Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Mon Apr 07, 2014 5:05 am

The first thing is the map, we'll start with that before reimagining this setting for Traveller.
http://media.battlestarwiki.org/images/ ... _Kobol.jpg
As you can see, all twelve colonies are in the same star system, they are all approximately Earth-sized worlds and though their climates vary they all fall within the habitable zones of the four stars that make up the system. It occurs to me that with all these planets within a single star system, we don't really need a jump drive or any kind of FTL Drive at all. What if we yank the Jump drives from the standard starships? (Such as Scout/Courier, Free Trader, Lab Ship, Subsidized Liner, Mercenary Cruiser, etc) In this setting there is really no difference between a starship and a smallcraft, A cutter, or a shuttle can get you from one planet to another just as easily as a Mercenary Cruiser. Tech Level is around 15 minus a few things, no Jump Drive, no black globes, or other force fields, no nuclear dampeners, no meson guns, no fusion or plasma guns for either starships or the hand held varieties. There is Artificial Intelligence though in the form of Cylons!
What do you think?
enderra
Stoat
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:12 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby enderra » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:31 am

First: Why no FTL? Thee colonials clearly have that, and use FTL drives to get around their own system/s. Even if all those worlds are in one system, they will be far away from each other. (I never bought that explanation anyway, first of all it is as shoddy in regards of worldbuilding as firefly is, and second of all, why would you limit yourself to one system if you have ftl?)

Second, I don't think BSG has TL15. Their tech is really much closer to TL8, with the addition AI (Cylons) of space tech. And there really only powerplants, ftl, some contragrav and some sort of reactionless drive (presumably, since it's hard to see how they can move those big ships about, otherwise). Haven't got extended tech tables handy, but feels like TL9 max.

If I were to "reimagine", that is, adapt BSG for Traveller, I'd make it a small star cluster. One subsector. The "armistice line" is one subsector to, say, trailing. The subsectors coreward, spinward, and rimward are "the frontier". The "red line" - the safe navigation line - is basically the outer border of that 3x3 subsector grid.

Ship size: it's probably a medium size universe. Some of these ships are fairly big, but nothing is very massive. I'd build the Galactica and then scale things based on it. You can probably work out the Galactica fairly well, since a lot of it is shown on screen. Number of launch tubes, the fact that the hangar bays are big enough for Colonial One to land in, and so on. Keep in mind that their FTL jump drives are very different and you won't waste much of the ship on tanks.

If you want to really "reimagine", not just adapt, then the best course of action is to start out with a list of things you dislike about BSG2004, and what you want to change, then work from those premises to come up with the new setting.
Still working on my setting: Contact Light
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Apr 07, 2014 11:24 am

enderra wrote:First: Why no FTL? Thee colonials clearly have that
I second this. Coordinating a fleet of ships jumping and the limits of the jump drive in determining where to go (and helping the cylons determine where the fleet may be) is, to me, a big part of BG.
enderra wrote:I don't think BSG has TL15. Their tech is really much closer to TL8, with the addition AI (Cylons) of space tech. And there really only powerplants, ftl, some contragrav and some sort of reactionless drive (presumably, since it's hard to see how they can move those big ships about, otherwise). Haven't got extended tech tables handy, but feels like TL9 max.
I'm thinking something in between. Jump 1 is at TL 10. I'm thinking more like TL 11 for the first AI (cylons) and Jump 2. Most of my BG recollections is with them on the run, did the 12 colonies have terraforming? That would be TL 12 and would bring Jump 3 (also plasma weapons). Cloning, Battle dress, ships can go underwater and Jump 4 of TL 13 is probably taking the TL too far.
enderra wrote:If you want to really "reimagine", not just adapt
Exactly. Do what you want to make the game most interesting for you. Are you looking to mimic the show as close as possible or something else?
Tom Kalbfus wrote:The first thing is the map, we'll start with that before reimagining this setting for Traveller.
Much of the show and possibly a game is about the chase and survival so I'm not sure if using the colonies as the focal for design is optimal. I suggest focusing on the things that will be important to the game. Of course a game could be centered around the colonies and the attack on them instead of the escape on the BG- even then, the characters could be crew on a single ship, captains of individual ships, leaders in control of an entire colony, or just miscellaneous citizens left behind when the fleet is destroyed and the BG jumps off... Maybe even the game starts with the first cylon war or is about the "cold war" era.

