The Universal Starport facility Profile

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by far-trader:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Antares Administration:
Liam and Shane, given that last exchange between FT and I in the wee hours of the morning, I'd like to recommend that the 'Powers that Be' award us both with Purple Hearts. The commodation should read something like:

"In the face of exhaustion and the intense scrutiny of hundreds of CotI users, FT and AA risked mental damage in their efforts to ensure that all of the CotI would be able to benefit from a more comprehensive UPFS. Their sacrifice of hours of blissful sleep was not in vain."

What more can we say....

Paul Nemeth
AA

Too funny Paul, and thanks for the thought and laugh...

in character mode on...

...but I humbly decline, I'm just a civilian, a humble trader and CotI doing my part to make my home port of call a better place for all. I put away the uniform years ago. far-trader out. </font>[/QUOTE]++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Be careful what you wish for paul/AA..it could happen!

FT, I think I could find suitable rewards for you..so no false modesty!

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by Mythmere:
The UWP covers information about the world, so the USFP should be limited strictly to the port itself, I'd think. What game usable information would be in it?

1 main port or secondary
2 ownership/management
3 traffic
4 law level (T20 main campaign area contains non-Imperial planets where LL might differ from both Imperium and planetary LL.
5 berthing costs/fees
6 something about bribability of officials, but couched in euphemism; perhaps availability of alternative bureaucratic solutions. This is VERY important to some travellers.
__________________________________________________

edited 0430hrs CST
lets try this idea--the UWP is eight digits, IIRC: Port type-Planet Sz-Atm-Hyd-Pop-Govt-LL- Tech Lvl. then followed the trade & base two alphabetic letter codes.

So maybe:
***Port type-[a given from UWP so lets say highport or downport here]
*** Port Trade factor [influences size/traffic]
*** Port Sz [based on UWP pop and WTB-or traffic-Paul's ITB again..]
*** Ownership type [alphanumeric]/Traffic allowed [alphanumeric]-Two letter code here
*** LL in port [may vary from planetary LL]
*** Port Facilities Mercantile available [type/ kind & number of facilities based on TL- & SZ of port/ population]-warehousing/ landing/ etc.
*** Port Facilities Other-available [as above]-the extras, resturants/ hostelry, banking, brokers, etc..
*** Port refuelling facilities [dictated by UWP port type: Refined/Unrefined/ none [available]

How's that gentlemen/ladies for an example?

 

[mad13142000]

There's two there - Ownership and traffic allowed, but you can cut the last one - fueling facilities - It is redundant, because the Class tells that data itself...

-MADDog

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by MADDog:
There's two there - Ownership and traffic allowed, but you can cut the last one - fueling facilities - It is redundant, because the Class tells that data itself...

-MADDog

-------------------------------------------------
Good!! shortens it yet again!

 

[Mythmere]

So maybe:
***Port type-[a given from UWP so lets say highport or downport here]

Excellent. H, D, G (grav), U (underwater), O (other). But why did you leave out the main port/secondary port distinction? I think that's almost the most important piece of info.

*** Port Trade factor [influences size/traffic]
*** Port Sz [based on UWP pop and WTB-or traffic-Paul's ITB again..]

My opinion, this is cumbersome and redundant. Quantity of trade equals size. Liam mentioned that size will be a modifier to shops in concourse and other things, so now I'm totally in favor of using such a number in the USFP (I agree, size matters, okay?). However, we don't need to distinguish here between trade and size. Let the ref do that. The profiles should leave huge latitude to the ref, not constrain choices.

*** Ownership type [alphanumeric]/Traffic allowed [alphanumeric]-Two letter code here

Yes. Adds much.

*** LL in port [may vary from planetary LL]

That's my contribution. I think it's brilliant.

*** Port Facilities Mercantile available [type/ kind & number of facilities based on TL- & SZ of port/ population]-warehousing/ landing/ etc.

This makes sense if it is going to be a modifier for the tables, or if it can directly affect trade or costs under Paul's new "in the black" ruleset. Otherwise, I think it's more important to use this space to clarify how much a ship pays for six days of berthing costs, all in.

*** Port Facilities Other-available [as above]-the extras, resturants/ hostelry, banking, brokers, etc..

I thought this was to be calculated from the size number. I wouldn't duplicate it.

 

[Antares Administration]

Originally posted by Liam Devlin:
lets try this idea--the UWP is eight digits, IIRC: Port type-Planet Sz-Atm-Hyd-Pop-Govt-LL- Tech Lvl. then followed the trade & base two alphabetic letter codes.

Liam, when you refer to trade alphabetic code, what are you referring to? Has it been 'defined' yet in any of these threads?

So maybe:
***Port type-[a given from UWP so lets say highport or downport here]
*** Port Trade factor [influences size/traffic]
*** Port Sz [based on UWP pop and WTB-or traffic-Paul's ITB again..]

