• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

My Ship is my Castle

EDIT: Sorry, I overlooked the percentage point. Consider all figure below reduced by a factor 100.

So out of the population of one billion, that would be one million potential shipowners.


Hans

Nope. I said "could afford". NOT, potential owners. Just like IRL there are other factors. FAR <1% of those who can afford a ship, purchase one, or want one.


So, time to revise your #'s, again...
 
Nope. I said "could afford". NOT, potential owners. Just like IRL there are other factors. FAR <1% of those who can afford a ship, purchase one, or want one.

That's what the 'potential' addresses.

If owning a ship automatically gives you a significant place in interstellar society (i.e. if being an Imperial baron is a big deal in the OP's TU), a lot of people who can afford it will want one just for that reason. Which would tend to render being an Imperial baron much less significant than the OP seems to suggest. In other words, a built-in self-contradiction in the notion.


Hans
 
Back in the day - the days of true feudal society, if you had a few men following you, a castle and a scrap of land to put it on, well, that made you a nob. Couldn't nobody say different. That's the origin of the whole feudal idea. In those days, no-one had a patent of nobility, they had a castle and a passel of men with swords.


That "explanation" betrays a breathtaking ignorance of history in general and feudalism in specific. It also explains why you think your "Barony Equals Ship Ownership" idea works.

This is the IMTU forum but even IMTU ideas must be internally logical.
 
Not when it comes to who will be purchasing something. MANY businesses have failed because a marketing exec thought that way...

But it does apply if talking about who will be purchasing starships if the incentive to do so is there. Which I was, as indicated by the paragraph I added in my most recent post to elucidate my point.


Hans
 
Using the analogy of a ship being a castle, what are the bakeries, butcher shops, blacksmiths, taverns and Inns? Perhaps the smaller tramp freighters and there is some qualifier for larger ship, more armed and armored, that is the castle?
If you own a Jump-capable starship, you can be a Baron.
What do you mean by own?

Many ships may be owned by a corporation or other commercial, government, religious or organizational entity (whichever fit in YTU).

Some people perceive that the "purchaser" doesn't really own it, the mortgage holder does. Perhaps one needs to own the ship free and clear?


A planet-bound Baron with a palace, a legion of servants and half a continent to lord it over might seem more impressive - until you remember that owning a Starship means the whole Galaxy is yours to exploit.
No reason at all that the "planet-bound" Baron can't own a fleet of ships, is there?
 
A planet-bound Baron with a palace, a legion of servants and half a continent to lord it over might seem more impressive - until you remember that owning a Starship means the whole Galaxy is yours to exploit.

I believe that I spotted where the OP made an incorrect leap.

Let's go back to the Tudor era. There was a "whole New World to exploit". Many merchants owned ships. So, why didn't these guys get Patents of Nobility given to them by Eliz I (for instance) in such a situation?

Well, 2 MAJOR reasons. 1) If you went off to "exploit" those unclaimed riches, another gov (Spain perhaps?) would come and take it as you were not under the protection of another powerful Kingdom.

2) If you "struck it rich" and didn't have a Royal charter, Elizabeth would just send a warship to take it from the subject who didn't get her Royal Highness' permission in the 1st place.

So, the Free Trader owner is much more beholden to the Royal Gov than the other way 'round.
 
...Besides, a starship owner already owns a W M D that is far harder to defend against than any bunch of 50 kg missiles - his starship and its KE. :p

Kind of an expensive way to get even, sending your "barony" crashing down from orbit.

Actually you are thinking too noble like ;)

If the ship has a cargo bay, just grab some large rocks and drop them from space.

Dave Chase

It's a wee bit more complicated than that. No way to be accurate about it, dropped as free-fall ordnance the things could land anywhere in a continent-sized area, and unless the target planet's very densely populated, the odds of doing any damage would be very low. If you dropped them from LEO, they'd hit terminal velocity, no? That'd seriously limit the impact damage. And if you ramp up velocity, rocks below a certain size burn up.

That "explanation" betrays a breathtaking ignorance of history in general and feudalism in specific. It also explains why you think your "Barony Equals Ship Ownership" idea works.

This is the IMTU forum but even IMTU ideas must be internally logical.

There is only limited application of Terran history to the dealings of a high-tech star-spanning empire. Given the cost of ships, I could see an expanding empire encouraging trade by offering titles to ship owners, assuming the ship owner had full title to his ship - I wouldn't hand a title to anyone who managed to score a bank loan. That would mean titles would only go to those who were either pretty wealthy to begin with or who had a long history of successful trade. I'd have gone with knighthood, though.

I believe that I spotted where the OP made an incorrect leap.

Let's go back to the Tudor era. There was a "whole New World to exploit". Many merchants owned ships. So, why didn't these guys get Patents of Nobility given to them by Eliz I (for instance) in such a situation?

Well, 2 MAJOR reasons. 1) If you went off to "exploit" those unclaimed riches, another gov (Spain perhaps?) would come and take it as you were not under the protection of another powerful Kingdom.

