Passages x distance: some thoughts on cost.
- Thread starter captainjack23
- Start date
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
AKAramis said:
Ditto. Thank goodness for the extra time.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
Now that I'm out of worldgen, I was wondering how we could actually try to break the existing trade system as requested.
We seem to be in agreement that there are problems with passenger cost, and availability, and availability of spec cargo & freight. Overall potential profitability of ships is in analysis, and it seems that what is also needed is some way to dummy an actual trade pattern in action, so we can test fixes against the exisitng model, and confirm problems. Short of a regression analysis, or a five year merchant prince campaign, is there a good way to simulate the actual process of trading, with an eye to how the system can be gamed ?
I can't imagine that other traveller versions haven't generated this kind or analysis -is there something we can use to avoid reinventing ?
We seem to be in agreement that there are problems with passenger cost, and availability, and availability of spec cargo & freight. Overall potential profitability of ships is in analysis, and it seems that what is also needed is some way to dummy an actual trade pattern in action, so we can test fixes against the exisitng model, and confirm problems. Short of a regression analysis, or a five year merchant prince campaign, is there a good way to simulate the actual process of trading, with an eye to how the system can be gamed ?
I can't imagine that other traveller versions haven't generated this kind or analysis -is there something we can use to avoid reinventing ?
captainjack23 said:
You should take a look at the history of the TML and the COTI boards.
Yes, indeed, they have. Even heated arguments.
In fact, the T20 changes are a direct result of Myself, Hunter, Dr. Skull, and another doing EXACTLY this kind of analysis.
a couple of notes from my memory:
On speculation with a tramp (no route required), J2 gives 3x the chances of favorable modifiers in range versus J1. Examine the number of hexes available to pick from by Jump Number (Jn):
Jn Hexes
1: 6
2: 18
3: 36
J4: 60
J5: 90
J6: 126
J3 seems about the longest range possible where the increased spec profits make the expenses worthwhile, and it really is not much better than J2. When I did the math for Bk2, J4 was a losing proposition, as the increased benefit was not sufficient to overcome the increased costs.
(table with bad data removed. Corrected data two posts down. analysis unchanged.)
Note that J6 is now possible, and even J6 is relatively cheap.
All of them have a point, using the Motrav finance rules, where they will be able to make a mortgage payment.
Note 1: under Bk2, these would almost never fly full except the J5-6 ones... unless they took a roleplay approach and filled a warehouse with spec, and then load up the ship as it comes around the route.
under Bk5, most of these could fill, but the J4+ will not routinely expect a profit.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
AKAramis said:
really ? Arguments ? Those aren't new to this board ? 8)
Well, sure, I'm on COTI and can look there - where are the TML archives ?
Is that potential profitability ? It sounds like MGT has added enough profit to make longer trade routes possible, which for a game, is cool.
Sounds like the slim fast ships will replicate the "small packet trade" pretty well ...risky but profitable..not as much as a solid J-2/3 ship, but still possible..
(note for flavor - the SPT, aka small scale smuggling and blockade running, often flounders on the fact that if the ship can't reasonably expected to turn a legal profit, the law gets awful suspicious when it does...so, one needs to have some likelihood of success to cover the profit that can't be hidden. Of course, this assumes that the smugglers are smart enough or motivated enough to do cost/benefit analysis...).
Very helpful stuff - any ideas on how to break that or the current system ?
