Thoughts on GURPS economics?

[rancke]

Jim's a good economist, and knows his numbers. His formulae are fine, given his assumptions. I think he tends to see the Imperium as being a high-traffic setting. So if your assumptions about the setting require high traffic flow, then his book will work.

My assumptions require somewhat lower traffic flow.

I think Jim's figures were based on the assumption that billions of people produced a lot of trade. ISTR that the figures involved in his model are still a very small percentage of GWPs.

I think it's important to realize that high traffic flows between major worlds does not contradict anything in CT, because CT simply doesn't go into any sort of details about traffic between major worlds. At worst it will contradict assumptions people have made to fill in that hole.


Hans

 

[aramis]

I can't see any relevance to how fast a ship can refuel, and if it was relevant, the comparative value of a multi-million credit vessel and a warehouse would mean that if having half-empty warehouses most of the time was the price of getting more use out of your starships, companies would build warehouses that were half-empty most of the time. (Depending on just how much extra use they got out of the ships, of course).

NOT REFUEL!!! WAREHOUSE!!!

That window is the arrival time window.

The following is a graph of warehouse hours assigned to a given ship... 4 hours per space. Upper case is arrival time, lower is load assuming latest expected arrival time.

AAAAAAAAaBBBBBBBBbCCCCCCCCc
If you don't allow allow for that window, you can have B arriving expecting to load while A is loading. That's inefficient. If you only allow 18 hour window, and have those three ships...
EEEeAAAAaBBBBbCCCCc
AAAA_BBBB_CCCC_DDDD_

That second line is possible overlap - which means that you can't reliably be loading cargo for that ship into the staging warehouse, because you're still potentially staging to/from the prior one - or you plot a second warehouse, and get:
AAAAAAAAaBBBBBBBBbEEEEE
FFFfCCCCCCCCcDDDDDDDDd
At no point is staging for two ships overlapping due to jump duration variability.

Note that of the load/unload window of 3.4 hours (3:24:00), that's a pretty fast unload and reload to allow for.

That's for player characters on tramp merchants.

No, not really - the maintenance hours are the same regardless of whether its a tramp or a military hotrod; the later editions are more specific about hours instead of just bodies. You can get your PP and JD maintenance hours during a 5 day down-time, and still give engineers shore leave. (You can do the hull, electronics, and MD hours during jump, and thus have all your hours on "cold" equipment.) Its outside the actual scope of the rules as written, but in line with the spirit of TNE and T4 maintenance rules.

IIRC, its mentioned in a couple places in canon that weekly maintenance is part of dirtside time.

 

[rancke]

NOT REFUEL!!! WAREHOUSE!!!

But I was talking about refuelling of ships carrying through cargo... Cargo that isn't destined for the intermediary system. Why you keep talking about warehousing is beyond me. As I said in my previous post, the comparative cost of starships and warehouses will mean that if having half-full warehouses means reduced jump cycles, a company will pay for half-empty warehouses.

No, not really - the maintenance hours are the same regardless of whether its a tramp or a military hotrod; the later editions are more specific about hours instead of just bodies.

So not CT rules, then? :devil:

You can get your PP and JD maintenance hours during a 5 day down-time, and still give engineers shore leave. (You can do the hull, electronics, and MD hours during jump, and thus have all your hours on "cold" equipment.)

You can work on a cold jump drive in jump too. It's only hot for the 20-40 minutes it takes to initiate a jump (and a cooldown period after).

And while in port you can use extra engineers (working for the company, of course) to work on your maintenance. Instead of the ship's two engineers working five days, you can have ten engineers working one day.

Its outside the actual scope of the rules as written, but in line with the spirit of TNE and T4 maintenance rules.

So not CT rules, huh? Wait, I said that already! :devil:

IIRC, its mentioned in a couple places in canon that weekly maintenance is part of dirtside time.

What does it say about weekly maintenance? How many hours and does it have to be weekly?


