T5 - Exploration bases?

[dalthor]

Okay, looking at the data definitions on Travellermap, specifically the T5 base codes.

Imps have Scout Bases and Waystations. Is an Exploration base the non-Imp equivalent? Is there a description or definition of an Exploration Base available?

I checked the wiki, and didn't find anything. Actually, the base code page on the Wiki might be in need of an update, as I look closer. (I'm willing, but not necessarily qualified, and I appreciate all info the wiki has!)

[[ BTW, Imps is a slang term IMTU, typically used by non-Imperials -- and some Imperials, for that matter. It is considered rude in Imperial company, but what the heck. It is a shorter form of "Impish Grynn." To those in the know, IMTU a Grynn is a carnivore that will devour anything it can chew - and many things it can't. Someday I'll submit the write-up to the board]]

 

[inexorabletash]

Okay, looking at the data definitions on Travellermap, specifically the T5 base codes.

Imps have Scout Bases and Waystations. Is an Exploration base the non-Imp equivalent? Is there a description or definition of an Exploration Base available?

Hrm, yeah, that's an interesting one. It's not actually in the T5 book. That base code appeared in a T5SS data drop from Don & Marc, circa May 17th, 2014. It existed in "legacy" data data, was absent from the earlier TSS data drops (in favor of just non-Imperial Scout), then reappeared. I don't know what the distinction is myself. T5 data has a distinct code for Imperial Naval vs. other Naval, but not for other cases. It's possible it's intended for the non-Imperial equivalent of Scouts, but since the code doesn't actually appear in any of the T5SS data it's hard to say.

 

[dalthor]

Any update on this? Still haven't found anything else related to an exploration base.

 

[Patron Zero]

Myself I would interpret an exploration base as to being mobile, hence an orbital or 'deep-space' facility rather than anything ground-side, asteroids perhaps being the exception.

Uncertain how this might apply in a T5 setting but in my Classic Traveller based games-campaigns, I've made use of modified and renovated 1000Ton X-Boat Tenders as 'modules' to construct said way-stations, relay points and exploration bases.

Generally three (3) separate hulls once 'docked' together by means of deployable structural frames and extendable boarding connectors, provide a compact but workable facility that's easily relocated when tasks-duties so call for such.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Gallery/index.php?n=1738

 

[inexorabletash]

They now show up in Beyond/Vanguard Reaches, two sectors that have recently come up for review by the T5SS and have draft data.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

They now show up in Beyond/Vanguard Reaches, two sectors that have recently come up for review by the T5SS and have draft data.

I have been finding code "V's" explorer base in Crucis Margin sector, which I am updating using the last T5SS review.

[http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Chu-jung_(world) ]

I found this listing:

| V [[Exploration Base]]. Any
| * This world has a an exploration base, which bear similarity to an [[Imperial]] [[Scout Base]], capable of handling explorer personnel and exploratory [[starship]]s.

Hope that helps, comrade.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[DonM]

Every time I look at CoTI, I find a discussion I missed.

Here's the current base codes the T5SS uses...

Code	Owner		Description	Starport
C	Vargr		Corsair 	base	
D	Any		Depot		A
E	Hiver		Embassy		A
K	Any		Naval base	A/B/C/D
M	Any		Military base	
N	Imperial	Naval base	A/B
R	Aslan		Clan base	A/B/C/D
S	Imperial	Scout base	A/B/C/D
T	Aslan		Tlaukhu base	A/B/C/D
V	Any		Exploration base	A/B/C/D
W	Any		Way station	A/B

Note that effectively N=K, S=V.

There was some discussion of keeping the Zhodani naval bases as Z, but in every case so far, all Zhodani client state worlds with naval bases are Zhodani naval bases, so we've kept that.

Not all CsIm worlds with naval bases are Imperial naval bases, so N has stayed.

 

[robject]

Difficult. So do we need a code for "Foreign Naval Base"?

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Difficult. So do we need a code for "Foreign Naval Base"?

"K" equals foreign (non-Imperial) navy base as far as I understand.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[robject]

"K" equals foreign (non-Imperial) navy base as far as I understand.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

Ah. It seems to me to represent "A Naval Base, ownership indeterminate, but not Imperial".

Put another way, supposing the Descarothe Hegemony puts a naval base on a world in the League of Suns. There's no way to note that that naval base isn't owned by LS: both pocket empires would use 'K' for their naval bases.

Now if "K" meant "native naval base" and something else ("L"??) meant "foreign naval base" then I'd be happy. The League of Suns would have a bunch of "K" naval bases, and one "L" or foreign naval base -- e.g. owned by some other empire outside of LS.



Of course I'd just prefer that 'N' meant "MY NAVAL BASE", and 'K' meant "SOMEONE ELSE'S NAVAL BASE IS ON MY SOVEREIGN TURF".


