Fuel Dumps

[GabrielGABFonseca]

Thoughts on my post above, #69? It kind of goes similar to your quartering idea, although not as extreme.

My knee-jerk reaction was an initial aversion to the idea of introducing rolls to something which didn't need them before, but thinking a bit more about it, it does put the agency in the hands of the players, which from a game design perspective is a good thing.

With respect, inventing a limitation to encourage the use of an obsolete and inefficient method of thrust is not good game design.

That was not my goal; my goal was to try and find any argument in favour of the limit I could irrespective of whether I found it a compelling one or not; that's what 'playing devil's advocate' is.

Deep space refueling stations EXIST, and not all of them are on rogue planets or around brown dwarf stars. Some are constructed space stations. If you cannot maneuver to them, then their existence is pointless.

I politely disagree; not only ships can still manoeuvre in deep space, albeit slowly, this is easily resolved simply by having DSMS-equipped tugs, which has the positive side-effect of being another expense involved in Deep Space Refuelling Stations, which helps explain why they aren't everywhere.

There is a sufficiently powerful gravity well surrounding the galaxy to trap satellite galaxies into orbit around us.
There is a sufficiently large gravity well encompassing galaxies to bend the light of the galaxies behind them (lensing).
Freefall is not an absence of local gravity, it is the perception of a lack of gravity. That includes freefall around the galactic center of gravity.

Look man, I know how gravity works; if I didn't I'd be out of a job.
But for some arcane reason, MWM decided that there was Merit™ in the 1,000D limit idea. What that may be, I have no idea, I'm just some guy – but the man handed me a lemon and I'm just trying to puzzle out how to make a Caipirinha with it.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Why not just get rid of the 1,000D limit and get rid of microjumps. This solves all of the issues.

 

[Condottiere]

What's the difference between Heplar and our rockets?

 

[Vormaerin]

They are about 10x more fuel efficient.

Basically, they retain the flavor of rocketry without the massive fuel to payload ratio that we are stuck with IRL

 

[Condottiere]

Do we have them somewhere in Mongoose, or do I need to look it up in Tee/Five?

 

[Technetium 98]

I'm pretty sure Mongoose R-Drives are meant to be HEPlaR, though they do have specific impulses in the millions of seconds, so. Bit more than 10x.

 

[Vormaerin]

Yeah, the reaction drives listed in High Guard 2020 have the 2.5% fuel ratio of Heplar, but they don't have a "Burns" mechanism, so they made it 1 hour of thrust.

T5 has Heplar engines needing power from the power plant and using 1/10 the reaction mass of regular rockets.

 

[MonsterX]

I just ignore the whole 1000D rule. And my players are the DNR.

For those who've asked, I think the rule is to prevent rocks or ships or whatever being accelerated to relativistic to smash into planets, which would probably become a dominant tactic in warfare, given the magic maneuver drives everyone is using. PC ships could also do this. So it becomes hard to explain why every terrorist isn't turning shuttles into WMDs on a regular basis. With the limit, it is a lot harder to get to those kinds of speeds, so the energy levels are lower (still a lot) , and the projectiles would be possible to shoot down.

My solution is just to not have anyone think of the possibility of using ships as WMDs, and pretend it can't happen, and not tell the players about it. Same as the flat 2D starmap - it is inconveniently impossible, but suspension of disbelief requires we all studiously ignore the possibility. Because ignoring it allows us to have our magic maneuver drives, and not worry about 1000D limits or planet-killing scout ships.

 

[Condottiere]

There's plasma in Twenty Three Hundred Anno Domini.

I'll take a closer look at that.

 

[Arkathan]

Look man, I know how gravity works; if I didn't I'd be out of a job.

Only the first sentence was a response to you. The rest was not a questioning/put down of YOUR knowledge, but a reality check on the 1000D argument.

 

[Geir]

Hey everyone,

With regards the 1,000d limit, we like the idea of it, but think 1,000d is too low. Far too low.

Assuming it should only kick in when we are talking serious deep space exploration and not in the outer system, what limit would you guys place it at?

Except... one of the original uses of J-1 once discovered was travel within the solar system. At 1000D it would cut off just short of Saturn, but you'd be close to Saturn's 1000D by then, so you could both accelerate and slow down without much of a problem (enough to handwave away). And that would leave the ice giants and Kuiper belt being useful for a microjump.

Or, if it's going to increase, at least just make it 10,000D to keep powers of 10 - that gets you to 93AU out and covers most everything in the solar system, even Eris for most of its orbit.

 

[Condottiere]

Outside of psychological trauma, default ten tonne jump drive for two hundred parsec tonnes would be available at technological level ten, whereas acceleration factor six manoeuvre drive is technological level twelve.

At two hundred tonne hull, fifteen megastarbux (plus four for the factor one manoeuvre drive) versus twenty four megastarbux.

 

[MasterGwydion]

I just ignore the whole 1000D rule. And my players are the DNR.

