No Population, No Tech Code?

[Garnfellow]

So I was comparing the UWPs from Mongoose's Spinward Marches book with CT sources, and in general the basic codes line up. There are a handful of systems that get minor tweaks, but one consistent change is to change systems with a population code of 0 to have a TL of 0. This makes good sense to me -- if you don't have anyone, can you really have a tech level?

For the curious, here are the UWPs that changed because of this tweak:

Bronze: E201000-9 > E201000-0
Djinni: E459000-9 > E459000-0
Iron: E529000-9> E529000-0
Judice: E9B2000-8 > E9B2000-0
Mithril: E568000-7 > E568000-0
Steel: E655000-7 > E655000-0
Tavonni: E567000-7 > E567000-0

 

[Peter Schutze]

heresy !

That implies going from a totally random system to something based in part on logic

 

[Madarin Dude]

Bronze Iron, Mithril, and Steel are are worlds that are reserved for further exploration and exploitation by the sword worlds. So often they have a temporary contingent on them. so they would have some sort of tech level to them. The others I don't know.

 

[Sturn]

Bronze Iron, Mithril, and Steel are are worlds that are reserved for further exploration and exploitation by the sword worlds. So often they have a temporary contingent on them. so they would have some sort of tech level to them. The others I don't know.

I wouldn't think that a temporary contingent of troops would give the entire world a tech level, which for most is ability to produce technology at that level.

More importantly,if a temporary contingent of troops does not give a Pop code for the world, then how could you justify that the same temporary troops do give a TL code for the world?

 

[rancke]

More importantly,if a temporary contingent of troops does not give a Pop code for the world, then how could you justify that the same temporary troops do give a TL code for the world?

And why would an outpost, temporary or not, set up by a society of a TL between 9 and 12 (depending on which Sword World set up the the outpost; the Confederation itself would presumably equip its minions to TL 12) have a TL of 7?


Hans

 

[Garnfellow]

Here are the other tweaks, for the curious.

Raydrad: E99467A-6 > E99367A-6 [changed hydro code]
Rushu: E765664-4 > E766674-4 [Changed hydro code and government]
Caloran: C796746-5 > D796746-5 [downgraded starport]
Pavanne: C210000-0 > E210000-0 [downgraded starport]
Zircon: C792668-8 > C791668-9 [reduced hydro, increased TL]
Victoria: X697770-4 > X697772-2 [reduced tech level, increased law level]

None of these really look like typos, though I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind the changes to the hydrographics.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

one consistent change is to change systems with a population code of 0 to have a TL of 0. This makes good sense to me -- if you don't have anyone, can you really have a tech level?

Pop 0 means 0-9 people. A completely deserted world will also have a pop multiplier of 0 and a Barren trade code.

 

[Easterner9504]

Victoria

Odd Victoria TL dropped. That is one of the few worlds covered in exhausting detail, they have flying machines after all!

 

[Garnfellow]

Pop 0 means 0-9 people. A completely deserted world will also have a pop multiplier of 0 and a Barren trade code.

The Mongoose UWPs do not include population multipliers, but all of the worlds with the TL dropped to 0 do have the Trade Code Ba.

I'm still analyzing the Mongoose trade codes vs. CT, but there are quite a few changes there. It looks like Mongoose is using a slightly different trade code schema than CT did, so I'm trying to suss out things that might look like a change but really aren't, as well as things that look the same but might be slightly different.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

[expletive deleted]

 

[samuelvss]

And why would an outpost, temporary or not, set up by a society of a TL between 9 and 12 (depending on which Sword World set up the the outpost; the Confederation itself would presumably equip its minions to TL 12) have a TL of 7?

Tech Level indicates the ability to produce, or at least maintain in some meaningful fashion. The higher the TL, the more industrial infrastructure needed to produce and maintain; a SWAG is on the average, one order of magnitude more individual parts and processes per TL. (Think TL 4 tank to TL 7 tank; TL 4 truck to TL 7 truck). If one were to preposition industrial infrastructure on a world for future occupation, one would need to decide how much infrastructure was "enough," in a cost-benefit equation. When you get the population there, they can produce more with what is there. I am not saying that is the only or best rationale, but it is one.

 

[rancke]

Tech Level indicates the ability to produce, or at least maintain in some meaningful fashion. The higher the TL, the more industrial infrastructure needed to produce and maintain; a SWAG is on the average, one order of magnitude more individual parts and processes per TL. (Think TL 4 tank to TL 7 tank; TL 4 truck to TL 7 truck). If one were to preposition industrial infrastructure on a world for future occupation, one would need to decide how much infrastructure was "enough," in a cost-benefit equation. When you get the population there, they can produce more with what is there. I am not saying that is the only or best rationale, but it is one.

The problem is that the definition implies that every single population 0 world with a TL is full of prepositioned industrial infrastructure, which is patently ridiculous. It also implies that every single world with a population lower than that which will sustain its TL is equally full of empty factories, waiting for another couple of thousands or millions or billions of immigrants to arrive and start running them. It also means that the people on any outpost world is equipped to a much higher standard that its tech level indicates, which is certainly possible, but makes TL a singlularly useless index for roleplaying purposes.

"Sure, we can build you a submersible, repair your diving suit, and sell you a pair of air tanks -- in a couple of decades when our population reaches the requisite number. Meanwhile, we do have the manufacturing capability to make you a diving bell right now."​

Traveller has indeed, in various places, defined TL as an indication of the general quality and capability of local industry (Which means that most outposts should have a TL of 0, since they don't have any local industry at all; this does not appear to be the case, however). But it also assumes that level of local industry is the same as the level of local ability to repair and maintain, as well as the "general types or categories of goods in general use on the world" [Book 3, p. 10].