2) If you "struck it rich" and didn't have a Royal charter, Elizabeth would just send a warship to take it from the subject who didn't get her Royal Highness' permission in the 1st place.

So, the Free Trader owner is much more beholden to the Royal Gov than the other way 'round.

I think it depends on what you mean by "strike it rich".

I don't actually know of any instances where a private party had his riches claimed by some other kingdom other than through privateering and raids and such. As far as I know, you didn't need royal permission to go hunting for riches in the New World. You just needed a lot of money, which usually translated to having rich backers since if you were rich in the first place you could hire some up-n-coming entrepreneur to do it for you while you stayed home.

Nor do I know of any instance where Elizabeth sent in a warship to take over some "strike it rich" find of a subject. What you COULDN'T do was claim territory for yourself and set up your own little kingdom ('cause THAT they would take from you). If you were smart, you'd get royal sanction beforehand, so if you found territory worth controlling, you'd have the backing of someone with an army and navy to ensure you and your backers got to keep your claim. Most people in that era, their next step after striking it rich was to find some way to parley that into a title, 'cause nobles had more rights and power than commoners, even rich commoners.

On the other hand, if you went trying to "exploit" in some territory that a power had already claimed, you were fair game - although Frances Drake earned a knighthood for himself that way, raiding the Spanish treasure fleet.
 
DaveChase said:
Actually you are thinking too noble like

If the ship has a cargo bay, just grab some large rocks and drop them from space.

Dave Chase


It's a wee bit more complicated than that. No way to be accurate about it, dropped as free-fall ordnance the things could land anywhere in a continent-sized area, and unless the target planet's very densely populated, the odds of doing any damage would be very low. If you dropped them from LEO, they'd hit terminal velocity, no? That'd seriously limit the impact damage. And if you ramp up velocity, rocks below a certain size burn up.

...

LOL

No, you see if they hit a location of note, you claim that was the intended target. If they hit some place else, you just them that is a sample of what could happen if you target one other important places.

;)

Dave Chase
 
I don't actually know of any instances where a private party had his riches claimed by some other kingdom other than through privateering and raids and such.

That's because private individuals didn't, back then, go without a Royal charter. For the reasons I already listed...
 
That's because private individuals didn't, back then, go without a Royal charter. For the reasons I already listed...

If you can cite any sources that indicate they did it for the reasons you listed, I'll be glad to yield the point.
 
:rofl:
Is that your way of saying that you have no ability or no desire to back up what you say?
:rofl:

No, it's my way of saying that I don't supplement someones basic EDU for free because they refuse to learn.

I charge $150/hr to retread someone's H.S. level courses they slept through...
 
No, it's my way of saying that I don't supplement someones basic EDU for free because they refuse to learn.

I charge $150/hr to retread someone's H.S. level courses they slept through...
So even on a community board where people supposedly share an interest, you lack the generosity to help those of us so less fortunate than yourself and instead feel the need to lord over the inferior minions?

It saddens me sire that my feeble mind can not comprehend and I bow to your superior wisdom.
 
Don't feed the trolls...

as for royal charters, they were generally the only proof that the crews weren't pirates. It equates favorably to modern automotive registration certs... without the charter, people could act as tho your ship were stolen goods. Not that they always did so.
 
Just about all of the early European exploration and trading voyages when out under either a Royal Charter, or under the auspices of a company with a Royal Charter. About the only group that landed in what is now the US without a Royal Charter were the Pilgrims in Plymouth, as they were supposed to land within the boundaries of the area covered by the Chartered Virginia Company. Exactly what Drake's orders from Elizabeth for his round the world voyage accompanied by raiding the Spanish Pacific possessions are still unknown, but he did leave a plaque taking possession of the lands around Monterey Bay in California for the English Crown, indicating some sort of official sanction.

The French Huguenots did attempt a settlement in Florida near what is now St; Augustine, without a Royal Sanction, and the Spanish came along and pretty much massacred the lot.

Generally, the policy for overseas settlement or commercial activity was to first set up a company under Royal Charter with exclusive rights to trading or settling in an area, before leaving home. See the English Muscovy Company, East India Company, and Virginia Company, also the Portuguese and Dutch East India companies, along with the Spanish initial invasions.
 
Generally, the policy for overseas settlement or commercial activity was to first set up a company under Royal Charter with exclusive rights to trading or settling in an area, before leaving home. See the English Muscovy Company, East India Company, and Virginia Company, also the Portuguese and Dutch East India companies, along with the Spanish initial invasions.

So even back then, the Megacorps ruled!
 
So even back then, the Megacorps ruled!

Moreso even than now - merchants were allowed to be armed, and an unlicensed ship (one without the charter) of one's own flag could be treated as a pirate... worse, if a corporate factor finds them in port doing business, the captain could face criminal charges, possibly even loss of the ship.

The charter companies were, for most intents, treated as arms of the government. And in the colonies they set up, they WERE the government.
 
Back
Top