Empty Hex Jumps....again

[far-trader]

If you can come up with a good reason why they weren't used, and then were used, but not by everybody, all the better.

...which kind of is the goal of these discussions ...?????

Yep, and it's why I'm following them despite having long ago decided. There's always a chance a convincing argument can sway me, or event that they may embellish my own points by counter-thinking them. So do carry on, it's interesting to see new thoughts on it.

 

[captainjack23]

If you can come up with a good reason why they weren't used, and then were used, but not by everybody, all the better.

...which kind of is the goal of these discussions ...?????

Yep, and it's why I'm following them despite having long ago decided. There's always a chance a convincing argument can sway me, or event that they may embellish my own points by counter-thinking them. So do carry on, it's interesting to see new thoughts on it.

That's very civilized of you....thanks ! And counter-thinking is what I hope we can generate -although it is easy to fall into pedantry -of which I'm guilty, I admit.
Ironically, in my current traveller campign, EHJs are allowed, but are more dangerous without enough computing power -it's my initial call on the issue, that the EHJ was limited by computer tech, not just jump tech...and it's contradicted by several things I've decided since then...BUT since it created an important hook for my campaign, I ain't changing it (in this incarnation) regardlesss of where I end up in this discussion...

 

[EDG]

Exactly that, and no more. Your "(i.e. between stars)" is your interpretation. It means only that they can create new "jump routes" where none existed, and "jump routes" are already defined as ONLY stellar to stellar.

And what do the rules EXPLICITLY state "jump routes" are? Stellar to stellar. Period. Does it say anywhere, EXPLICITLY, that it means an empty hex at either or both ends?

The Movement section explicitly defines jump routes as then line linking two stars.
The Exploration Ship section explicitly says that EX ships are required to do the first jump down a jump route (i.e. between two stars).
And the Jump Technology section explicitly says that all ships can jump up to four hexes without using a printed jump route.

Can we agree on that at least?

Now, what does "without using a printed jump route" mean? It means "not on a line connecting two stars". What can that mean? It can mean "between two stars not connected by a link", AND it can mean "between a star and an empty hex", AND it can mean "between two empty hexes". Because the rules do not explicitly rule those possibilities out, it means that they are possible alternatives that are allowed by the rules.

If the rules had said "can jump up to four hexes without using a printed jump route but only between two stars" then that would have been absolutely clear - there is no possibility for a jump to or from an empty hex in this case - but it didn't say that. It only said "can jump up to four hexes without using a printed jump route", and that allows us a variety of different options.

The problem is that you're taking "without a printed jump route" to mean "it has to be star to star as well" when it's not explicitly stated that it does have to be that at all.

Therefore, I'm sticking to the rules exactly as they are stated, which is that in Dark Nebula a ship can jump up to four hexes that isn't on a printed jump route, and that destination does not have to be a hex containing a star.

Without an explicit statement to the effect that empty hexes are allowed you have to refer to the ruling that "jump routes" are stellar to stellar. So it does in fact mean that they can't jump into or out of empty hexes. By your own requirements of taking the rules as is and explicitly stated, without interpretation where they may be.

Then you've misunderstood what I'm saying. Hopefully what I just reiterated is clearer.

 

[EDG]

Ooops ! didn't even notice that was EDG before I posted. Sorry about that !

I'm finding this quite tiresome. I don't really care about this "ignore eachother" thing - fact is, we're all capable of raising points about the subject matter being discussed without making it personal, and we shouldn't have to ignore points made by anybody unless they do get personal.

I am going to continue addressing and responding to any point that you raise your posts about any subject in a non-personal manner, and I'm not going to apologise for it. If you're capable of responding to my posts in a non-personal manner too then I'll be happy to respond to them likewise - I have never had a problem doing that.

But if it's got to the stage where you feel you have to apologise just for responding in a non-personal manner to a couple of points that I raised in a non-personal manner, then it's getting way too ridiculous.

