Think of it as a paper and pencil version of Sid Meier's Civilization.
ROBJECT - I'd be interested in seeing your javacript.
All,
This thread prompted me to buy and read Pocket Empires. It is an interesting read and, as a stand alone game, would probably make a good Pbem or PbP game. I would like to give it a shot as a player or referee. If interest exists, I would be willing to referee a stand-alone, online PE game.
As far as its' relation to Traveller, I agree with previous posters about how to best integrate it into a Traveller campaign.
I do have some issues with some of the rules, though:
1) Major issue. Infrstructure cost is tied to world size, not population. It seems to me that improving the transportation, IT, energy, etc network of a billion person would be significantly more expensive than the same task on a tiny mining outpost of a few thousand souls, regardless of world size. Therefore, I propose the following fix: Infrastructure upgrade = (pop + A) * (I + 1) * 0.2RU
2) Major issue. There is no maximum population delineated. I think a world of a given size will eventually reach a maximum supportable population. I propose the maximum = 1 + ((size – 5) * 0.2)) * TL)/10 expressed in billions
3) Major issue. Military maintenance costs in direct proportion to the abstract values given in PE factors. I accept that a given quantity of lower tech forces can be of equal combat value as a smaller quantity of higher tech forces, but will maintaining the larger, technologically inferior, force cost the same? I think not. I propose military maintenance = (size * purchase price)/10
4) Trivial issue. A participatory democracy has one of the higher tax rates in the game. This is a bit of a head scratcher. I propose changing govt 2 tax rate to 0.20.
5) Minor issue. Government efficiency rates are a bit odd. For example, a non-charismatic dictatorship is more efficient than a charismatic dictatorship, as if being disliked made one more effective. Also, religious theocracy is one of the more efficient governments. Fix is to reverse govt A and B values, make govt D = 1.30 or 1.35.
6) Trivial issue. I would tweak the atmospheric cost of improvements. Should imrpoving in a vacuum atmosphere be harder than in a trace atmosphere? Should improvements in a corrosive atmosphere be the same cost as in an insidious atmosphere? I think not. Fix is atmo 0 = +6, atmo C = +10
7) Major issue. Population growth is not adjusted for habitability. Colonists will procreate at the same rate on an ice-cold, weaterless, airless, tunnel-warren colony as they will on a garden world. Fix is to divide growth by 10 for any colony outside the habitable zone or by two for any colony within the habitable zone that doesn't have a breathable atmosphere or hydrographics 2-9.
Please bear in mind these are just my impressions from a read-through of the rules and have no basis in playtesting or experience.
OIT
I might be interested, depends on my time availability.
Inf is based on planet size because it is assumed that the whole planet will be upgraded and this will cost pretty much the same no matter how many people do the work.
However, I agree that it is an unreasonable assumption for a small settlement based around a single drilling rig. In a way, this is a sort of minimum population problem - I first noticed it when I tried to figure out the long term survival of a shipwreck.
My solution was to figure the area that would be developed and divide this into the surface area of the spherical planet, allowing for the hydrographic percentage. This gave me a cost per sq km. The crew of the drilling rig might only develop a sq km or two.
Good point, not sure about your formula though: For Earth today, 1+(((8-5)*0.2))*7)/10 = (1+0.6*7)/10 = 0.52 billion?
Without checking the figures, I can't remember what they suggest, but a significant proportion of even a high-tech force's budget is for food, accommodation, training, etc. The increased cost of equipment maintenance is probably assumed to cancel out the reduced cost of 'tending the cattle'.
Maybe if these guys are able to personally control what happens to the money, they're willing to invest more?
Maybe the leader maintains popularity by spending money?
Just how much does a hair shirt cost?
Maybe a good point. Availability of habitation does restrict population growth. OTOH, if the infrastructure is available to expand the habitation, there should be no restriction on population growth. Growth is only restricted if you can't build sufficient habitation.
Cold weather and lack of outdoor activities might actually increase population growth.
Some good observations there from a first read-through.