For those who've asked, I think the rule is to prevent rocks or ships or whatever being accelerated to relativistic to smash into planets, which would probably become a dominant tactic in warfare, given the magic maneuver drives everyone is using. PC ships could also do this. So it becomes hard to explain why every terrorist isn't turning shuttles into WMDs on a regular basis. With the limit, it is a lot harder to get to those kinds of speeds, so the energy levels are lower (still a lot) , and the projectiles would be possible to shoot down.

An asteroid doesn't need high speed to decimate a planet, it just needs size. If I have players that want to do it, I tell them that I don't run games that include the players committing genocide. So, don't do it, or find another table. lol

My solution is just to not have anyone think of the possibility of using ships as WMDs, and pretend it can't happen, and not tell the players about it. Same as the flat 2D starmap - it is inconveniently impossible, but suspension of disbelief requires we all studiously ignore the possibility. Because ignoring it allows us to have our magic maneuver drives, and not worry about 1000D limits or planet-killing scout ships.

As far as the map goes? This is the Traveller Universe, not our universe, so in the TU, the galactic plane is flat. lol. Stating this when people ask gets Me a lot of confused faces. lol

 

[Arkathan]

My solution is just to not have anyone think of the possibility of using ships as WMDs, and pretend it can't happen, and not tell the players about it. Same as the flat 2D starmap - it is inconveniently impossible, but suspension of disbelief requires we all studiously ignore the possibility. Because ignoring it allows us to have our magic maneuver drives, and not worry about 1000D limits or planet-killing scout ships.

Dagger at Efate on steroids: Converting the cargo bay of a free trader to fuel tankage gives you four more jumps. Probably have to knock out walls and put some fuel bladders in dismantled staterooms to get the weeks of operation needed. Accelerate to the 1000D limit in the first system, jump to the next system, conserving velocity. Jump in above the plane of the ecliptic at one 1000d limit and run to the other side of the system, say 1900D that uses the standard tankage. Three more jumps accelerating across 1900D, transferring fuel from the cargo bay each time. Last jump come in at the edge and accelerate towards the target planet. Even if missiles manage to intercept it, the shrapnel is going to be flying at the planet at a measurable fraction of C.

Maniacs will find a way, regardless of the limits imposed.

Adding this for MasterGwydion's later post. Rule zero does tend to stop the maniacs rather well.

 

[Sigtrygg]

An asteroid doesn't need high speed to decimate a planet, it just needs size. If I have players that want to do it, I tell them that I don't run games that include the players committing genocide. So, don't do it, or find another table. lol

Umm, no.
Kinetic energy.
Double the mass of your asteroid you double the energy.
Double the velocity and the energy increases by four times.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Best way to get rid of the near c rock is to adopt a "semi" realistic drive. While HEPlaR is still science fantasy it does do a good job of limiting the velocity a ship can get up to.

Law of unintended consequence - if you have a magic maneuver drive that only needs electricity to power it then you can keep the drive running as long as your power plant can output electricity.

 

[Vormaerin]

There's a lot of ways to wax a planet if you want to. There's probably thought given to stopping these sorts of things with folks who understand Future Tech that the game doesn't bother with developing. Warping gameplay to solve hypotheticals is not generally a useful approach to game design.

Since it's all space magic, might as well just say M-Drives stop accelerating at "velocity we are not scared of". Makes as much sense as anything else about them

But, mostly, I just don't worry about hypotheticals like that. I just hypothesize that future space experts figured something out, so I don't need to.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Umm, no.
Kinetic energy.
Double the mass of your asteroid you double the energy.
Double the velocity and the energy increases by four times.

Right, but the only difference is if the extinction level event enough to kill everyone or enough to kill everyone twice. It doesn't matter. Accelerate a 10km asteroid to 1km/second and the planet is doomed. That is only 29 hours of 0.001G of acceleration.

 

[agentwigggles]

With respect, inventing a limitation to encourage the use of an obsolete and inefficient method of thrust is not good game design.
Deep space refueling stations EXIST, and not all of them are on rogue planets or around brown dwarf stars. Some are constructed space stations. If you cannot maneuver to them, then their existence is pointless.
There is a sufficiently powerful gravity well surrounding the galaxy to trap satellite galaxies into orbit around us.
There is a sufficiently large gravity well encompassing galaxies to bend the light of the galaxies behind them (lensing).
Freefall is not an absence of local gravity, it is the perception of a lack of gravity. That includes freefall around the galactic center of gravity.

The best argument for the continued use of fusion reaction drives is their use as a weapon at dogfight ranges, or as a turbo boost.

No one said the m drive does not work outside the 1000d limit, it just reduces to 1 percent operational power.
So it can still go to empty hexes and to those facilities. That hasn't changed.

 

[Vormaerin]

Well, if there isn't a star around, then it drops to 0.1%. You aren't really doing much of anything at that point.