 

[EDG]

The point .5 parsec thing is 1/2 a hex assuming sol at the center...its just saying "within the same hex". The 100D effect isn't stated as involved in mass-mass jump calculations, to my knowledge.

The IW book states that a ship is precipitated out of jump if it intersects the 100D limit of a larger object, and that it should enter jump at least 100D from an object (but can enter jump closer to it, with large penalties). p226 says that safe jump entry or exit requires that the ship is at least 100D from an object. That's about all it says on the matter though - it doesn't say where exactly a ship has to emerge from jump.

An implication is that 100D is really the limit that matters when it comes to doing anything with jump, not 0.5 hexes. Another implication is that a ship can only exit jump at the 100D limit. But those are not explicitly stated in the rules.

Yes, he may be, barring a definitive statement from an author, but its not proven by that - there's a stellar mass at both ends of a microjump -it's just the same star

It's not though. There's a stellar mass at one end, not the other. If the same star was at both ends, the ship is looping back on itself.

...they are still separated by the week in hyperspace, and I can't see why the mass-mass has to apply only to two different stars -how does the math know ? If it fits the calculation, it fits the calculation.

The math can know very easily, because the departure mass is not the same as the arrival mass - you are leaving near a star and arriving near a planet and skipping over the space in between. You can argue that the physics is such that the star somehow "swamps" things up to a distance of 0.5 pc but in pretty much every other physics we know that means you're going to land up with terms mapping onto themselves and identities flying around and then everything cancelling out. And maybe you will argue that, but then we're just talking about something that doesn't follow any kind of scientific principles established beforehand, in which case it's all "magic".

 

[captainjack23]

The point .5 parsec thing is 1/2 a hex assuming sol at the center...its just saying "within the same hex". The 100D effect isn't stated as involved in mass-mass jump calculations, to my knowledge.

The IW book states that a ship is precipitated out of jump if it intersects the 100D limit of a larger object, and that it should enter jump at least 100D from an object (but can enter jump closer to it, with large penalties). p226 says that safe jump entry or exit requires that the ship is at least 100D from an object. That's about all it says on the matter though - it doesn't say where exactly a ship has to emerge from jump.

An implication is that 100D is really the limit that matters when it comes to doing anything with jump, not 0.5 hexes. Another implication is that a ship can only exit jump at the 100D limit. But those are not explicitly stated in the rules.

Yes, he may be, barring a definitive statement from an author, but its not proven by that - there's a stellar mass at both ends of a microjump -it's just the same star

It's not though. There's a stellar mass at one end, not the other. If the same star was at both ends, the ship is looping back on itself.

...they are still separated by the week in hyperspace, and I can't see why the mass-mass has to apply only to two different stars -how does the math know ? If it fits the calculation, it fits the calculation.

The math can know very easily, because the departure mass is not the same as the arrival mass - you are leaving near a star and arriving near a planet and skipping over the space in between. You can argue that the physics is such that the star somehow "swamps" things up to a distance of 0.5 pc but in pretty much every other physics we know that means you're going to land up with terms mapping onto themselves and identities flying around and then everything cancelling out. And maybe you will argue that, but then we're just talking about something that doesn't follow any kind of scientific principles established beforehand, in which case it's all "magic".

Okay, if you want, I'll give this a try.....you seemed to agree that mutual ignoring was the way to go in your email to those of us talking to Matt, but perhaps I misread; although I do tend to agree, and Matt clearly does, I'll try. Can we leave it at that ?


1. I'm not going to deal with jump precipitation; one can enter and leave jumpspace pretty much anywhere outside of 10 diameters
of a body, period. I'm fine with that. Jump precipitation is a big canon issue I am unwilling, and unable to participate in. If your contention is that jump precipitation is the mechanism for mass-mass jumps, that works for me, and doesn't matter, as it still implies a mass related endpoint. A lower limit, lower probablity of success, all are uncontradicted by this. Cool.

