Decanonized, not excluded

[rancke]

The A5:TCS method of calculating naval budgets, for example, has been specifically excluded from figuring the 3I naval budget.

Not quite. It's been decanonized, which means that the method is no more authorized than any other method. But since no alternate method has been provided, it is no LESS authorized either. It certainly hasn't been excluded. Same for the Striker method.

So why not use them both? It's possible to reconcile the two methods by assuming that the Cr500 represents an average percentage of an average planetary economy into something that fits pretty well with Real Life figures.

Until and unless someone comes up with a method that works better, I see no reason not to keep using this one. Least of all that it has been decanonized.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Not quite. It's been decanonized, which means that the method is no more authorized than any other method. But since no alternate method has been provided, it is no LESS authorized either. It certainly hasn't been excluded. Same for the Striker method.

So why not use them both? It's possible to reconcile the two methods by assuming that the Cr500 represents an average percentage of an average planetary economy into something that fits pretty well with Real Life figures.

Until and unless someone comes up with a method that works better, I see no reason not to keep using this one. Least of all that it has been decanonized.


Hans

It's most certainly been overwritten - T4's supplement line does replace it. Albeit for the very early 3I. And it was explicitly disallowed by MWM during T20 playtesting.

 

[DonM]

And it's been revisited in T5 development after I pointed out that Pocket Empires doesn't really improve on either Striker or TCS, it just gives another way to do it.

T5 has its own built-in mechanism, based on Resource Units.

I don't know much about T20, so I can't comment on it.

But between Pocket Empires, Striker or TCS, use whichever system you are most comfortable with. Marc isn't going to come over to your house and make you stop playing and switch to the one true way.

 

[rancke]

But between Pocket Empires, Striker or TCS, use whichever system you are most comfortable with. Marc isn't going to come over to your house and make you stop playing and switch to the one true way.

Not really what I worry about. I'm much more interested to know if Marc will reject, say, a system writeup where the planetary defenses are based on a military budget equal to 3% of GWP, said GWP having been calculated according to Striker. If that's the case, then it has indeed not only been decanonized but also disallowed.

Somehow I doubt he will, though.


Hans

 

[DonM]

Not very likely. I'll admit that I wish I had a good program to generate Far Trader trade maps -- very useful in sector analysis.

One of these days I'm going to find a way to compare all of these systems and either unify them or take the best and consolidate them.

 

[Hyphen]

Someone created one of these - they had created a map of the entire Imperium's trade routes, and you could see why the Sol Rim was so important!

I want it for all the "what-if's": what if Tavonni were TL 13 & Pop 4? TL 15 & Rich? And what really are the high-value targets for a "proper" set of 5FW victory conditions? ;-)

Can't remember off-hand who it was; is it part of the travellermap site?

 

[tjoneslo]

Not very likely. I'll admit that I wish I had a good program to generate Far Trader trade maps -- very useful in sector analysis.

One of these days I'm going to find a way to compare all of these systems and either unify them or take the best and consolidate them.

The nroute.c code posted on the Traveller wiki does this, but I'm not sure if it counts as a "good" program. It was used to generate the trade maps.

The best Traveller mapping program I know of in active development is Universe. Perhaps you can convince Peter that is the next area of focus.

 

[aramis]

Not quite. It's been decanonized, which means that the method is no more authorized than any other method. But since no alternate method has been provided, it is no LESS authorized either. It certainly hasn't been excluded. Same for the Striker method.

So why not use them both? It's possible to reconcile the two methods by assuming that the Cr500 represents an average percentage of an average planetary economy into something that fits pretty well with Real Life figures.

Why not? Because the current edition's upkeep rules mean most people would starve on most worlds...

 

[rancke]

Because the current edition's upkeep rules mean most people would starve on most worlds...

How do you figure that?


Hans

 

[aramis]

How do you figure that?


Hans

Real simple: Striker GNP's are in Local Credits (CrL).
TL 5 is base KCrL2, TL6 is base KCrL4 and TL7 is base KCrL6.

Soc ≤2 costs Cr400 per month, x12 or x13 months (non OTU/OTU) is KCr4.8 or KCr5.2.