What is the scope of your your game concept?
User avatar
Reynard
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Reynard » Mon Apr 07, 2014 2:35 pm

When I first bought Traveller in the late 1970s, the first thing a friend and I did was create ships and people from Battlestar Galactica. We made the Cylons the reptilian race in battle armor rather than robots. We had seen the organic race in the series and heard they were replaced early with robots because the studio was caught up in the trendy non-violence wave so robots were alright to destroy in bunches. Both sides had laser weapons and the BG crew wore Cloth armor suits. Wish I remember the specs for our Vipers and Raiders. The Battlestars and Basestars were plot devices and no stats while the fighters were based on information from FASAs BG starship game (which I still own). Cylons Centurions had minion stats. Like Stormtroopers, there were lots but they were all bad shots. We never stated what size Jump engines were available because each scenario had them at whatever destination was next. Remember, it took DECADES to reach Earth. Who cared how they did it. Now, of course, I need to design the capital ships and fighters again.

It was fun.
User avatar
Reynard
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Reynard » Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:15 pm

http://www.tecr.com/galactica/capships/capships.htm

Here's one site that describes ships from the original series in detail. Should be a decent starting place to design Traveller versions. The next site pretty much says the new series ships differ mostly with some image changes but superficially.

http://www.tombsofkobol.com/bsg/2003-warships-01.html
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:47 pm

enderra wrote:First: Why no FTL? Thee colonials clearly have that, and use FTL drives to get around their own system/s. Even if all those worlds are in one system, they will be far away from each other. (I never bought that explanation anyway, first of all it is as shoddy in regards of worldbuilding as firefly is, and second of all, why would you limit yourself to one system if you have ftl?)
Because you don't really need FTL, as basically the Fleet is running away from the Cylons, so they never visit the same place twice, so it doesn't really matter how long it takes them to get any place they've never been before. And without FTL, you avoid the problem of starships just popping up out of nowhere, as was the case in the second series. Why have FTL if you don't need it. Star Trek needs it, but Battlestar Galactica doesn't. if every system you visit is a new discovery, it doesn't matter if it took the fleet centuries while crew and passengers are in Cold Sleep. Also without FTL, you can see enemy ships approaching from a long way off, you have time to bring crew out of their low berths in time to get into their vipers to engage the Cylons in deep space, Near a planet however you have cover, an enemy can surprise you there! he tactics are different without FTL, you can't just teleport all over the place, certain episode premises such as in episode 33 couldn't happen. To evade pursuit once ship just has to outrun the pursuers until he is beyond sensor range!
enderra wrote:Second, I don't think BSG has TL15. Their tech is really much closer to TL8, with the addition AI (Cylons) of space tech. And there really only powerplants, ftl, some contragrav and some sort of reactionless drive (presumably, since it's hard to see how they can move those big ships about, otherwise). Haven't got extended tech tables handy, but feels like TL9 max.
I like a more futuristic BSG, after all they are in space and travelling between the stars and we're not!
enderra wrote:If I were to "reimagine", that is, adapt BSG for Traveller, I'd make it a small star cluster. One subsector. The "armistice line" is one subsector to, say, trailing. The subsectors coreward, spinward, and rimward are "the frontier". The "red line" - the safe navigation line - is basically the outer border of that 3x3 subsector grid.

Ship size: it's probably a medium size universe. Some of these ships are fairly big, but nothing is very massive. I'd build the Galactica and then scale things based on it. You can probably work out the Galactica fairly well, since a lot of it is shown on screen. Number of launch tubes, the fact that the hangar bays are big enough for Colonial One to land in, and so on. Keep in mind that their FTL jump drives are very different and you won't waste much of the ship on tanks.

If you want to really "reimagine", not just adapt, then the best course of action is to start out with a list of things you dislike about BSG2004, and what you want to change, then work from those premises to come up with the new setting.
BSG2004 doesn't have low Berths, it only has the futuristic tech it needs to travel in space and have Cylons t fight and nothing more, but is this realistic?
User avatar
Rick
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1452
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Lincoln, UK

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Rick » Mon Apr 07, 2014 6:25 pm

I would argue that some form of FTL might well be desirable from a roleplaying perspective. While the overall arc of the campaign would be running away from the Cylon threat and visiting new locations with the entire fleet; you may well want the PC's to go off on 'side trips' to investigate things away from the fleet. While this did happen in both, it did seem to be handled better with FTL in the later series. Of course, you might want to restrict FTL to just a few ships, giving the PC's a moral dilemma - do they stay and 'shepherd' a slow ship, or jump and leave them to their own devices?
"Understanding is a 3-edged sword" bit like a toblerone, really.
enderra
Stoat
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:12 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby enderra » Mon Apr 07, 2014 6:48 pm