2. The discussion I was making was as regard hexes; the .5 hex comment was to indicate that everything in a hex can be reached by a J1 drive. You agree, right ? So, an Oort cloud jump is less than 1 parsec from earth, IIRC.

3. As to the same mass being as an endpoint and jump point, I think we are going to have to disagree, as our contentions on either side are undisprovable by other than Authorial Fiat.
The same with the math, as the whole issue (jumpspace) is essentially magic. I'm not innumerate, some math could very well not know the difference, some could, largely depending on what it is trying to do...which we dont know. Given that we know less than a little about the subject of hyperspace calculation, this seems to be a waste of effort, so I'll leave it at that. If you can find a game related reference about it, or derive one from another, I'll be happy to consider it.

4. In any case, I can happily drop the whole discussion about microjumps as it veers directly in jump precipitation. I don't really see where it contradicts my ideas, but if it does, I'll deal with it.

I mean, we agree on the course of the Imperium period, on the changes in jump science, the usefullness of mass-mass jumps, the issues of finding such points, the usefulness of GTIW, and the fact that it would be nice if the disappearance of the dwarf jump points of old were covered by the description of jump. I'm not sure why we seem to bash heads bout this.

So, how bout this...before we spiral off into arguing about minutae, how bout you just reread my general idea about the jump issue, and my "why the terrans hid the jump point" idea, and just tell me where you think they don't or shouldn't work...as you said, if not explicit in canon, any explanation, not just the likely one, has to be considered.

 

[EDG]

1. I'm not going to deal with jump precipitation; one can enter and leave jumpspace pretty much anywhere outside of 10 diameters of a body, period. I'm fine with that. Jump precipitation is a big canon issue I am unwilling, and unable to participate in. If your contention is that jump precipitation is the mechanism for mass-mass jumps, that works for me, and doesn't matter, as it still implies a mass related endpoint. A lower limit, lower probablity of success, all are uncontradicted by this. Cool.

It's a whole different flame war. I made it clear that what I said was just an implication, but not the actual canonical answer .

2. The discussion I was making was as regard hexes; the .5 hex comment was to indicate that everything in a hex can be reached by a J1 drive. You agree, right ? So, an Oort cloud jump is less than 1 parsec from earth, IIRC.

Fair enough. But do understand that 0.5 parsecs is even more arbitrary than 100D. 100D is at least based on some property of the massive object, but a parsec is defined as "the distance from the sun at which two imaginary lines—one projected from the Earth, and one projected from the sun at a right angle to a third line connecting the Earth and the sun—intersect in space at an angle of 1 arcsecond". It's is defined using the earth's orbital distance from the sun - there's nothing otherwise special or universal about it whatsoever, and a Vilani parsec would be different to a Terran one or a Hiver one because their orbits are different sizes. So why would a bunch of stars of very different sizes and masses have any field of influence defined by a nice tidy unit of distance (or fraction thereof) that is entirely specific to Earth's orbit?

3. As to the same mass being as an endpoint and jump point, I think we are going to have to disagree, as our contentions on either side are undisprovable by other than Authorial Fiat.
The same with the math, as the whole issue (jumpspace) is essentially magic. I'm not innumerate, some math could very well not know the difference, some could, largely depending on what it is trying to do...which we dont know. Given that we know less than a little about the subject of hyperspace calculation, this seems to be a waste of effort, so I'll leave it at that. If you can find a game related reference about it, or derive one from another, I'll be happy to consider it.

True, but there's no reason for me to believe that any kind of FTL physics involving entry into another universe would not follow similar principles to real world physics - after all, that entry is still taking place in our own universe, subject to our rules.

I mean, we agree on the course of the Imperium period, on the changes in jump science, the usefullness of mass-mass jumps, the issues of finding such points, the usefulness of GTIW, and the fact that it would be nice if the disappearance of the dwarf jump points of old were covered by the description of jump. I'm not sure why we seem to bash heads bout this.

