use IMTU is mainly for calculating travel times.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Who is EDG?

Who is EDG?

 

[tjoneslo]

Who is EDG?

EDG stands for "Evil Dr Ganymede" an alias for Dr Constantine Thomas, a long time Traveller fan/critic who has a doctorate in Astrophysics

http://evildrganymede.net/

 

[DonM]

First thing I do upon reading the incoming world line is to randomly roll for HZ and type of MW, i.e. planet or satellite. Then I run the check above against existing remarks, and modify the HZ and planet type accordingly. Finally I generate the new remarks accordingly. It'll add hot/cold/garden and so on as needed.

Seems to work pretty well, and doesn't break existing data. The updated remarks replace most of the functionality of the PoSH field I created. PoSH use IMTU is mainly for calculating travel times.

Please e-mail me right away, and if you previously e-mailed me about this I massively apologize.

 

[DonM]

Does that mean that the issue is dead, or just on the back-burner?

Back-burner. Until this discussion came up, I was one of three people who cared.

Somewhere around here I redid the Marches as a draft in the EDG format...

 

[Garnfellow]

EDG's system was very similar, and I would be quite happy using the system you decribed above as well, as long as it is not going to be an isssue with EDG.

The system devised by EDG for TNE:1248 was basically:

I've got the 1248 books, but I don't see where the EDG notation system is explained anywhere. Your interpretation makes sense to me, but I am having a hard time reconciling it with the actual data.

Stellar data for the Solomani Rim has a strange history. I think the first data was provided in CT Alien Module 6 - Solomani (1986). GURPS Traveller: Rim of Fire (2000) presented revised stellar data. And the TNE 1248 Bearers of the Flame (2006) book provides two different sets of revised data. Finally, the T5SS provides another set of stellar data. There is only a very loose correspondence between any of these datasets:

World	Hex	CT AM6	BotF: 221	BoF: 333	Rim of Fire	T5
Faiwyd	0105	M6D M2D	M3 V* M6 V	[D D]*	M2 V M6 V	M0 V M2 V
DARRUKESH	0106	M6 V M4D M0D	K6 V* [M0 V M4 V]	[M3 V M2 V]* M0V	K6 V M0 V M4 V	M0 V M4 V M0 V
IDDAMAKUR	0110	M1 V M0D	K1 V* [M0V]	G1 V* [M0V]	K1 V M0 V	M1 V M0 V

Might you have reversed the use of brackets and parentheses? There are several systems like Faiwyd on page 333 with just two stars within brackets: "[D D]*". If brackets indicate close companions, that makes sense: two white dwarf stars in close proximity, with the mainworld orbiting around both.

Otherwise I don't know what that signifies.

 

[whulorigan]

I've got the 1248 books, but I don't see where the EDG notation system is explained anywhere. Your interpretation makes sense to me, but I am having a hard time reconciling it with the actual data.

That's because it isn't in the books (which I am presuming is an oversight on the part of the publishers). I looked everywhere in those books when I got them to find the notation-key, and pulled my hair out doing it, to no avail.

My source for the notation syntax above comes from an e-mail forwarded to me by DonM in which Mike West details from memory long afterward what he remembers the notation to be.

Might you have reversed the use of brackets and parentheses? There are several systems like Faiwyd on page 333 with just two stars within brackets: "[D D]*". If brackets indicate close companions, that makes sense: two white dwarf stars in close proximity, with the mainworld orbiting around both.

Otherwise I don't know what that signifies.

In the e-mail Mike West admits that his recollection is a little bit "foggy". So your observations might be correct. Of course, there is also the possibility that it is an example of an erratum, and that they should be "(D D)*".

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Stellar data for the Solomani Rim has a strange history. I think the first data was provided in CT Alien Module 6 - Solomani (1986). GURPS Traveller: Rim of Fire (2000) presented revised stellar data. And the TNE 1248 Bearers of the Flame (2006) book provides two different sets of revised data. Finally, the T5SS provides another set of stellar data. There is only a very loose correspondence between any of these datasets:

[/FONT]

World	Hex	CT AM6	BotF: 221	BoF: 333	Rim of Fire	T5
Faiwyd	0105	M6D M2D	M3 V* M6 V	[D D]*	M2 V M6 V	M0 V M2 V
DARRUKESH	0106	M6 V M4D M0D	K6 V* [M0 V M4 V]	[M3 V M2 V]* M0V	K6 V M0 V M4 V	M0 V M4 V M0 V
IDDAMAKUR	0110	M1 V M0D	K1 V* [M0V]	G1 V* [M0V]	K1 V M0 V	M1 V M0 V

One of the things that most of the post-CT:AM6 data does is correct the erroneously high numbers of "D" type stars (most of which were MD, which if you are adding a temperature/spectral class to D-Stars, should not even exist - the coldest D-type stars should be "KD"). Also, many red dwarf stars are just simply too cool to support some of the mainworlds described for them. Generally, stars cooler than M3 V are unlikely to have any "earthlike" worlds. So in some cases later datasets "upgraded" the temperature class of M-Dwarfs to M0 V - M2 V (or changed them outright from M V to K V or even G V). [FONT=arial,helvetica]Many of the TNE:1248 changes were made to make the mainworld-situations of those systems more plausible. [/FONT]

I would interpret the [FONT=arial,helvetica]BoF:333 reference for Darrukesh to be an M0V primary, with the mainworld orbiting jointly a Far M2 V / M3 V binary pair.


[/FONT]