CosmicGamer wrote:I'm thinking something in between. Jump 1 is at TL 10. I'm thinking more like TL 11 for the first AI (cylons) and Jump 2. Most of my BG recollections is with them on the run, did the 12 colonies have terraforming? That would be TL 12 and would bring Jump 3 (also plasma weapons). Cloning, Battle dress, ships can go underwater and Jump 4 of TL 13 is probably taking the TL too far.
BSG old had some ray guns, BSG new doesn't even have that. It's really modern day with some outlier tech thrown in. Standard Traveller TLs probably won't fit the setting, the look and feel is definitely low tech. This isn't just because Galactica is old tech in the setting, Caprica et al don't look much different from 21st Century Earth. The cylons obviously have higher tech than the colonists, no matter how you slice it, so that's something to keep in mind (cloning, AI, better drives, better sensors, obviously some form of FTL communications, etc).

Doesn't mean you can't "up the ante", especially if you want a more cinematic action game. PCs in powered armor fighting swarms of Centurions could be fun, and make for a very different feel.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: Because you don't really need FTL, as basically the Fleet is running away from the Cylons, so they never visit the same place twice, so it doesn't really matter how long it takes them to get any place they've never been before.
Cut for brevity. You absolutely need FTL for BSG to work. Without it, your refugee fleet won't be going anywhere. You are not talking centuries, it's millenia. For each "jump". Space is very, very big. I really don't see what you gain by omitting FTL. It seems you want to go for realism, but BSG is inherently not a realistic scenario. Much like the Enterprise, the Galactica travels at the speed of plot. If there are centuries, millenia without any action, well - your survivors could just live out their lives happily and in safety if they don't go to cold sleep. Tragic, perhaps, as they are trapped in their ships; but no drama.

If you dislike some of the tactical implications, change the FTL drive mechanics. Increase the spool up times significantly - again, in the show, the drives would take howeverlong was needed for dramatric purposes.
Still working on my setting: Contact Light
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:07 pm

enderra wrote:Standard Traveller TLs probably won't fit the setting,
Yes and no. The Traveller tech rules do mention that it can vary. Some areas like medicine or robotics being higher or lower than a UWP indicates.
enderra wrote:the look and feel is definitely low tech.
Part of this is typical of most Sci Fi hollywood. Perhaps mostly a budgetary issue. Part of this, I think, is due to the plot - The ship, Galactica, being outdated, much of the more useful tech probably pulled out and ready to be a museum or mothballed or whatever.
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:59 pm

enderra wrote:
CosmicGamer wrote:I'm thinking something in between. Jump 1 is at TL 10. I'm thinking more like TL 11 for the first AI (cylons) and Jump 2. Most of my BG recollections is with them on the run, did the 12 colonies have terraforming? That would be TL 12 and would bring Jump 3 (also plasma weapons). Cloning, Battle dress, ships can go underwater and Jump 4 of TL 13 is probably taking the TL too far.
BSG old had some ray guns, BSG new doesn't even have that. It's really modern day with some outlier tech thrown in. Standard Traveller TLs probably won't fit the setting, the look and feel is definitely low tech. This isn't just because Galactica is old tech in the setting, Caprica et al don't look much different from 21st Century Earth. The cylons obviously have higher tech than the colonists, no matter how you slice it, so that's something to keep in mind (cloning, AI, better drives, better sensors, obviously some form of FTL communications, etc).

Doesn't mean you can't "up the ante", especially if you want a more cinematic action game. PCs in powered armor fighting swarms of Centurions could be fun, and make for a very different feel.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: Because you don't really need FTL, as basically the Fleet is running away from the Cylons, so they never visit the same place twice, so it doesn't really matter how long it takes them to get any place they've never been before.
Cut for brevity. You absolutely need FTL for BSG to work. Without it, your refugee fleet won't be going anywhere. You are not talking centuries, it's millenia. For each "jump". Space is very, very big. I really don't see what you gain by omitting FTL. It seems you want to go for realism, but BSG is inherently not a realistic scenario. Much like the Enterprise, the Galactica travels at the speed of plot. If there are centuries, millenia without any action, well - your survivors could just live out their lives happily and in safety if they don't go to cold sleep. Tragic, perhaps, as they are trapped in their ships; but no drama.

