Misjumps

[HG_B]

Let me clue you in, then: It was a suggestion of a simpler way to improve economics (at least for higher jumps) than to change a basic feature of all Traveller versions[*].

PP fuel isn't sufficiently large enough % of total tonnage to ameliorate the problem from an econ standpoint.

 

[rancke]

PP fuel isn't sufficiently large enough % of total tonnage to ameliorate the problem from an econ standpoint.

Oh, you mean to make the operating expenses of a jump-6 ship conform to the prices MGT:Core Rulebook qoutes for jump-6 service?

Dropping power plant fuel will help quite a lot, actually, but you're right, it's not enough. But why set about solving the problem in such a roundabout way? Why not just figure out the true costs of operating a jump-6 ship and change the prices of jump-6 services to match?

I'd quote you the figures I once worked out using a number of QSDS 1.5 designs[*], but it's almost certain that they won't match ships designed by the MGT system.

[*] IMO the system that comes closest to "reality[**]", even if it has some problems of its own.

[**] I.e. a 'consensus' or 'average' (I can't quite think of the right word) of all the various systems that have been published to date (Not counting Book 2, T20, and MGT -- OK, the system that came closest back when I did the calculations ).​

Hans

 

[HG_B]

Oh, you mean to make the operating expenses of a jump-6 ship conform to the prices MGT:Core Rulebook qoutes for jump-6 service?

Yep. Although add for J2-J6. MGT comes the closest of any major edition to date for anything above J1. The rest ignored totally.

p.s. Earlier in this thread Aramis linked to his cost figure out for J2 and above...

 

[rancke]

Yep. Although add for J2-J6. MGT comes the closest of any major edition to date for anything above J1. The rest ignored totally.

Except for GT:Far Trader. But why go to the trouble of fiddling with fuel consumptions instead of simply adjusting the prices to match the actual expenses?


Hans

 

[HG_B]

Except for GT:Far Trader. But why go to the trouble of fiddling with fuel consumptions instead of simply adjusting the prices to match the actual expenses?


Hans

Right, GURPS only, not anything put out by the main company.

As to your other Q. Just study the linked analysis and the answer becomes self evident.

 

[aramis]

Except for GT:Far Trader. But why go to the trouble of fiddling with fuel consumptions instead of simply adjusting the prices to match the actual expenses?


Hans

which is the approach I took.

Getting the prices to match the book will require reducing fuel, LS, maintenance, and ship price.

Say, Hans, what are the prices in GT?

 

[rancke]

Say, Hans, what are the prices in GT?

Sadly, while SJG had the right idea, the execution was muffed. To begin with, the core rules just duplicated previously published material, which essentially meant CT prices.

Then FT changed the definition of High and Middle passage, with High Passage roughly (but not exactly) equivalent to CT middle passage and Middle passage employing double occupancy. And to put the cherry on top, GT allowed eight low berths per dT instead of two. (None of which I approve of, for the record).

Anyway, here are the per parsec costs from FT:

Passage                     Average Price/Parsec/Passenger

                           Free Trader     Liner       Express (J4)
High                        Cr3,500      Cr4,000      Cr6,500
Middle                      Cr1,750      Cr2,000      Cr5,500
Low                         Cr175         Cr200        Cr550

I do approve of allowing double occupancy for passengers, but I would have introduced it as an option (called, perhaps, Economy Passage) for which the various Imperial organizations did not issue travel vouchers and kept High Passage as a 'priority passage' and Middle Passage as basic single occupancy passage.


Hans