Trojan Reach: Hierate/Imperium Trade Route ... why not Exe?

[sideranautae]

Then don't play in the 3I.

The flaw is built into the sys gen rules. Whether you use the rules for 3I or your own sys gen. Why did you think that the sys gen rules in the book get magically fixed if not playing in a 3I setting?

[Reynard]

Over all the decades I've run games or just love making worlds and I often decided a particular roll need be 'adjusted' to better fit, not frequently but because the situation called for a different outcome. As with most RPGs, random is subject to the needs of players and referees. Mongoose did a favor with the population option while not losing the flavor of a four decade old game. This goes for all the other small corrections, clarifications, additions and improvements and I'll keep welcoming them as long as the basic game, even with its 'flaws', remains the same.

[Nerhesi]

Traveller has always been a game where the map was generated and then it has been explained after the event. It creates creative dissonance.

It creates an illogical and annoying setting. Always has.

Seriously - for calling other people trolls all the time, you sure are leading by example.

You will note, that there are a lot of people that actually enjoy the setting, therefore - your deduction is completely incorrect.

It creates an annoying setting, for you. However, as pretty much everyone else has pointed out in this thread, there are many reasons why it is completely logical to skip the "shortest path".

[CosmicGamer]

To me, using logic and page 169 trade routes, a low population can easily result in a system being a poor choice for buying and selling cargo and thus not being part of a trade route.

[zero]

Poor worlds are still okay for picking up passengers, its not the most ideal place clearly as they hold that -2 penalty but that can be countered depending on your next destination... A High Pop world averages out to a +2 with Pop value to find available passengers for example.

There are many, many Trade Codes that aren't conducive to Freight Runs and some others when it comes to Free Trading (Barren and Non-Agricultural).

[GypsyComet]

Exe is shown with a population code of 1, so there's just a few people on the planet. I don't know how they maintain a class B starport with so few inhabitants, but there is obviously too few people to make it a worthwhile trade stop.

Population Multiple is 6, so 56 to 65 people.
Refined fuel? One gas giant in-system, and a world with those physical stats could easily be a moon of it. The local bush pilot takes the old surplus fuel shuttle out for a spin once or twice a week to keep the Port and Municipal supply topped up, or the world has deep organics to draw on.
Small Craft construction? "Fred's been building a Kit Gig on Pad 4 since before there was a Pad 4. Purrs like a kitten. We don't build fast here, but we can build."
Starship Repairs? "Might have to order parts from Falcon, but we can do the install."

The heck are you people doing here? "Renting industrial space. This moon is really big for its neighborhood, so it attracted mining interests back in 920. They left a century later, and our founder bought the place for cheap. We have a huge hab complex below the surface, mostly unused. We can offer metals and organics processing facilities, already in place on the surface, with no worries about environmental damage, since there isn't an environment here to damage. A couple of the neighbors bring their nasty or excess refining work here. Got one of those Imperial corporations on long term contract in a facility south of here. Not sure what they do, but the money spends just fine so we don't ask questions."

[hdan]

What Raynard said. The WorldGen rules were never meant to be used "blind". Even the original CT rules state that "the purpose of the world generation sequence is to aid the imagination."

[Jame Rowe]

Traveller has always been a game where the map was generated and then it has been explained after the event. It creates creative dissonance.

It creates an illogical and annoying setting. Always has.

I've been writing my own setting and am quite happy to rewrite certain aspects of the world based on my understanding of (a) real-world astrophysics, which is admittedly VERY VERY VERY spotty, and (b) the arguments presented on boards like this one.

For example, if I get a world with a 6 size and a normal atmosphere I will sometimes change it to atmo A (exotic), and if the atmo is corrosive I will automatically give its population a tech of 8+, or decide that it's got natives. As a general rule I prefer to have tech of 9+ instead of natives.

[sideranautae]

I've been writing my own setting and am quite happy to rewrite certain aspects of the world based on my understanding of (a) real-world astrophysics, which is admittedly VERY VERY VERY spotty, and (b) the arguments presented on boards like this one.

That's cool. I just don't see the point in using an intentionally screwed up system.

[Jame Rowe]

I've been writing my own setting and am quite happy to rewrite certain aspects of the world based on my understanding of (a) real-world astrophysics, which is admittedly VERY VERY VERY spotty, and (b) the arguments presented on boards like this one.

That's cool. I just don't see the point in using an intentionally screwed up system.

They didn't intentionally screw it up. They just didn't think it through.

[sideranautae]

They didn't intentionally screw it up. They just didn't think it through.

Come on! Not fixed after 30+ years of being told that it's broken?

[Reynard]

And yet a LOT of people have happily used those 'broken' rules for decades long after other games with supposedly perfect rule mechanics morph into completely other games or fade into memories. How is that possible? Why haven't the howls of the indignant Who Know Better have never been humbly acknowledged and therefore garnering millions of non-Traveller gamers to the Rules That Work Perfectly?

Because it is not broken. It's actually a living game mechanic that has evolved without becoming unrecognizable and people love it.

[Jame Rowe]

They didn't intentionally screw it up. They just didn't think it through.

Come on! Not fixed after 30+ years of being told that it's broken?

They never said you had to keep the thing you kept exactly, now DID they?

Even with the argument about how they didn't say you could change it. I would posit that they just wrote it and assumed we'd make our own decisions.


By the way, how does one pronounce your name, you guy-who-can-either-listen-to-me-or-not?

[tanksoldier]

It can also create a lot of needless work for the GM.

Since gaming isn't "necessary", playing itself creates needless work.

As suggested above, why don't you find your perfect system elsewhere, or create your own?

Come on! Not fixed after 30+ years of being told that it's broken?

Perhaps not everyone agrees it's broken.

[sideranautae]

They never said you had to keep the thing you kept exactly, now DID they?

Um. Fail due to not keep up with the thread.

[Jame Rowe]

They never said you had to keep the thing you kept exactly, now DID they?

Um. Fail due to not keep up with the thread.

Whatever. You play it how you want, and I'll play it how I want.

However, I'll agree to play by your rules if you GM just so long as you agree to play by mine if I GM. If for no other reason than "it's a game so let's not argue about it."