Traveller5 and World Budgets
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
So?
Why the post? I mean I am assuming that you want to discuss RUs and there uses, so where shall we start?
I got this ATU with a bunch of RUs to spend on all sorts of projects, from Shipyards, to Starports to Starship fleets, so yes let us dicuss this topic some.
Honestly, I am hoping we can get Hans in on this one, seems like a subject he would have some good things to contribute. He seems good with the infrastructure topics. Hans? You up for some of this RU action?
So, again, where are we starting? I would suggest either Yards or Ports, but lean towards Yards since you need to build ships first usually.
Why the post? I mean I am assuming that you want to discuss RUs and there uses, so where shall we start?
I got this ATU with a bunch of RUs to spend on all sorts of projects, from Shipyards, to Starports to Starship fleets, so yes let us dicuss this topic some.
Honestly, I am hoping we can get Hans in on this one, seems like a subject he would have some good things to contribute. He seems good with the infrastructure topics. Hans? You up for some of this RU action?
So, again, where are we starting? I would suggest either Yards or Ports, but lean towards Yards since you need to build ships first usually.
Yes, an RU is an RU. They are a standardized measurement by which we can compare the budgets of worlds. If world Alpha has RU 100, and world Beta has RU 50, that means that Alpha has twice the economy of Beta.
Oh! For a moment there I thought T5 had ressurrected the system from Pocket Empires.
Hans
Yeah, I think that's how it differs from T4. I seem to recall that RUs in T4 could be mapped back to MCr -- it was dependent on the value of the credit compared to the local world's economy, or something like that?
Mapping to MCr.
I don't see a problem with them mapping to CrImps, but I can see the point of having them remain abstract. Since they are abstract it seems that most large scale projects are going to abstract costs.
So things like Yards, Ports and BCS/Fleets are going to be rated not in CrImps, but RUs. Now here's where it gets sticky for Pocket Empires lovers like me, which is how do we determine how many or what portion of a World's RU Budget can the local Noble get their hands on and what can they do with them?
I don't see a problem with them mapping to CrImps, but I can see the point of having them remain abstract. Since they are abstract it seems that most large scale projects are going to abstract costs.
So things like Yards, Ports and BCS/Fleets are going to be rated not in CrImps, but RUs. Now here's where it gets sticky for Pocket Empires lovers like me, which is how do we determine how many or what portion of a World's RU Budget can the local Noble get their hands on and what can they do with them?
Original_Carl
SOC-12
Hi Magnus. I'm going to disagree with you here.
1. I see a problem mapping RU to CrImps. See p.56 under Resource Units, "There is no direct correlation between Resource Units and Credits or MegaCredits." I think of this is as being similar to the difference between microeconomics (your checkbook) and macroeconomics (the U.S. Treasury). They're completely different animals.
2. "The Local Noble" is a bad assumption. There is likely more than one. There may be one who controls more territory than the others. Nobility is hierarchical after all. But I would find it very unusual that a single noble would have complete control of any planet of note.
3. The RU a given noble does control can be determined using the number of Terrain Hexes they have in their grant, the number of total Terrain Hexes on the planet, and the number of RU that planet has (p.435). I would simply divide the RU by the total number of terrain hexes on the planet and multiply that number by the number of terrain hexes your noble(s) control. Now you know whether they can afford to build that new starport or whether they need to rally support from their fellow nobles.
That would be the simple way (and possibly the only practical way), but just thinking in-universe, it doesn't follow that each hex would have the same economic value or production capacity. I've given some thought to this on the nation level for balkanized worlds in order to compare their economies, and it seems pretty tricky, because you'd have to figure out each of their Resources, Infrastructure, and Labor, and make sure they all total up to the world's values in those. Doing it for hexes would be crazy hard.
On another note, I have a problem with the idea that RUs represent the raw economic power of a world (like GNP or something). Since Efficiency can be negative, that can make your RUs negative as well, so what does that mean? You can't anti-produce, unless you're destroying yourself or something. So to me it seems like this more represents economic activity relevant to other worlds; in other words, are you running a surplus that can be exported, or a deficit that requires support (voluntary or otherwise) from other worlds to maintain?
Ah, the joy of admin.
I mean I own and have read the FY 2000 US Government Budget, so don't run that micro/macro stuff by me, mister.
2. I never said a singular Noble got the RUs. What I was wondering is if there is an official way to determine how much can they get?
3. Yeah, pretty much the way I am figuring it now. Also, since I run an ATU there is the 5-20% off the top for the Imperial coffers.
1. No, they are the same thing, the only thing that differs is the number of people doing the math and the size of the numbers. I am not some noob, sir. I have Admin-2 and Bureaucracy-6.Hi Magnus. I'm going to disagree with you here.
1. I see a problem mapping RU to CrImps. See p.56 under Resource Units, "There is no direct correlation between Resource Units and Credits or MegaCredits." I think of this is as being similar to the difference between microeconomics (your checkbook) and macroeconomics (the U.S. Treasury). They're completely different animals.
2. "The Local Noble" is a bad assumption. There is likely more than one. There may be one who controls more territory than the others. Nobility is hierarchical after all. But I would find it very unusual that a single noble would have complete control of any planet of note.