I guess it's largely because I don't see any problem with just saying that the dwarfs aren't shown on the maps. We haven't seen any Vilani-Era editions of their jump maps, who's to say that they didn't show them initially, but then as the millennia progressed they slowly forgot the old stepping stones as they found they didn't use them. It doesn't mean that they never existed, it just means they got forgotten about. I'm sure there's plenty of real world old maps that showed things that current maps don't show. A way station on a dusty highway in the 1800s may not correspond to anything in the 2000s, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't there and wasn't used.

So, how bout this...before we spiral off into arguing about minutae, how bout you just reread my general idea about the jump issue, and my "why the terrans hid the jump point" idea, and just tell me where you think they don't or shouldn't work...as you said, if not explicit in canon, any explanation, not just the likely one, has to be considered.

I could, but I don't see the point. If you want to come up with an explanation that makes sense to you in your own games then just go with it - you only have yourself and your players to satisfy. But I just don't see that an alternate explanation is necessary at all given what canon says on the subject.

 

[captainjack23]

It's a whole different flame war. I made it clear that what I said was just an implication, but not the actual canonical answer .

Yes. And thats something else we agree on....

Fair enough. But do understand that 0.5 parsecs is even more arbitrary than 100D. So why would a bunch of stars of very different sizes and masses have any field of influence defined by a nice tidy unit of distance (or fraction thereof) that is entirely specific to Earth's orbit?

Not really an issue. I believe it's been explained that the map parsec is just either the closest terran approximation to a vilani "Onejumpunit" and co-incedentally close (like half litres and pints -the only reason I feel that the UK went metric) ; or that the term has shifted from the original meaning to the current one; or that its an original rules decision we are stuck with. Any of those work for me - the jump is the issue, not the hex, I agree. But there is some point in a jump from mass-mass where there isn't a mass close enough to work, regardless of what its called...which, I think, was all I wanted to say.

True, but there's no reason for me to believe that any kind of FTL physics involving entry into another universe would not follow similar principles to real world physics - after all, that entry is still taking place in our own universe, subject to our rules.

What..even if I say there is ? Disgraceful.
Perhaps I'm talking out my butt here, your point is good, but that said, there's no reason for me to believe that we know enough about the situation to be able to make a meaningful statement; so, there I am, and there you are.

I guess it's largely because I don't see any problem with just saying that the dwarfs aren't shown on the maps. We haven't seen any Vilani-Era editions of their jump maps, who's to say that they didn't show them initially, but then as the millennia progressed they slowly forgot the old stepping stones as they found they didn't use them. It doesn't mean that they never existed, it just means they got forgotten about. I'm sure there's plenty of real world old maps that showed things that current maps don't show. A way station on a dusty highway in the 1800s may not correspond to anything in the 2000s, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't there and wasn't used.

Perhaps its a cultural thing - quite a few places out here in the American west only exist because the train needed water, and some of the towns stayed after the train left...near my hometown is a place called Colinga -short for "Coaling Station eight", I kid you not. Coaling stations seven and nine didn't, but eight is still there -down to the abandoned train depot (it's a swank restraunt, if memory serves me)


My hometown exists because it was a good stopping point (had one place with a roof to sleep under and a bar, just like in D&D) on the wagon and horse trail between LA and SF (before the trains, even) , and became the garrison, then the post office, then the railhead, then the county seat. Its in a dry riverbed, and probably counts as generally niinhabitable by most standars -Its about 110 degrees this time of year, and bone dry, with crappy air even before pollution (allergens, dust and mold). Currently Population >100K . (airport rating D)

So, I see where we disagree, and why; I just think it horrendously unlikely that none of them survived to be on current maps -given especialy some of the ancient hellholes that are, simply because the are on a main and have fuel or some sort.

So, how bout this...before we spiral off into arguing about minutae, how bout you just reread my general idea about the jump issue, and my "why the terrans hid the jump point" idea, and just tell me where you think they don't or shouldn't work...as you said, if not explicit in canon, any explanation, not just the likely one, has to be considered.