Hans

 

[aramis]

But I was talking about refuelling of ships carrying through cargo... Cargo that isn't destined for the intermediary system. Why you keep talking about warehousing is beyond me. As I said in my previous post, the comparative cost of starships and warehouses will mean that if having half-full warehouses means reduced jump cycles, a company will pay for half-empty warehouses.



So not CT rules, then? :devil:



You can work on a cold jump drive in jump too. It's only hot for the 20-40 minutes it takes to initiate a jump (and a cooldown period after).

And while in port you can use extra engineers (working for the company, of course) to work on your maintenance. Instead of the ship's two engineers working five days, you can have ten engineers working one day.



So not CT rules, huh? Wait, I said that already! :devil:



What does it say about weekly maintenance? How many hours and does it have to be weekly?


Hans

You're the one who claims it's all one universe... :devil:o::devil:

TNE and T4 do specify weekly maintenance hours. They don't specify which day the week starts on.

The 32.6-hour arrival window is as tight as you can plan your warehousing for. And that presumes an exactly on-schedule departure...

... which certainly isn't a guarantee.

 

[rancke]

You're the one who claims it's all one universe... :devil:o::devil:

Oh, indeed. And you're the one who claims it isn't.

TNE and T4 do specify weekly maintenance hours. They don't specify which day the week starts on.

But maintenance that starts nine days after the last maintenance cycle is not weekly, even if the maintenance takes five more days. It will be fortnightly. And if it can be fortnightly, why can't it be monthly?

The 32.6-hour arrival window is as tight as you can plan your warehousing for. And that presumes an exactly on-schedule departure...

... which certainly isn't a guarantee.

You're wrong about that, but since I've already pointed out twice that it's irrelevant, I shan't bother refuting you.

About the maintenance hours being the same for a military ship as for a civilian one, that's quite possibly true, but the manning levels are not necessarily the same. Military ships must plan on worst case scenarios. Situations where the ship will have to arrive in a system and jump out again 16 hours later several times in a row. It follows that any civilian ship with the same number of engineers (for a similar ship) should be able to arrive in a system and jump out again 24 hours later several times in a row. And we're back to my example of the long-distance hauler that makes a couple of quick jumps through intermediate systems and then spend a full five days at the destination system, for an averge jump cycle of 10 days.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

I don't know about all that warehousing business. A free trader's not going to worry about warehousing - the cargo owner will be doing that while he's seeking someone to carry his cargo. And, since the ship is the biggest cost, one presumes a scheduled liner like Tukera will make whatever warehousing provisions are needed to keep their ships moving at the most efficient rate. I'm thinking loading and servicing the ship is going to be the main time factor.

Real world is not a great analog for far future game circumstances, but it's the best we have:

I see an example of a cargo ship being loaded with 7200 long tons in three days. In that case, there are 5 crews with equipment loading through 5 hatches. A standard 30-ton shipping container can be anything from 4 to 8 dTons, so figure that's maybe 240 containers, 1000 to 2000 dTons in Traveller terms. I'm not sure it's all containerized, but it's a RoRo, so it loads and unloads like a Trav ship would - or at least more so than the big ones that strap so much to their decks.

The typical Free Trader carries quite a bit less but isn't blessed with 5 hatches. No reason it can't use shipping containers, but best use of space will probably involve taking smaller packages as well. Still, one should be able to load it in a bit over a day, 3 to 4 8-hour shifts. Unloading, maybe same. So, assuming roughly similar techniques, you ought to be able to unload and then load in 2 to 3 days. Far future may bring some improvements in loading equipment, but I don't envision radical improvements in loading speed. One presumes your ship can be fueling and your systems receiving needed maintenance while all that is going on.

This assumes a hired crew of longshoremen (or robotic equivalents) with equipment, which isn't actually mentioned in canon, and I don't think the Cr100 docking fee is enough to cover that. I'm guessing very roughly that hiring a crew and their equipment could set you back as much as Cr500 - 1000 for the whole job (so figure it roughly at Cr5-10 per dTon, just to make it easy to figure). If you save money by doing it yourself with your crew, you aren't going to be able to manage back-to-back shifts, so - assuming your crew's about the same size as a typical loading team and that the Cr100 docking fee does give you rights to some loading equipment - 2 to 3 days can become 6 or more, maybe a bit less if you can manage 10 or 12 hour workdays (you slave-driver:devil.