If you dislike some of the tactical implications, change the FTL drive mechanics. Increase the spool up times significantly - again, in the show, the drives would take howeverlong was needed for dramatric purposes.
Just for curiosity, suppose you took a scout/courier for instance and yanked out the jump drive, replaced all that empty space with fuel tankage and ran the maneuver drive on that fuel? Assuming the ship accelerates and then decelerates to its destination, what would the maximum velocity of that scout/courier be under the mongoose Traveller rules? in other words how fast would it take to get to the nearest star, 4.4 light years? Assume you have low berths for everyone and the ship takes as long as it takes.
enderra
Stoat
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:12 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby enderra » Mon Apr 07, 2014 9:10 pm

If you assume constant acceleration Traveller drives, not very long.

Here's a curve for 1g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roundtriptimes.png

The math is probably fairly trivial too.

If I see it right, a scout uses a ton of fuel per week but you don't have to accelerate all the way, you can coast for a while before you decelerate.

The problem, though, is that Traveller's reactionless constant acceleration "maneuver drives" are probably less realistic than jump drives are :-)
Still working on my setting: Contact Light
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:48 pm

Tom Kalbfus wrote:Just for curiosity, suppose you took a scout/courier for instance and yanked out the jump drive, replaced all that empty space with fuel tankage and ran the maneuver drive on that fuel? Assuming the ship accelerates and then decelerates to its destination, what would the maximum velocity of that scout/courier be under the mongoose Traveller rules? in other words how fast would it take to get to the nearest star, 4.4 light years? Assume you have low berths for everyone and the ship takes as long as it takes.
No offense. If you want to play this way that's fine, but I thought you were trying for a Battlestar Galactica like game and were against low berths?
Tom Kalbfus wrote:BSG2004 doesn't have low Berths, it only has the futuristic tech it needs to travel in space and have Cylons t fight and nothing more, but is this realistic?
Not being able to jump away from an overwhelming force of cylons, being much more trackable, and other non jump issues don't have the BG feel to me.
CosmicGamer wrote: Of course a game could be centered around the colonies and the attack on them instead of the escape on the BG- even then, the characters could be crew on a single ship, captains of individual ships, leaders in control of an entire colony, or just miscellaneous citizens left behind when the fleet is destroyed and the BG jumps off... Maybe even the game starts with the first cylon war or is about the "cold war" era.

What is the scope of your your game concept?
I'm still uncertain what your overall game concept is; just that you seam to prefer a non jump low tech setting so it's hard for me to know how best to discuss things in a way that will be helpful.
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Mon Apr 07, 2014 11:16 pm

enderra wrote:If you assume constant acceleration Traveller drives, not very long.

Here's a curve for 1g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roundtriptimes.png

The math is probably fairly trivial too.

If I see it right, a scout uses a ton of fuel per week but you don't have to accelerate all the way, you can coast for a while before you decelerate.

The problem, though, is that Traveller's reactionless constant acceleration "maneuver drives" are probably less realistic than jump drives are :-)
Doesn't involve the equivalent of Time Travel as FTL does. Once could substitute a more realistic fusion drive, they can reach about 1% of light speed. 3,000,000 meters per second. Since a Scout/courier can accelerate at 2Gs that is about 20 meters per second squared, it would take 150,000 seconds to reach this velocity and another 150,000 seconds to slow down for a total of 300,000 seconds of acceleration time. This is 3.5 days of total acceleration. Lets be generous allow 600,000 seconds of acceleration for a total of 7 days a cruise velocity of 2% of the speed of light, a fusion drive can go as high as 10% of the speed of light with staging, but we're not using expendable starships here, so we'll stick with 2%. It would take 220 years to travel to Alpha Centauri at this velocity. To travel to Kobol from the Cyrannus System, which is 2000 light years away would take 100,000 years! I've got a better idea though. Remember the fuel Tilium? What is Tilium? You know antimatter consists of three types of particles, Antiprotons, positrons and antineutrons. Interestingly you could combine regular neutrons with antiprotons and positrons. Conversely you could combine antineutrons with electrons and protons. A neutron when it comes in contract with a antineutron will convert to energy. So lets define Tillium as a form of heavy hydrogen, Deuterium. Normally a Deuterium atom has a proton and a neutron in its nucleolus and has an atomic weight of 2. But a Tillium atom would be just like Deuterium would have the same atomic eight of 2 but instead of having a neutron in its nucleus it would have an antineutron and a proton, this would be a stable atom, and the same chemical properties as Deuterium, which is a form of hydrogen, it would burn just like hydrogen, but be twice as heavy as that gas. The antineutron would be safe and table until you combined it with a neutron, and the only way to do that would be through nuclear fusion! Unlike normal fusion reactions, half the mass of the trillium atoms would convert to energy as opposed to about 1% for normal fusion reactions, this is half as efficient as matter/antimatter reactions, but much more powerful than normal fusion and much safer than antimatter containment You could reach half the speed of light with this, it would take 20 weeks to reach 40% of the speed of light It would take 5000 years to reach Kobol with this sort of drive, now this seems reasonable for a sub-light drive. What do you think?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8963
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Condottiere » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:15 am