Corrected 800 Td and 1000 Td ships
Code:
800 Td Series | D | G | k | N | r | v |
| J1 | J2 | J3 | J4 | J5 | J6 |
---------------------------+------------------+------------------+------------------+------------------+------------------+------------------+
Hull | 800 80 | 800 80 | 800 80 | 800 80 | 800 80 | 800 80 |
JDrive | 25 40 | 40 70 | 55 100 | 70 130 | 85 160 | 105 200 |
MDrive | 7 16 | 7 16 | 7 16 | 7 16 | 7 16 | 7 16 |
PP | 13 32 | 22 56 | 31 80 | 40 104 | 49 128 | 61 160 |
PPFuel | 8 0 | 14 0 | 20 0 | 26 0 | 32 0 | 40 0 |
JFuel | 80 0 | 120 0 | 160 0 | 200 0 | 240 0 | 280 0 |
Bridge | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 |
SR | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 |
2HdPt+2FC | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 |
Software | 0 0.1 | 0 0.2 | 0 0.3 | 0 0.4 | 0 0.5 | 0 0.6 |
Computer | 0 0.03 | 0 0.045 | 0 0.24 | 0 0.3 | 0 7.5 | 0 15 |
Ship's Locker | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 |
Cargo | 581 0 | 511 0 | 441 0 | 371 0 | 301 0 | 221 0 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Price | 178.43 | 232.545 | 286.84 | 341 | 402.3 | 481.9 |
Financed | 143 | 187 | 230 | 273 | 322 | 386 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Monthly | 715 | 935 | 1150 | 1365 | 1610 | 1930 |
Per Jump Payment | 357.5 | 467.5 | 575 | 682.5 | 805 | 965 |
Maint | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
fuel | 44 | 67 | 90 | 113 | 136 | 160 |
LS-Crew | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
ST: Expenses | 425.5 | 558.5 | 689 | 819.5 | 965 | 1149 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Per ton costs financed | 732 | 1093 | 1562 | 2209 | 3206 | 5199 |
Per ton costs not financed | 117 | 178 | 259 | 369 | 532 | 833 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
1000 Td Series | E | H | L | P | S | X |
| J1 | J2 | J3 | J4 | J5 | J6 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Hull | 1000 100 | 1000 100 | 1000 100 | 1000 100 | 1000 100 | 1000 100 |
JDrive | 30 50 | 45 80 | 60 110 | 75 140 | 90 170 | 115 220 |
MDrive | 9 20 | 9 20 | 9 20 | 9 20 | 9 20 | 9 20 |
PP | 16 40 | 22 56 | 34 88 | 43 112 | 52 136 | 67 176 |
PPFuel | 10 0 | 16 0 | 22 0 | 28 0 | 34 0 | 44 0 |
JFuel | 80 0 | 120 0 | 160 0 | 200 0 | 240 0 | 280 0 |
Bridge | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 | 20 2 |
SR | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 | 64 8 |
2HdPt+2FC | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 | 2 0.2 |
Software | 0 0.1 | 0 0.2 | 0 0.3 | 0 0.4 | 0 0.5 | 0 0.6 |
Computer | 0 0.03 | 0 0.045 | 0 0.24 | 0 0.3 | 0 7.5 | 0 15 |
Ship's Locker | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 | 0 0.1 |
Cargo | 769 0 | 702 0 | 629 0 | 559 0 | 489 0 | 399 0 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Price | 220.43 | 266.545 | 328.84 | 383 | 444.3 | 541.9 |
Financed | 177 | 214 | 264 | 307 | 356 | 434 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Monthly | 885 | 1070 | 1320 | 1535 | 1780 | 2170 |
Per Jump Payment | 442.5 | 535 | 660 | 767.5 | 890 | 1085 |
Maint | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
fuel | 45 | 68 | 91 | 114 | 137 | 162 |
LS-Crew | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
ST: Expenses | 517.5 | 633 | 781 | 911.5 | 1057 | 1277 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+
Per ton costs financed | 673 | 902 | 1242 | 1631 | 2162 | 3201 |
Per ton costs not financed | 98 | 140 | 192 | 258 | 342 | 481 |
---------------------------+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+------.------.----+The bottom line is how much per ton it COSTS, assuming no salaries (crew on profit sharing).
So, the flat rate of older editions can work for even J6 shipping... assuming J6 ships are not bought on credit.
The way to look at the flat rate is paying by time, rather than distance. It's not as bad as a flat rate per parsec...
So, the flat rate of older editions can work for even J6 shipping... assuming J6 ships are not bought on credit.
The way to look at the flat rate is paying by time, rather than distance. It's not as bad as a flat rate per parsec...
[/quote]captainjack23 said:
Isn't that a bit weird though? I mean, there's got to be some goods that need to get delivered to their destination relatively fresh (by which I mean, they have to last long enough to not become useless or spoiled in the week it has to sit in jumpspace plus the week/fortnight going to and from the 100D limit).
What if there's a market 4pc away that wants those goods but obviously won't be able to get them if they have to be shipped via four J1 jumps or two J2 jumps? Wouldn't they be willing to pay a premium to get the goods there quickly? (ditto for passengers too - there's bound to be a LOT of people who want to get to a J4 world in a week rather than in a month).
EDG said:
Bk 2 has variable base prices by type of good, from Cr300/Td to MCr10/Td, but only one lot "per trader" of spec goods. The price was modified by the Actual Value Table (AVT), the roll on which was modified by purchase DM's, and many interpreted the broker rules to allow a hired broker as well. Since that one lot ranged from a low of 1 ton to a high of about 60 tons, and most worlds will only generate a handful of large cargoes, it can be hard to fill ships.