That is of course a very rough estimate based on only one example.

 

[robject]

I declare a Holy Thumb War!

(I'm getting images from Braveheart in my head, with droves of grimy, woad-covered semi-barbarians screaming at the tops of their lungs, and bagpipes.)

I think it's important to realize that high traffic flows between major worlds does not contradict anything in CT, because CT simply doesn't go into any sort of details about traffic between major worlds. At worst it will contradict assumptions people have made to fill in that hole.

Including Marc, who holds that the OTU is a somewhat low traffic one. But he's cagey on that topic, and unwilling to be pinned down too much.

 

[rancke]

I think it's important to realize that high traffic flows between major worlds does not contradict anything in CT, because CT simply doesn't go into any sort of details about traffic between major worlds. At worst it will contradict assumptions people have made to fill in that hole.

Including Marc, who holds that the OTU is a somewhat low traffic one. But he's cagey on that topic, and unwilling to be pinned down too much.

One of the problems I have with this discussion is that I'm never quite sure we mean the same thing when we use a term. I mention high traffic flow between major worlds. I've already, earlier in this thread, conceded that I think that the trade flows the FT model generates for low-population worlds seem to be too high. When you say 'somewhat low traffic', do you mean low traffic between all worlds, minor and major? And just what do you mean by 'low traffic' given Akerut's fleet of 5000T freighters and the mention somewhere (in MP?) of multi-thousand ton freighters?

(Incidentally, it seems to me that if Marc Miller didn't want high traffic flows between major worlds, he shouldn't have approved of FT. )

As far as goods are concerned I'm not particularily invested in the FT numbers. I think they seem pretty modest for trade between worlds with billions of inhabitants, but you don't really notice cargo traffic in most adventures. Indeed I can't think of a single instance where large numbers of huge freighters have featured in any official adventure. The closest I can think of is the 5000T Akerut freighter in First Visit to Zila from TTA. (I do have a major problem with an Akerut freighter showing up at Zila, but it isn't its size, it's its alleged jump-1 capability).

But I do feel it would be a real pity to tone down passenger traffic to the point that the starports (the major ones, I mean) becoming the analogs of sleepy provincial harbors instead of the bustling airport-analogs every rendition of a major starport I've seem shows them to be. I know that pictures are inferior canon, but really, a major starport should have thousands of passengers arriving and departing daily, not a couple of hundred a week. (Note: Numbers are crude guesstimates).

As a related aside, one thing I'd really like to see lowered in Traveller are the high cost of interstellar travel. Not just the canonical costs, but the realistic costs too. There are so many potential plots that won't work because the NPCs involved aren't rich enough to pay for the necessary starship tickets.

At the very least I'd suggest allowing -- indeed, promoting -- economy passage in shared staterooms.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Economy passage made it into canon in T20.

Per t20, p.357:
A passenger pays Cr10K for HP SO, and 8K for HPDO
A passenger pays Cr8K for MP SO, and 6.5K for MPDO
I argued for, and didn't get, Steerage (quad occupancy or 1Td cargo space).

 

[rancke]

Economy passage made it into canon in T20.

Per t20, p.357:
A passenger pays Cr10K for HP SO, and 8K for HPDO
A passenger pays Cr8K for MP SO, and 6.5K for MPDO

I never noticed that. I'm very pleased to hear it. Did MgT pick up on it?

(The prices charged for DO seems a bit high).

I argued for, and didn't get, Steerage (quad occupancy or 1Td cargo space).

Quadruple occupancy staterooms ought (IMO) to be possible, but I think it would require additional life support. I've no idea what life support masses and costs in itself. Perhaps Cr50,000 and ½ a dT? Making a steerage cabin take up 5T and cost Cr600,000.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

...Quadruple occupancy staterooms ought (IMO) to be possible, but I think it would require additional life support. I've no idea what life support masses and costs in itself. Perhaps Cr50,000 and ½ a dT? Making a steerage cabin take up 5T and cost Cr600,000.