TL 5 worlds starve everyone even if Ri Ag; KCrL2 *1.2*1.6=KCrL3.84 per capita.
TL6 starve if not Ag or In; KCrL4 *1.2 = KCr4.8. All Ri worlds are also Ag. Note that Ag worlds starve under the OTU 13 month calendar as the basis.
TL7 worlds don't raise replacement kids if Na or Ni or Po, being KCrL4.8 per capita, and starve if any two of those.

The per capita income NEEDS to support at least KCrL4.8 or everyone is dead, or living on off-world income sources or charity.

Refs: Striker Bk 2, p.38, and MGT CRB, p.87 & 181.

 

[rancke]

Real simple: Striker GNP's are in Local Credits (CrL).
TL 5 is base KCrL2, TL6 is base KCrL4 and TL7 is base KCrL6.

Soc ≤2 costs Cr400 per month, x12 or x13 months (non OTU/OTU) is KCr4.8 or KCr5.2.

Wow. There's been one hell of an inflation in the Imperium. Retroactively, too. Back in CT, you could live averagely for ~Cr600[*] per month in 1105. With MgT you need Cr1500 -- also in 1105.

[*] Good food, Cr200 per month, good lodging, Cr200 per month; the remaining Cr200 for everything else is my guess.​

So one fix could simply be to multiply the GNP figures from Striker by 2.5 -- retroactively.

Or perhaps TPTB at Mongoose will reconsider this change in CoL and errata it when they realize it increases fleet sizes by a factor 2.5.

Or we keep both the Striker figures and the fleet sizes and instead say those costs of living are for typical player characters, travelers, living on restaurant meals and sleeping in hotels. So perhaps that can be used to explain the discrepancy between CT prices and MgT prices. The CT figures were for long-term subsistence; PCs don't usually live in the same place long enough to qualify for that even when they live off ship. Another thing: a CrImp is the equivalent of a 1979 $US, isn't it? So if maintaining an average SL of 7 really do require Ct1,500 per month, it costs the equivalent of US$50,000 per month to maintain a middle class lifestyle. That doesn't sound all that realistic, does it? I don't think the average cost of living in the US is $600,000.

(Incidentally, I notice the rule doesn't specifiy what the cost of living is for a person that has his food and lodging taken care of by living on a ship).


Hans

 

[aramis]

Wow. There's been one hell of an inflation in the Imperium. Retroactively, too. Back in CT, you could live averagely for ~Cr600[*] per month in 1105. With MgT you need Cr1500 -- also in 1105.

Not really - all the non-ship non-travel prices were apparently refigured, as MGT was more a rewrite from scratch, not a revision of CT.

[*] Good food, Cr200 per month, good lodging, Cr200 per month; the remaining Cr200 for everything else is my guess.​

So one fix could simply be to multiply the GNP figures from Striker by 2.5 -- retroactively.

Or perhaps TPTB at Mongoose will reconsider this change in CoL and errata it when they realize it increases fleet sizes by a factor 2.5.

Or we keep both the Striker figures and the fleet sizes and instead say those costs of living are for typical player characters, travelers, living on restaurant meals and sleeping in hotels. So perhaps that can be used to explain the discrepancy between CT prices and MgT prices. The CT figures were for long-term subsistence; PCs don't usually live in the same place long enough to qualify for that even when they live off ship. Another thing: a CrImp is the equivalent of a 1979 $US, isn't it?

No. CT Cr is Cr1=1977US$1 1977. A factor of about 1977$1=1979$1.2... That was one of the more noted periods of rapid inflation. THe MGT Cr is more correctly 2007US$3.4 or 2007GB£2.35. Makes a HUGE difference when looking at incomes.

also:

A character living on board ship is assumed to have his food and lodging taken care of. A character living on a planet or orbital for a long period must spend money on their living costs – the amount
depends on the quality of life desired. A character who does not live
at the standard listed for his Social Standing risks being embarrassed
and even losing his standing

So if maintaining an average SL of 7 really do require Ct1,500 per month, it costs the equivalent of US$50,000 per month to maintain a middle class lifestyle. That doesn't sound all that realistic, does it? I don't think the average cost of living in the US is $600,000.

The 2007 US average income in 2007$ is $50,823 or so... and the conversion from 2007 US$ to 1977 US$ is about 2010$3.42=1977$1...