You have to use optional rules for BSG, because if you tried the standard ones, the Cylons will catch up with your ragtag caravan sooner rather than later.
User avatar
Reynard
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Reynard » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:22 am

http://www.tecr.com/galactica/engines/engines.htm

Check out this page of the BG Tech Manual under Jump Corridor. The show was fairly vague about interstellar travel using the theory for the Speed of Plot. The information gleaned from parts of the show, throwing out the silly non-science, comes up with a system that is fairly compatible with Traveller, Jump space travel to and from gravity neutral points.

The other issue is fuel use. Mercury and Solium sound cool but how available are they especially for ships on the run through unexplored and uncivilized space? Antimatter could be the alternative making refueling less often but where do you get it except some sort of refining facility. The fleet was always making stops in systems for replenishing supplies. Seems reasonable that would include a fuel stop at gas giants or water at planets and stay in line with the series with a reason to explore and make contact.
User avatar
ShawnDriscoll
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3013
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby ShawnDriscoll » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:41 pm

Universal is making a movie. Another re-do. So we'll see more stuff to use in our Traveller.
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:21 pm

Reynard wrote:http://www.tecr.com/galactica/engines/engines.htm

Check out this page of the BG Tech Manual under Jump Corridor. The show was fairly vague about interstellar travel using the theory for the Speed of Plot. The information gleaned from parts of the show, throwing out the silly non-science, comes up with a system that is fairly compatible with Traveller, Jump space travel to and from gravity neutral points.

The other issue is fuel use. Mercury and Solium sound cool but how available are they especially for ships on the run through unexplored and uncivilized space? Antimatter could be the alternative making refueling less often but where do you get it except some sort of refining facility. The fleet was always making stops in systems for replenishing supplies. Seems reasonable that would include a fuel stop at gas giants or water at planets and stay in line with the series with a reason to explore and make contact.
How about tilium? That was the fuel used in Battlestar Galactica. My version of it is Deuterium with an antineutron instead of a neutron in its atomic nucleous Deuterium is a form of hydrogen with one proton and one neutron, therefore its atomic mass is 2. So if Tilium is a form of hydrogen it also has the chemical properties of hydrogen. If you filled a balloon with Tilium it would have the same weight as helium as Helium has 2 protons and 2 neutrons for an atomic mass of 4, while a Tilium atom pairs with another tilium atom or a hydrogen atom or a deuterium atom. Now just for the record, some physicists think its impossible to have a Deuterium atom with an anti-neutron replacing the neutron, the quarks in the antineutron would annihilate the quarks in the proton, but lets just say there is a previously undiscovered force that prevents the quarks in the neutron from coming in contact with the quarks in the proton. Now lets suppose tyllium is possible, and since part of each atom is made out of antimatter, where would such tyllium be found? Where ever there are antineutrons, and antimatter can be produced in the vicinity of black holes. Black holes accelerate matter just as particle accelerators do, as matter falls in or toward a black hole, it often collides with other matter, just as happens in a particle accelerator When two atoms collide at near light speed, their mass gets converted to energy, and when you have such a high concentration of energy, some of it forms a particle shower consisting of 50% matter and 50% antimatter, those that don't annihilate or fall into the black hole escape, some of the antimatter particles are anti-neutrons Now if an antineutron collides with a hydrogen atom, it creates a heavier isotope of hydrogen called Tyllium. Tyllium otherwise has identical chemical properties of deuterium except under certain circumstances involving nuclear fusion. A Tyllium atom collides with the deuterium atom both atoms fuse and the neutron comes in contact with the anti-neutron in the tyllium atom, and 50% of the deuterium-trillium mixture undergoing fusion gets converted to energy, some of this energy is absorbed by the remaining protons, the rest is gamma rays, The protons can be channeled by magnetic and electric fields and used as thrust for a spaceship. So this is what propels most of the starships in this Battlestar Galactica scenario. It just so happens that Cyrannus System has an invisible 5th companion which is a black hole, this black hole is billions of years old and during its more active phase, it bombarded surrounding asteroids and airless bodies with antineutrons, some of which got trapped in hydrogen atoms making tyllium. tyllium is stable unless it undergoes nuclear fusion, it can be part of more complex hydrocarbon molecules such as octane found in gasoline and jet fuel for example, or water for that matter. Tyllium is rare and the best source of it is the asteroid belt surrounding that black hole.