Port size and Port Trade factor, if they are both based upon UWP pop, will only vary at most by a factor of +/-1 (representing operating at 10% to 1000% of planned capacity. So fine, get rid of one or the other.

It's the planetary economic factor or PE that should have the most effect. PE is like GDP in the modern context, and planets with the same population will have PEs that can vary by +/-2 (a range of 1%-10,000% of UWP pop) based upon many factors.

*** Ownership type [alphanumeric]/Traffic allowed [alphanumeric]-Two letter code here
*** LL in port [may vary from planetary LL]
*** Port Facilities Mercantile available [type/ kind & number of facilities based on TL- & SZ of port/ population]-warehousing/ landing/ etc.
*** Port Facilities Other-available [as above]-the extras, resturants/ hostelry, banking, brokers, etc..
*** Port refuelling facilities [dictated by UWP port type: Refined/Unrefined/ none [available]

How's that gentlemen/ladies for an example?

Paul Nemeth
AA

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Antares Administration:

Originally posted by Liam Devlin:
[qb] lets try this idea--the UWP is eight digits, IIRC: Port type-Planet Sz-Atm-Hyd-Pop-Govt-LL- Tech Lvl. then followed the trade & base two alphabetic letter codes.

Liam, when you refer to trade alphabetic code, what are you referring to? Has it been 'defined' yet in any of these threads?

Paul Nemeth
AA


Hi Paul, in case Liam is slow to show and answer this I feel pretty confident that what he means are the standard In, Ni, As, etc. codes for Trade Classification from forever. I'm also pretty sure I just heard a head-slap and loud D'oh out there

That's OK I've had my share so it might be just an echo

 

[Mythmere]

I don't think anything that is a "world" number ought to go into the USFP. The USFP must cover not only secondary ports but even those that are on other planets in the system, where the economics may be considerably different than the mainworld. The USFP should only cover details specific to the starport, not the planet. That being said, it may be sensible to put in a number that can feed into Paul's book, but it should be on the starport level. If we put in that number AND tell someone how to use it in trade, we have put that portion of Paul's book into Ports of Call, and it is no longer needed in In the Black.

That's where I'm coming from on this.

 

[trader jim]

I AGREE!!!!...most strongly!!!...lets not put ANY LIMITS on this...lets NOT give any GM the slightest hint that you cant do this or that..KEEP IT WIDE OPEN!!!!


Matter of fact...KEEP THE ENTIRE BOOK "OPEN" AS FAR AS POSSIABLE.

I MEAN OPEN ENDED GAMING!!

 

[Antares Administration]

Originally posted by far-trader:

Originally posted by Antares Administration:

Liam, when you refer to trade alphabetic code, what are you referring to? Has it been 'defined' yet in any of these threads?

Hi Paul, in case Liam is slow to show and answer this I feel pretty confident that what he means are the standard In, Ni, As, etc. codes for Trade Classification from forever. I'm also pretty sure I just heard a head-slap and loud D'oh out there

That's OK I've had my share so it might be just an echo

Oh, THE TRADE CLASSIFICATION CODES (head-slap and loud "D'oh")

Paul D'Oh Nemeth
AA

 

[Liam Devlin]

Liam Joins the "DO'H!" abuse anonymous head slappers group for thereapy..

Sorry FT, AA..yeah the trade codes...Shucks.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Mythmere's logic of not using the WTB, hmmm.
There's gotta be some indicator "how busy" <as in $$$-flowin transactions> IMO on the USFP for thems that do play trading campaigns.<or even pirating ones--how rich a target is the place? can we fence that starship and its gig here?, etc>

I do think it ought to mesh somehow with ITB--Without tipping ITB's hand at present <poker playin analogy here>..lets see what we can do..

I chunked an idea USFP out there..I'm not the only one with cards n chips here..so ante up! Lets see what others think it ought hold?

*yeah-fuel type redundant, my DO'H!
*Yeah, types of facilities covered under "Size" possibly redundant-semi DO'H..<unless we give an approximate idea based on size what it DOES have for the time impaired GM--then its a full DO'H!>.

 

[Mythmere]

How about a ships per day type of number? It would give the referee an idea of what things look like. The problem is that to calculate such a number would require a calculation of the planet's (or system's) total traffic, knowledge of how many other ports there are, and a division of the trade among those ports. Moreover, the number would be meaningless in game terms under the currently existing trade rules.

Nevertheless, I DO agree with everyone that it would be good to be able to picture whether the sky is abuzz with grav vehicles, starships, and spacecraft, or whether some kid's kite is the only traffic hazard. It lends atmosphere.

I suppose you could add an optional rule that ports with a particular level of traffic have modifiers on some of the trade rolls, but that seems to me like tinkering with the machinery - especially since the THB rules cover the entire planet's trade resources. Even more so if Paul is about to develop improved trade rules.