I could, but I don't see the point. If you want to come up with an explanation that makes sense to you in your own games then just go with it - you only have yourself and your players to satisfy. But I just don't see that an alternate explanation is necessary at all given what canon says on the subject.

For not seeing the point, you sure seem to have a lot to say. Obviously I see the need, even looking at the same evidence. Possibly I'm being selfish by suggesting that others may want to help me with the issue, possibly not; but there does seem to be some interest....so is what really want to offer simply the above, which boils down to: "it's not an issue, stop wasting bandwidth"? This isn't a personal comment, or an attack, just an honest question - you certainly have contributed more in the past, which seems at odds with what you say above.

 

[EDG]

For not seeing the point, you sure seem to have a lot to say. Obviously I see the need, even looking at the same evidence. Possibly I'm being selfish by suggesting that others may want to help me with the issue, possibly not; but there does seem to be some interest....so is what really want to offer simply the above, which boils down to: "it's not an issue, stop wasting bandwidth"? This isn't a personal comment, or an attack, just an honest question - you certainly have contributed more in the past, which seems at odds with what you say above.

My motivation is to point out the known facts (in canon) of the matter of deep space jumps, is all, and trying to cut through the fog of misinterpretation. Hell, we've even had people claim that what IW says isn't canon because it contradicts what CT says... when the two have absolutely nothing to do with eachother. CT can say one thing and IW can say another, it just means something changed in between - but some people seem to take that as meaning that they contradict, when they in fact don't. I think (after much more discussion and argument than necessary) we generally understand that the two can co-exist now, so that part of the argument is done with.

The only other issue is what you do with those 'missing BDs', and that's largely down to personal interpretation. I'm fine with what the existing rules say about them. You're apparently not, and that's fine - but if I don't see a problem with something that's down to personal interpretation then I don't really see much point in me discussing it or commenting about it - if you want to figure out a solution to satisfy yourself then just go ahead and do that, but it does appear that you are the only person here who has that much of a problem with it.

 

[Ishmael]

The IW book states that a ship is precipitated out of jump if it intersects the 100D limit of a larger object, and that it should enter jump at least 100D from an object (but can enter jump closer to it, with large penalties). p226 says that safe jump entry or exit requires that the ship is at least 100D from an object. That's about all it says on the matter though - it doesn't say where exactly a ship has to emerge from jump.

An implication is that 100D is really the limit that matters when it comes to doing anything with jump, not 0.5 hexes. Another implication is that a ship can only exit jump at the 100D limit. But those are not explicitly stated in the rules.

I'm afraid that I don't follow how this implies that a ship can only exit at the 100d limit...

"....p226 says that safe jump entry or exit requires that the ship is at least 100D from an object...."

That implies that a ship can only exit jump at least 100d from an object. Jumping into an empty hex is at least 100d away from anything.
Therefore, IW states, in a roundabout way, that empty-hex-jumps are possible.

imtu, empty hex jumps are easier that jumping near any form of gravity well, and that tech advances allow safer jumps deeper in such a well. Tech advances also allow for better coordinated jumps and jumps of shorter duration ( less than a week ).

One adventure involved jumping back in time by a short amount during experiments in temporal 'scattering'. The players saw themselves being chased by sdb's..the rest of the adventure meant strong-arming them into a position where sdb's were chasing them regardless of any actions they took to prove the alternate them innocent...when they entered jump again, the time-slip went the opposite way and evened everything out ( except they were now wanted criminals in that system ).

 

[EDG]

I'm afraid that I don't follow how this implies that a ship can only exit at the 100d limit...

Probably because I used the wrong word - it's actually an inference, not an implication . The point being that it's not something that is stated in the rules.

 

[captainjack23]

if you want to figure out a solution to satisfy yourself then just go ahead and do that, but it does appear that you are the only person here who has that much of a problem with it.