My rationale is tied to proto-Traveller: N and S were intended to be general, not Imperial-specific. Let's untangle them.


So to sum up my quixotic jaunt, these are where I differ:

Code    Owner   Description             Starport
K       Any     Client Naval base       A/B/C/D  ("Client" = foreign)
N       Any     Naval base              A/B
S       Any     Scout/Exploration base  A/B/C/D
(V - dropped.  No need for this.)

 

[rancke]

Of course I'd just prefer that 'N' meant "MY NAVAL BASE", and 'K' meant "SOMEONE ELSE'S NAVAL BASE IS ON MY SOVEREIGN TURF".

If '<no code>' meant 'naval facilities big enough to service the part of my own fleet that needs it', you wouldn't need 'N' for 'own naval base' and could use it for something else. It seems to me that naval facilities commensurate with the local navy really ought to go without saying.

(Also, there are canonical worlds without base codes where it would be exceedingly strange if they didn't have abundant naval facilities. If you eliminate the possibility that they do have such facilites, just without having a code to show it (because it goes without saying), you create some unnecessary problems.)


Hans

 

[aramis]

Of course I'd just prefer that 'N' meant "MY NAVAL BASE", and 'K' meant "SOMEONE ELSE'S NAVAL BASE IS ON MY SOVEREIGN TURF".


My rationale is tied to proto-Traveller: N and S were intended to be general, not Imperial-specific. Let's untangle them.


So to sum up my quixotic jaunt, these are where I differ:

Code    Owner   Description             Starport
K       Any     Client Naval base       A/B/C/D  ("Client" = foreign)
N       Any     Naval base              A/B
S       Any     Scout/Exploration base  A/B/C/D
(V - dropped.  No need for this.)

Agree, whole heartedly.

 

[DonM]

N and S will NOT become generic. Sorry, but they are fixed as Imperial only. That was decided long ago by Marc.

 

[DonM]

I should point out that T5SS goes to great lengths to straighten out a bunch of confusing base and allegiance codes. The orders I received were to simplify, not make more complex. Same logic for Aslan/Hiver government codes.

If you have an example of a complication in a sector already under T5SS, I'm prepared to review it, but Far Frontiers isn't one of them (it's in preparation, along with Theta Borealis).

I was prepared for K'kree data, but I have yet to actually find any published data for a K'kree system other than Kirur. Unless someone has a semi-canon or wild source I'm not aware of...

 

[robject]

N and S will NOT become generic. Sorry, but they are fixed as Imperial only. That was decided long ago by Marc.

And I can live with that.

In that case, I would like there to be a code that says "World Alpha in Pocket Empire A has a Naval Base from Pocket Empire B".

 

[DonM]

I was going over the old base codes...

inexorabletash put together this scary spreadsheet...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kUmFhyXE1W10fu9iXbxdoVg3mahEWLyiH1WfcveRsJw/edit#gid=1

Anyway, after you've been frightened by that, we could easily use J or L, but the issue really is a mechanism for identifying what polity owns it, without handing out base codes like previous, in which case two-character base codes will be upon us.

Then you could have N and S be generic, with Ni and Si being Imperial, Nz and Sz for Zhodani, etc...

Now, IF Far Frontiers does in fact have the example I think it might (a Zho client state multi-world polity with both Zho and non-Zho naval bases), we'll probably see the revival of the Z code for Zhodani Naval bases.

I'm really trying to avoid two-character base codes.

 

[aramis]

I was going over the old base codes...

inexorabletash put together this scary spreadsheet...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kUmFhyXE1W10fu9iXbxdoVg3mahEWLyiH1WfcveRsJw/edit#gid=1

Anyway, after you've been frightened by that, we could easily use J or L, but the issue really is a mechanism for identifying what polity owns it, without handing out base codes like previous, in which case two-character base codes will be upon us.

Then you could have N and S be generic, with Ni and Si being Imperial, Nz and Sz for Zhodani, etc...

Now, IF Far Frontiers does in fact have the example I think it might (a Zho client state multi-world polity with both Zho and non-Zho naval bases), we'll probably see the revival of the Z code for Zhodani Naval bases.

I'm really trying to avoid two-character base codes.

Let's see...
We NEED codes for:

• Naval (local)
• Scout (local)
• Military (local)
• Research
• Way Station
• Depot

It would be awful useful to have

• Naval (patron's)
• Military (Patron's)
• Scout (Patron's)

As all of these are canonically present in the marches in the classic era.
Mongoose adds Pirate bases.

Generic is FAR better than setting specific, especially since so many do not use the core settings of M0, M1000, M1100, M1116 (rebellion), M1200 (New Era), nor M1248.