Bk 7 (my typo earlier) had all goods being Cr4000 per Td of cargo, adjusted for TL and the Actual Value Table. The only modifier to the AVT was Broker skill. However, the same process as used to generate freight was also used to generate a number of lots of this "generic trade goods" available for purchase. Sale was always KCr5, adjusted for TL difference, source trade codes, and empire of origin, and of course, an AVT roll. Said AVT roll was adjusted by Broker skill only. It was explicit that it was one roll per ship, not per person.
MegaTraveller added a detailing process for trade goods, which allowed determining if they were hazardous, explosive, radioactive, flammable, and/or perishable, but none of this affected pricing.
TNE and T4 both used MT's version whole cloth.
T20 allows up to 8 lots, from a 100 place variation of the Bk2 table, and uses the Bk2 process. It also adds several additional types of freight: Priority, Hazardous, and security. It also added optional rules for double occupancy passengers, allowing a higher profit margin.
So the problem is "how much can we fill up with" sets the upper limit on freighters, while prices to operate under Bk2 (and MoTrav) DROP with increased size, as does the proportion of the population able to purchase them.
Under Bk2, the reason the 200 Td & 400Td is so prevalent is that TL9 can only build drives to type D, and both can be built at TL 9, so if you use the article (which reappears in several later rulesets as canon) for converting costs to local credits, you can buy a TL9 Type A for about 60-75% of List, since the List price is paid in CrLocal, and the CrImp is about 1.3-1.5x the value of the CrLocal. (Note that Trade Goods are explicitly exempted from this rule in at least one version of it... Trade Goods are bought and sold, and priced, in CrImp.)
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
AKAramis said:
How different are the MGT numbers ?
AKAramis said:
A good summary, but I'm not seeing how that answers the question I posed (and that you quoted) - namely, surely there's some demand for things to get to their destination in a week or two (by J4+) rather than after a month or more by J1.
Heck, if you had a J6 ship then I bet people would be begging you to take them or their cargo on board to get to a world 6pc away in a week and a bit, rather than two months! That's got to be profitable, surely, given the inevitable demand.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
So, to pull it together a bit,
it looks like:
The ships in MGT are potentially profitable.
Passengers in MGT are both a net loss, and cannot compete with cargo in any case.
One interesting observation is that Profit per parsec/jump isn't flat, or linear (spikes at 2) due to optimal access to markets with a jump 2 drive. Was this based on MGT data ?
Still curious about the best way to get passenger trade up and running. So far, I see:
drastically reduce stewards,
flat increase in base cost for passage,
incresed rate by parsec (non-flat fee).
reducing the profitability of cargo to increase the compeditiveness of passengers is removed from the list as a bad idea from a game mechanic perspective, given that Aramises, analysis of MGT trade indicated a good possibility of character being able to make a profit at trade (not always a good bet in other versions, or so I understand) .
Have i missed any ?
it looks like:
The ships in MGT are potentially profitable.
Passengers in MGT are both a net loss, and cannot compete with cargo in any case.
One interesting observation is that Profit per parsec/jump isn't flat, or linear (spikes at 2) due to optimal access to markets with a jump 2 drive. Was this based on MGT data ?
Still curious about the best way to get passenger trade up and running. So far, I see:
drastically reduce stewards,
flat increase in base cost for passage,
incresed rate by parsec (non-flat fee).
reducing the profitability of cargo to increase the compeditiveness of passengers is removed from the list as a bad idea from a game mechanic perspective, given that Aramises, analysis of MGT trade indicated a good possibility of character being able to make a profit at trade (not always a good bet in other versions, or so I understand) .
Have i missed any ?
captainjack23 said:
All the ship figures above are based upon MoTrav.
as you can see by looking at the ships, the actual cost ratios are non-linear by distance...