Ah, well, one of the many burdens of being a lonely, misunderstood genius that I must bear in my relentless quest for the one, true, entertaining truth.....

 

[RandyT0001]

"....p226 says that safe jump entry or exit requires that the ship is at least 100D from an object...."

That implies that a ship can only exit jump at least 100d from an object. Jumping into an empty hex is at least 100d away from anything.
Therefore, IW states, in a roundabout way, that empty-hex-jumps are possible.

Re-read the "Technical Details" section on p.170, the "Deep Space Jumps" box on p.171 and as confirmation the 'historical' events detailed in "The Jump Drive (AD 2088-2098)" section on p.22 and top of p.23 of GT:IW. This will clarify your misperception of what IW says in a roundabout way on the topic of empty-hex-jumps. The first three sentences in the "Deep Space Jumps" box are explicit - no DSJ's during the IW's.

 

[Ishmael]

I can't; I never bought GT:IW
I was merely going by the reference to it that EDG gave.

From the snippet he gave, it strongly infers that, as empty hexes are at least 100d from everything, entry and exit into jump-space is okay as the distance from mass requirements (100d) are met as per EDG's reference.

hmmmmmmm
if you go by mass to mass jumps...it might be visualised like jumping from 'peak' to 'peak' 'over' the intervening space-time*. But then, the deeper you get into the well, the higher up you get on a j-space peak and thus, the further you can jump. Yet the higher up on a j-peak you go the less accurate you can be when hitting your target destination. Of course, you might be able to exit anywhere except that you can't "crash" into another peak. As jumping over a higher peak between the entry and exit point is not possible ( you crash into it instead ) jump shadowing is predicted. Also, jumping into an empty hex would be possible, but jumping out again would not ( but spacetime is never absolutely flat, so maybe pico-jumps** are possible...hardly useful )

Imagine that, the shorter the jump the further out you have to go. But longer jumps becoming increasingly more dangerous; remember that you can't enter j-space without mass, so mis-jumps are killers; most spacers would rather die in a quick ball of fire than the slow death in isolation. This instability is what prompted researchers to search for a different jump theory which does not require a strong gravity well to enter j-space. But it is vastly less efficient and uses much more fuel. Maybe there are some of the ancient old drives about...
( just tossing out ideas.... )

I like this brainstorm, but I think I'll stay with my original position that empty hex jumps are possible , IMTU anyways, just not very practical due to fuel usage and increased navigation difficulty/precision that is required.

I still stand by my inferences based on EDG's given reference.

* when looking at the rubber sheet model of gravity wells and curved space from under the sheet..the 'dimples' would look like 'peaks', aka the peaks and dimples are inverted from normal-space
** far smaller than micro-jumps

 

[EDG]

I can't; I never bought GT:IW
I was merely going by the reference to it that EDG gave.

From the snippet he gave, it strongly infers that, as empty hexes are at least 100d from everything, entry and exit into jump-space is okay as the distance from mass requirements (100d) are met as per EDG's reference.

Well, the text in GT:IW explicitly states (several times) that you need a mass at both ends for jump to be possible in the IW era, so no.

Of course, your logic may explain why EHJs are possible in later eras, but the IW book explicitly states that during (and before) the IW era the computations to allow jump routes to be plotted into empty hexes are impossible to solve using the techniques available at the time.

So you may be right, but not in the IW era.

 

[Ishmael]

Thats fine.
But it shows why I dislike canon; something that is stated definitively is also contradicted in the same source ( even if it is only an inference ).
And that the way something is done over here is done differently over there or just in a different time. It just muddies the water. Like if Star Trek universe was just a different period of history in the Star Wars universe.

I've given my opinion now, so I have little else to say on empty hex jumps.
I'll keep doing things in my own TU as always anyways...

 

[captainjack23]

I've given my opinion now, so I have little else to say on empty hex jumps.
I'll keep doing things in my own TU as always anyways...

good for you ....and have fun.