So that 2007$50,823. , given the conversion back to 1977$ would be 1977$14,614, or KCr14.6 per annum. With Soc 6 average, and KCr1.2 per month for that average, and 12 months per year, KCr14.4 per annum, that checks. It probably includes 0.4 kids and 0.5 spouses, and a car, plus 0.3 dogs and 0.25 cats... so per person should be about 1/1.7 and ignore 1 pet...


The 1977 US GDP was roughly $8,979 per capita ($8,146 & $9,546 are other measures of per person income), but note that the GDP per capita includes children.

Remember, the CT rates are per person (as are the MGT ones)... and not per household. That extra 200 you find is probably the half-cost child for replacement purposes, so we probably can multiply the GDP for comparison purposes by 1.5 for "imported worker only" populations.

So the Cr1500 is a modern cost converted into Cr... I remember pointing out to Gareth when asked that the Cr1 was the 1977 US$1, and doing the conversion math to 2006 US$... it looks like he used that rather than looking up 1977 costs of living.

Which, by the way, have gone way up in the US. One of the problems with adjusting the 2007 or later US$ to the 1977 is that the measures of inflation ignore (usually) changes in housing costs, energy costs, and food costs.

To give an example: in 1979, a 2 Bedroom in Mountain View neighborhood of Anchorage was roughly $350 per month (I know someone who lived in the complex I'm thinking of), and I've read ads in the neighborhood for 1977 at $200 per month. In 1990, when I moved in, it was $550 per month. In 2009, I looked at the EXACT same unit, and it was $925 per month, +$25 per pet. In 2011, that same unit was up to $975, plus $25 per pet. And living there definitely puts your apparent soc at under 6... neighborhood's considered by many to be a slum, and in the 70's, was an ethnic ghetto (Alaska Natives, mostly). It's still pretty much a ghetto, but it's now mostly Thai, Laos† and Hmong‡, with a minority of whites and natives combined.

——————————​

Notes:
† The people I've met from Laos emphatically reject the label "Laotian" and use the term "Laos" as both the noun for the country and the noun for persons from that country. And it is a homophone of louse. I don't think they really grasp that last as being a problem - if they did, they'd probably switch to "Laotians"
‡ aka Montagnards, the mountain peoples of Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam. The Vietnamese Hmong (and the Laos Hmong) were called Montagnards by the French in Indochina, and by many US personell during the 'Nam war.

Refs:
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/economics-business/variable-638.html
http://economics.about.com/library/weekly/aa043004a.htm
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1977.html
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/2007.html
http://www.forbes.com/2007/10/10/pets-colorado-economics-biz-cx_tvr_1010pets.html

 

[McPerth]

All Ri worlds are also Ag.

Unless pop 8 or water 0-3 or 9+ (at least in MT, RM page 50)

 

[aramis]

Unless pop 8 or water 0-3 or 9+ (at least in MT, RM page 50)

Yep, MGT checks on that. Oversight mine. So it's possible for a TL5 Rich world to not be Ag... and thus starve.


Now, looking at it the other direction... local navy is Cr500*range(0.5 to 1.5) per capita per annum for a range of Cr250 to Cr750, in local Cr.

If we assume the striker cite of 3% GDP and 60% naval out of that 3%... Military budget is (500/.6)=Cr833
Per capita GDP is then 833/0.03=Cr27777.

Multiply by 0.85 for Gov 4 peacetime to represent the US... you get 23611.

Which, BTW, is a "close enough" match to the 1981 US average income of 1981$21050... they estimated, and were off.


Oh, and given the KCr27.8 number and 13 months, and average soc 7, you get Cr305 per Month per point of Soc... making MT's Cr250 per soc per month somewhat generous.

It's pretty clear how DGP got the MT numbers from this. Income was pretty flat through about 1986's $22,400 per year. Divide that by 12 and 7 and you get 266 per soc per month... So both figures checked there... the TCS and US 1985-1986 numbers are close enough to $250 per person if one ignores that the average income was representing only 50% of the people working, but supporting the other 50%...

——————————​

Refs:
Striker Bk2, p. 38
CT Adv 5 TCS, p. 31
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1981.html
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1986.html