Code:
Jump Class J1 J2 J3 J4 J5 J6
400 Td Fin 1 1.9901639344 3.737704918 7.6475409836 24.790163934 NP
400Td UnFin 1 2.0975609756 4.0406504065 8.3821138211 26.804878049 NP
800TdFin 1 1.4931693989 2.1338797814 3.0177595628 4.3797814208 7.1024590164
800TdUnFin 1 1.5213675214 2.2136752137 3.1538461538 4.547008547 7.1196581197
1000Td Fin 1 1.3402674591 1.8454680535 2.4234769688 3.2124814264 4.7563150074
1000TdUnFin 1 1.4285714286 1.9591836735 2.6326530612 3.4897959184 4.9081632653
Average all 1 1.645183453 2.6550936744 4.5428984252 11.204018216 5.9716488522
Average Big 1 1.445843952 2.0380516805 2.8069339367 3.9072668281 5.9716488522The costs relative to J1 are roughly linear for big ships (800Td+), but under Bk2, or even Bk5, they have a hard time filling. Mo Trav has no filling limit, only a freight limit and passenger limit... the rest of the filling MUST be speculation, and speculation is unlimited in size (but should be limited!)
And as a further thought on shipping: stuff that's time critical won't sell to people not going to a viable market.
EDG: you're stuck in Demand-driven market mode; only GT presumes that, and only in GTFT and later works. Everything else is speculation market derived, that is, the consumer isn't ordering goods produced remotely, but buying those items they want when they arrive, or offering low-ball values for surpluses.
Current real world markets are moving towards full scale demand driven: producers do not begin production until they know they have a market. A few are not, like automobiles and toys... but they are tending to move that way. Aircraft are almost exclusively demand driven. Many housing markets are as well.
But as recently as the 1960's, many markets were speculative in the sense that the producer produced speculating he had a market. Since about 1850, most shipping has been demand driven; goods ship only once a purchaser orders them.
But these changes all occur because of rapid communication. So, on world, most goods will be demand driven by TL 9+; interworld is still speculative work. At some point, someone is speculating. The safest route for the producer is to leave the shipper taking the largest chunk of risk. As routinely happened between 1600 and 1800. The shipper owned the ship, and the cargo; the owner was seldom aboard...
Here's my suggestion: For regularly scheduled trips (i.e. the economic environment that free traders operate in) an easy, albeit VERY rough, approximation is (1 + jump number) times Cr2,000 for a middle passage, 25% more for a high passage, and 50% less for an economy passage (economy passage is my name for double occupancy travel; it's actually legal by CT rules, yet it's never mentioned as a possibility). For a low passage, use (1 + jump number) times Cr400.EDG said:
However, ticket prices for regular passenger liners can vary tremendously with local conditions. Monopolies can allow a line to raise prices far above the average while price wars and state subsidies can temporarily depress the prices to where they won't even cover the liner's expenses. Seasonal variations can also play a part. To account for such factors, the referee may elect to raise prices by as much as 100% or lower them by as much as 50%.
For free traders, the cost is whatever the passenger is willing to pay. This is really a roleplaying issue.
Hans
PS: EDG, if you have a subscription to JTAS Online, have a look here: http://jtas.sjgames.com/login/article.cgi?380
In order to figure out a realistic cost for a ticket, work out the ship expenses for a year (including a fair profit) and divide by the number of passengers/tons of cargo carried in a year. I suppose it could be done for the half a dozen standard Traveller ships: The Beowulf, the Marava, the Stellar, the... I forget what the 400 T one is called.EDG said:
However, for free traders, the cost should really be whatever the passenger is willing to pay. I even have a vague notion that it says so somewhere in the original CT rules but the ramifications are completely ignored. I could be misremembering, though.
Hans
The problem with existing designs is that they're all mixed designs. That is, they all carry both cargo, high passengers, mid passengers, and low passengers. To get realistic prices you should really do a specialized design for an all-cargo version (no passengers), a high passage version (one steward per 8 staterooms, 1 T of cargo space per stateroom), a mid passage version (one steward per 50, one extra medic per, I forget how many, no cargo space), and a low passage version (filled to the brim with low berths) of each ship.EDG said:
I did that once for bunch of 600 T ships, but I used the QSDS1.5 design rules, which differ enough from HG rules to make a difference.
As for fitting J6 into a 200T ship, that depends on whether MGT is based on Book 2 or on HG. Please, please, please tell me it's not based on Book 2! Book 2 ship design is SO broken.
Hans
Hans
If you want to carry passengers from Rhylanor to Porozlo and back, jump-2 is much worse news than jump-1. It all depends on what you're planning to do with the ship when you order it from the shipyard.Zowy said:
Very few (if any) ships are actually intended to roam the spacelanes desperately trying to scrape together freight and passengers for the next destination. Most (if not all) are intended to jump back and forth along a route that the buyer know beforehand will have enough passengers and freight to fill the staterooms and cargo bay comfortably each and every jump. (Of course, sometimes the buyer miscalculated).
Hans
Similar threads