The big problem is that those are three different standards, and those standards are not necessarily the same for any given world. The definition is sufficiently muddled that I will submit that the most useful interpretation is that it indicates the level of technology in general use by the general population on the world (Though NOT necessarily the level in general use by the social elite). Which would mean that outposts ought to have the same TL as its parent society, unless there's a sensible reason (ususally economic in nature) why not.


Hans

 

[samuelvss]

The problem is that the definition implies that every single population 0 world with a TL is full of prepositioned industrial infrastructure, which is patently ridiculous.

It's not a definition. I was only talking about the Sword Worlds' outposts on reservations, and addressing a demographic and economic justification of why they would have a lower TL than their parent societies. I think I said something like, "one justification, but not the only one."

I was not establishing a meaning for lower TL's for outposts in general. As written, the Referee is admonished to provide explanation. What is yours?

 

[rancke]

It's not a definition. I was only talking about the Sword Worlds' outposts on reservations, and addressing a demographic and economic justification of why they would have a lower TL than their parent societies. I think I said something like, "one justification, but not the only one."

We have a canonical description of Mithril, and your explanation doesn't fit that description.

I was not establishing a meaning for lower TL's for outposts in general. As written, the Referee is admonished to provide explanation. What is yours?

For outposts with populations between one and nine with a TL lower than the parent society? I don't have one.


Hans

 

[Sturn]

Pop 0 means 0-9 people. A completely deserted world will also have a pop multiplier of 0 and a Barren trade code.

All depending on which version of Traveller you are speaking of. Original CT? "0 = No Inhabitants"(Book 3, page 11). Multipliers came later. It appears that Mongoose Traveller is using the basic CT as a basis as its charts has "0 = None".

Mongoose and CT both have Pop 2 as 100's of inhabitants. If Pop 1 is 10's of inhabitants, how can you have a world of say 8 inhabitants? I don't care myself, I would still call such a world barren except for the 8 people living in the crashed Fat Trader. Mongoose must have noticed this since their Pop 1 isn't just 10's of inhabitants, but goes all of the way down to 1. This makes it simpler, no need of a Barren code to know the world has no inhabitants, 0 = 0 inhabitants, which kinda makes sense. No need to roll a multiplier either unless you really need to know.

 

[Gruffty]

Pop 0 means 0-9 people.

Unfortunately not so in MGT. In MGT rules Pop 0 = zero inhabitants, a la CT 1st edition. It was MT that defined Pop 0 as 0 to 9 inhabitants; CT LBBs 3 and 6 simply say Pop 0 = No inhabitants (literally - that is what is written in those books - the words "No inhabitants", which I have always taken to mean zero inhabitants. However, as usual, YMMV).

A completely deserted world will also have a pop multiplier of 0 and a Barren trade code.

MGT hasn't got that far yet (although it has changed the position of the Al code to closer to the UWP, which I actually don't agree with).

 

[rancke]

Unfortunately not so in MGT. In MGT rules Pop 0 = zero inhabitants, a la CT. It was MT that defined Pop 0 as 0 to 9 inhabitants; CT LBBs 3 and 6 simply say Pop 0 = No inhabitants (literally - that is what is written in those books - the words "No inhabitants", which I have always taken to mean zero inhabitants. However, as usual, YMMV).

I never noticed that. However, that makes the CT habit of assigning randoms TL to worlds with a population code of 0 even sillier. At least with some people on the world, you could say it referred to their equipment; with no population at all, the only technology on the world could be the automated starport beacon, which would have a minimum TL of 7 or thereabouts on its own. And if those beacons are placed by the Scouts (as seems a reasonable assumption), their TL would likely be something in the 9-12 range.


Hans

 

[Gruffty]

MGT explicitly states that Pop 0 = no one there; no inhabitants; nobody there but those chickens. At the risk of getting my arse kicked by a Mod for posting it, here is part of the MGT Population table:

Digit Population Range Description
0     None       0
1     Few        1+    A tiny farmstead or a single family
2     Hundreds   100+  A village

So for, MGT, we can see that Pop 0 = no inhabitants (which, oddly enough, is the same wording used in CT LBBs 3 and 6........). The side effect of this is that MGT Population codes are slightly on the skew numbers-wise when compared to other editions.

 

[Gruffty]

It was MT that defined Pop 0 as 0 to 9 inhabitants

...and here I have to correct myself, as it was actually DGP's Classic Traveller book Grand Survey that introduced that description.

 

[far-trader]

...and here I have to correct myself, as it was actually DGP's Classic Traveller book Grand Survey that introduced that description.

...almost

Actually I think you'll find it's right there in CT LBB3 (2nd ed at least, don't have 1st ed to check) page 7:

"The digit indicating population is an exponent of 10. This may be viewed as the number of zeros following a one. Thus, a population digit of 6 indicates a population of approximately 1,000,000."

...and a population of 0 would indicate a population of approximately 1. The implication clearly being 1-9 people.

Also note, MGP Traveller itself has the exact same text for population:

"The Population digit can be viewed as the number of zeroes following a one, so a population of 6 indicates a population in the millions (1,000,000)."

...and so a population of 0 would indicate a population in the ones (1).

But then it goes on to say in the chart right below, that Pop 0 is None. So they aren't even internally consistent on the same page.
So, imo, Mongoose got it wrong. Period. Unless they purposfully meant to deviate from CT. Or meant to harken back to 1st ed with all it's little faults (and some gems). In which case they should have changed the text explanation.​