Cyrannus is not a natural system, for example 12 of the planets were terraformed to be compatible with humans. Though how this was accomplished is the subject of conjecture. The twelve colonies suffered a decline in their civilization shortly after the arrival of the humans from Kobol, there was a rebellion against the Lords of Kobol, some of those Lords, particularly Athena and Apollo sided with the humans, but the result of the war was a decline in tech level that was only recently recovered in the last several centuries, whereas the 12 colonies reestablished contact with each other, and interplanetary commerce was reestablished after millennia of it absence. Advances in computers and software plus competition between the colonies led to the creation of the Cylons. Cylons were used to replace human soldiers on the battlefield and at some point the Cylons began to see humans as the enemy and thereby the First Cylon War commenced, followed by an interval of 50 years of peace and the Surprise Attack by the Cylons thereafter. During the 50 years of peace a number of interstellar expeditions were sent out by the humans to colonize various star systems. Many of them were still heading out to their destinations at the start of the Final War. Because of the speed of light, many are unaware that the 12 Colonies were attacked until the radio transmissions from the Cyrannus System caught up with them. A number of systems have been identified by remote telescopic observation as likely places to mine for Tyllium, its just a matter of getting there. typical interstellar cruise speed is around 40% of light speed, aided by use of low berths, which are really more reliable than in the standard Traveller Setting. Typical fusion reactors can run on either Tyllium or a Deuterium-trintium mixture, which is less efficient that Tyllium but will get a starship around in a Star System. As a rule of thumb a starship can accelerate using standard fusion for 1 week, but can accelerate for 20 weeks while running on Tyllium. Rapidly rotating Black holes can also be used to accelerate quickly to 80% of the speed of light with some fuel savings, while the full load of Tyllium fuel can then be used to slow the starship down once again.
Tom Kalbfus
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2521
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:26 am

Cast of Characters Can you think of any others I might have missed? What would their careers be?
William Adama, Commander of Battlestar Galactica
Colonel Tigh, First Officer of Battlestar Galactica
Apollo Lee Adama, Viper Pilot
Troy Adama, Viper Pilot
Athena Adama, Viper Pilot
Starbuck, Viper Pilot
Kara Thrace: Viper Pilot
Serena: Holovid Reporter, and later a viper pilot
Boxy: Serena's son
Boomer: Viper Pilot
Cassiopeia: Prostitute
Karl Helo Agathon: Scout/Courier Pilot
Gaius Baltar
Number One: Cylon Agent
Number Two: Cylon Agent
Number Three: Cylon Agent
Number four: Cylon Agent
Number Five: Cylon Agent
Number six: Cylon Agent
Number Seven: Cylon Agent
Number Eight: Cylon Agent
Number Nine: Cylon Agent
Number Ten: Cylon Agent
Number Eleven: Cylon Agent
Number Twelve: Cylon Agent
Cylon Centurion
Cylon Raider
Cylon Heavy Raider (Scout/Courier)
JRoss
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby JRoss » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:10 pm

It is mentioned at times that there are more settlements than just the 12 colonies. For instance Boomer's origin story places her on some place called Troy, and then the episode where Bulldog is recovered I can't remember offhand, but there was something about other settlements there, too. Each of the little colonies must be subservient to a larger colony.
Freelance S&P Traveller contributor
Squirrel - Your Best Friend
Fox - Beware of Lies

Do you really want to spend your entire lives praying for longevity? We were born in order to die!
Thunderegg Productions
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8963
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Battlestar Galactica 3.0

Postby Condottiere » Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:15 am

If I were the Cylons, I'd have systematically eliminated the smaller settlements during the war, which would explain why there doesn't appear to be a big push by political and religious dissidents to open up all possible colonizable planets.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MonsterX and 34 guests