Something vaguely like quadruple occupancy is possible in Megatrav: a bunk takes up 1 ton of space, so 4 bunks takes up as much space as a stateroom. Unstated is how many of those you can use in a ship, since that Cr5000 price can't pay for much in the way of life support. Also can't be used for passenger transport - which is I guess some Imperial edict or something, considering that folk were quite content with Pullman sleeper cars for decades. Makes for a dandy slave transport, though.

 

[rancke]

Something vaguely like quadruple occupancy is possible in Megatrav: a bunk takes up 1 ton of space, so 4 bunks takes up as much space as a stateroom. Unstated is how many of those you can use in a ship, since that Cr5000 price can't pay for much in the way of life support. Also can't be used for passenger transport - which is I guess some Imperial edict or something, considering that folk were quite content with Pullman sleeper cars for decades. Makes for a dandy slave transport, though.

Since I really can't see the Imperium micro-managing things to the point of forbidding double occupancy passenger service as long as there's no safety issues involved (and we know from the rules that double occupancy is perfectly safe and legal for private ships), I've come up with a fix[*] for that: Mid and High Passages are not tickets, they're ticket vouchers. Mid Passages can be exchanged for mid passage and High Passages for high passage, both of which involve single occupancy. Economy passage is and has always been available, but no organization issues Economy Passage vouchers, so it just hasn't been mentioned before.

[*] Well, strictly speaking the fix is to explain per jump mid and high passages. The voucher is exchanged for the actual ticket and redeemed for the actual cost of such a ticket. However, custom lets ships with flexible price shemes (i.e. tramps) cash in mid passages for Cr8000 and high passages for Cr10,000 without having to justify the price (anything more and they have to demonstrate that the price is commensurate with expenses. But it explains economy passage too.​

This fix does require amending the rules for generating passengers for PC tramps. Simply say that the referee can treat any mid passenger generated as two economy passengers if he likes.


Hans

 

[Fovean]

I never noticed that. I'm very pleased to hear it. Did MgT pick up on it?

(The prices charged for DO seems a bit high).

Quadruple occupancy staterooms ought (IMO) to be possible, but I think it would require additional life support. I've no idea what life support masses and costs in itself. Perhaps Cr50,000 and ½ a dT? Making a steerage cabin take up 5T and cost Cr600,000.

Hans

MgT hasn't to my knowledge published rules covering this as such but someone's posted some interesting ideas on passenger travel over on their forum.

http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=52143

 

[aramis]

Something vaguely like quadruple occupancy is possible in Megatrav: a bunk takes up 1 ton of space, so 4 bunks takes up as much space as a stateroom. Unstated is how many of those you can use in a ship, since that Cr5000 price can't pay for much in the way of life support. Also can't be used for passenger transport - which is I guess some Imperial edict or something, considering that folk were quite content with Pullman sleeper cars for decades. Makes for a dandy slave transport, though.

It's canonical in TNE for the post-imperial period ouside the regency at KCr2.5 for 0.5 to 1 ton of cargo space, or up to 8 persons per stateroom. See p 219.

Also, MP is usually double occupancy in TNE, but is only KCr5 per person.

 

[mike wightman]

The minimum ticket price would be enough to cover life support costs - KCr2 per person per fortnight.

It then becomes a question of how many people you can actually cram in and how - bunks in the cargo hold, common room spaces, etc.

The counter argument is that the staterooms you build into the ship design put a maximum on how many people you can carry regardless of life support payment.

Stuff like this does come up - you are the last ship off a failing space station. Can you cram all 32 survivors onto your 200t free trader and make the jump to the next system or is it going to result in a scene from Downbelow Station at the far end of the trip?

 

[aramis]

Actually, using the belting rules in Beltstrike, you can get by for even less than KCr2 per person... figuring 1.5 weeks per person, and KCr2 per 2 weeks, you can squeeze in 1 extra body per 3 you pay for... for KCr1.5 per person.

Note that Best of JTAS 1 Mining Article has, on page 30, lower quality rations in bulk for Cr25 per day...