Background questions

An alternative would be say that each jumps is say a lightyear and that each
ship has fuel for so many jumps. You could then get real tricky and say that
the amount of fuel for each jump is dependent on the mass of the ships thus
you need those escorts to raid and patrol. Just a thought.

Tony. twilko@ozemail.com.au

> At 04:09 18/01/99 -0500, you wrote:

I've been considering the idea of setting up a 'background assumptions' page
for my NRE, discussing the assumptions I make when considering my universe (I
like the ring of that, "My Universe"). Anyway, I think I've more or less
decided to use the 'offical' FTL drive, I guess I could call it the "hop
drive" which makes a number of short hops rather than one long jump from
starsystem to starsystem (a la Traveller). Anyway, to limit these guys
somewhat, I wanted to introduce an arbitrary fuel
requirement.  I was considering 3-4 parsecs for military ships, and
probably 2-3 parsecs for civillian ships.  This wouldn't show up as a
factor of mass in Full Thrust ship design, but would force space combat to
follow logical lines of advance, with a requirement to secure fueling spots
(any gas giant will do, as will an inhabitated planet with hydrogen refining
equipment). Just a playability issue. But anyway, what I was asking the Star
Gurus on the list is, Is that enough distance? I mean, if I say "2 parsecs for
civillian ships" will I be cutting off a lot of stars from commerce? Do I need
three? Or even four?

> hydrogen refining equipment). Just a playability issue. But anyway,

No, you just need refueling stations along the way. And tankers, so your
construction ships can get home.

> An alternative would be say that each jumps is say a lightyear

[snip]

I agree that lightyears is a better standard than parsecs. I would think that
the amount of fuel used would be dependent of the MASS of the drive.

Schoon puts in:

> An alternative would be say that each jumps is say a lightyear

Actually, piping in here for a second, a parsec is more of an accepted
standard in measuring distances in the astronomical community. Now granted, it
doesn't translate into lightyears very easily (3.2615 ly to the parsec), but
then again, astronomical units (AUs), another standard of measure, don't
translate
into miles/kilometers real easily, either. :-/

As for John's dilemma, it really depends on what limitations of resources you
are willing to work with. As one other person noted (who it was JUST slipped
my mind:(), you could set up refueling stations along the way. Real bummer,
though, if the enemy finds them and blows 'em away... My take would be to
bolster civilian liners to 3-4 parsecs per jump. Military ships going
1.5x to 2x the distance of Civie Ships. Otherwise you'll run the risk of
restricting your paths of travel to *exceedingly* narrow corridors, and some
stars then
may easily be out of reach entirely (not all stars have planets - gas
giants
or otherwise - around 'em; of course I *am* speaking speculatively here,
just
as speculatively as one would to claim planets around many/all stars :)
give
'us' 10-15 years and we may have a better feel for how many planets
could be in existence around other stars...).

One of the many Marks,

Mk

> Actually, piping in here for a second, a parsec is more of an accepted

I can't help myself: I'm a big proponent of the metric system ;-)

> The end of the bottomeless pit is a body-length and a half down. wrote:

> Actually, piping in here for a second, a parsec is more of an accepted

It's more common in the RPGs I've played (Traveller junkie! TNE will never
die!) so that's what I was using.

> bolster civilian liners to 3-4 parsecs per jump. Military ships going

*eyebrows* Wow. Nice. 3&6. What was the "official" speed of the
GZG-verse hop drive?  I remember it was something odd, and I thought it
was in the Fleetbook, but I can't find it.

> or otherwise - around 'em; of course I *am* speaking speculatively

Of course most systems have gas giants! Otherwise refueling gets really
inconvenient. Playability wins if there are no hard facts.:) This goes up on
the 'implicit assumptions' page.

BTW, I was coming down with severe insomnia about 0230 this morning, and threw
together an entire backgroup page with notes on conversion of
GURPs[1] to the GZG-verse, with a focus on the NRE.  It's not up yet
(havn't decided on some of the details) but should be soon.

"The end of the bottomeless pit is a body-length and a half down."
wrote:
> Actually, piping in here for a second, a parsec is more of an accepted

I would check out the fallowing page:
http://www.btinternet.com/%7Edavid.manley/wargames/fthrust/ftmain.htm
It has a lot of realy cool stuff.
The only problem with using the dock rules is that my 23 year old ex-NAC
CVL is costing a lot to keep up. The first UBW CVL will be operational in
three weeks (this is assuming that the NAC does not come a beat the SH** out
of the reble colonys
-Stephen

In a message dated 99-01-18 12:10:05 EST, you write:

<< eyebrows* Wow. Nice. 3&6. What was the "official" speed of the
 GZG-verse hop drive?  I remember it was something odd, and I thought it
was in the Fleetbook, but I can't find it. >>
6 Ly/week (call it 2ps/week)
Page 34 Full Thrust
-Stephen

> At 12:03 PM 1/18/99 -0500, you wrote:

...NAC courier... realspace displacement of 7.328ly... FBpg44

> DracSpy@aol.com wrote:

One major problem I noted: When you use a link, then go back to the page, the
link goes REALLY dark blue. On a black background this SUCKS.

> One major problem I noted: When you use a link, then go back to the

Almost as much as textured bacgrounds ;-)