 

[notagoodusername]

Just like I'd like to avoid a precise measure of tonnage of cargo passing through, I'd also like to avoid a precise ship number. I'd prefer a Very Busy / Busy / Average / Low / Scarce sort of distiction(precise terms vary).

Shane

 

[far-trader]

A very minor issue here, and it may be just me but does everyone like USPF? My brain keeps trying to figure out which branch of the US service it is (i.e. you have the USAF, USMC, etc.). I know, my brain is wired oddly, but could we change it?

Something more in keeping with the Traveller 3-letter code standard (UWP, UPP, USP), perhaps UBP for Universal (star/ship)Base Profile?

Just a thought.

 

[notagoodusername]

UFP? Universal Facilities Profile?

That said, I stand by USFP as it works fine. I see your concern about it sounding like a branch of the US forces (or US porses, as P is the last letter - USFP, not USPF), that isn't too big a problem.


Shane

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Shane Mclean:
UFP? Universal Facilities Profile?

That said, I stand by USFP as it works fine. I see your concern about it sounding like a branch of the US forces (or US porses, as P is the last letter - USFP, not USPF), that isn't too big a problem.


Shane

Erk, you're right I flipped the last two letters, a very minor possibly dyslexic trouble. So I guess most of you have no problem with it and I'll have to agree with that.

That said I'd prefer UFP, or almost any 3-letter U_P version.

Or steer clear of Universal and Profile completely and just call it something like "Expanded Starport Code".

 

[Antares Administration]

Originally posted by Liam Devlin:
...On Mythmere's logic of not using the WTB, hmmm.
There's gotta be some indicator "how busy" <as in $$$-flowin transactions> IMO on the USFP for thems that do play trading campaigns.<or even pirating ones--how rich a target is the place? can we fence that starship and its gig here?, etc>

I do think it ought to mesh somehow with ITB--Without tipping ITB's hand at present <poker playin analogy here>..lets see what we can do..

- The following is a draft ITB concept - for Discussion Only -

At the Sub-sector level:

Transient trade - the level of trade "passing through". Small, low pop and low tech worlds along a main may still have a large starport, because of the volume of transient trade.

At the Planetary level:
I'm considering three trade ratings at the planetary level, that will have to be included somewhere, ideally with the UWP.

The first - Trade Classification (NI, R, Ag, etc) already exists, and describes the kinds of goods that the planet imports and exports.

The second - World Trade Balance (T20) already exists, but has not been included in any of the canon or Gateway Domain Sector Lists, so it is not available as a ready reference, and must be created by the GM.

The third - Planetary Economy (new) gives the strength of the planet's economy in relation to its population. A world with UWP Pop 7 may have a PE between 5 and 9. This represents the Traveller equivalent of Gross Domestic Product per Capita. That means how productive an individual in that economy is. Poor worlds or worlds with repressive or captive governments will have lower PEs while worlds with high tech, or other natural benefits will have PEs higher than population. US GDP $35,831/person, Somalia GDP $531/person. So each US citizen has the same productivity as roughly 70 Somali citizens. Now imagine the same on an interstellar level, and you see the reason for a PE number.

So much for Planetary Indicators.

Starport Traffic, as I referred to, is an indicator of the trade/traffic activity at the starport. We could work with Starport Size, but how do we indicate how busy it is (traffic is a modifier to the availability of goods locally).

Paul Nemeth
AA

 

[notagoodusername]

Originally posted by far-trader:
Erk, you're right I flipped the last two letters, a very minor possibly dyslexic trouble.

I'm dyslexic too, I know how ya feel. Pain in the ass, innit?

Still, Einstein was dyslexic....

Shane

 

[mad13142000]

You could call it the
Universal Port Code...

or the
Universal Starport Code (go Trojans )

You could entitle the chapter
Universal Starport Usable Code Knowledge...

-MADDog

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by Shane Mclean:
Just like I'd like to avoid a precise measure of tonnage of cargo passing through, I'd also like to avoid a precise ship number. I'd prefer a Very Busy / Busy / Average / Low / Scarce sort of distiction(precise terms vary).

Shane

or...Traffic indicator
Infrequent/Scarce*
Very Low
Low
Moderate/Average*
Busy
Very Busy

reason I reccomend *moderate* Shane, is what is average for a port of the size in question? Not trying to nitpick here in week 2 brainstorming phase mind you...besides that daily traffic can vary--
but in a simple code we give the newly arrived starship operator(s)/PC's a quick glimpse of the "overall annual average" of traffic expected at the port..
One can imagine an adventure at a Busy port, arriving and the code they have *Very Busy* has been re-routed/changed to Very Low* makes you wonder whats going on in the system already??? it would for me!