3. The RU a given noble does control can be determined using the number of Terrain Hexes they have in their grant, the number of total Terrain Hexes on the planet, and the number of RU that planet has (p.435). I would simply divide the RU by the total number of terrain hexes on the planet and multiply that number by the number of terrain hexes your noble(s) control. Now you know whether they can afford to build that new starport or whether they need to rally support from their fellow nobles.
I mean I own and have read the FY 2000 US Government Budget, so don't run that micro/macro stuff by me, mister.2. I never said a singular Noble got the RUs. What I was wondering is if there is an official way to determine how much can they get?
3. Yeah, pretty much the way I am figuring it now. Also, since I run an ATU there is the 5-20% off the top for the Imperial coffers.
I'm struggling with the statement on page 56 disconnecting RU's and MCr. That breaks the link between a world/government and the tonnage they can produce.
I dearly loved Pocket Empires, and had a good deal of fun using its rules to determine the available budget for construction of military tonnage. All of our mileage would vary, but IMTU the relative military strength of various worlds was consistent. This is of particular concern for worlds with smaller populations, or early in the development curve. The acquisition of the first three SDB's could be a big deal.
I dearly loved Pocket Empires, and had a good deal of fun using its rules to determine the available budget for construction of military tonnage. All of our mileage would vary, but IMTU the relative military strength of various worlds was consistent. This is of particular concern for worlds with smaller populations, or early in the development curve. The acquisition of the first three SDB's could be a big deal.
Original_Carl
SOC-12
1. No, they are the same thing, the only thing that differs is the number of people doing the math and the size of the numbers. I am not some noob, sir. I have Admin-2 and Bureaucracy-6.
A government can print its own money. You can't. Uncle Sam Won't Go Broke.
RU is a derived metric that is an abstraction of the economic output potential of a planet. The CrImp value of that planet depends as much on the worlds surrounding it, its physical placement in the Imperium, and who happens to be governing its resources as it does on that potential output.
RU answers the question of, "Can I build a new starport?" It does not answer whether or not you should.
Says who?
Also, if the Government can't go broke what is with those countries (including the US) that are all worked up about their debts?
In fact, I seem to recall a government going broke sparked the event we call the Long Night.
RUs and CrImps are both abstractions, they are just different scales.
Actually, if I can people to take it in trade for goods and services and can back it, then yes I can print my own money. It has been done in the US a couple of times. The Emperor of San Frisco (if I am remembering correctly ) did it and there is an artist who has done it as well. So nice try again.
Also, if the Government can't go broke what is with those countries (including the US) that are all worked up about their debts?
In fact, I seem to recall a government going broke sparked the event we call the Long Night.
RUs and CrImps are both abstractions, they are just different scales.
Yes, and the Weimar Republic didn't go broke either. You'll just need a Mega freighter filled with MCr notes to purchase a loaf of bread. :rofl:
BTW, the link you gave is written by those who have Econ 180 degree backwards.
Last edited:
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
I think you need to look into what will happen when the Dollar looses its position the the Worlds reserve currency.
HG_B is right. When people loose faith in the currency the government can't print it fast enough. That is if anyone will sell them paper and ink.
But wait! We don't need paper and ink. We have little electronic bits on a magnetic media that surely can't be tampered with...:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Last edited:
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Carl, I read your link. No offense to you at all but that is one of the most spectacularly stupid articles I've ever read.
Depression? :rofl: The government says we are coming out of a recession... A bit of a different animal...(not that I'm buying that either).
The US is borrowing more money than it currently takes in in taxation.
If printing worked, why are we borrowing?
Who will continue to lend if we can't pay it back.
Read up, seriously, and in depth, the history of the Federal Reserve Bank and it's predecessor, the Central Bank.
There isn't enough space here to tell the tale and the political policies of this board may have already been violated.
Carl, seriously, no insult was given, so please don't see it as such, but look into this.
Original_Carl
SOC-12
The Levy Economics Institute is a highly respected nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization. Your response is disappointing and embarrassing, but I am not offended.
I think you mean intended rather than given. I'm not so petty as to begrudge you the expression of your opinion. But in this matter, we're going to have to agree to disagree.
Original_Carl
SOC-12
Actually, if I can people to take it in trade for goods and services and can back it, then yes I can print my own money. It has been done in the US a couple of times. The Emperor of San Frisco (if I am remembering correctly ) did it and there is an artist who has done it as well. So nice try again.
A couple of times? The Emperor of San Francisco? Some artist your heard about once? You're killing me here. This doesn't even rise to the level of barstool pontificating. Raise the bar, Magnus. You're better than this.
I provided a link to a paper on historical government debt written by a respected US economic think tank to add weight to my argument about the abstract nature of economics at the macro level, and you cite some anecdotal stuff about a mentally ill man who made pretend money to pay some of his debts in the late 1800s. The real story about the Emperor and His Money is that people loved this guy so much they accepted his pretend money, and he was not arrested for treason after declaring Congress abolished. That's because he was insane and no one took him seriously. They humored him as we humor those we love who are no longer in possession of their full faculties. The city adopted that guy as their mascot.
In no way does this lend credence to your assertion that RU can or even should be converted to CrImps.
Original_Carl
SOC-12
These are all good discussion points.
1. Regarding RU variance over a planet's surface: since grants are Terrain Hexes and very large, you could actually plot them out and maybe see which terrain hexes were better apportioned than others. However, since they are so large I think it might be better to just assume that the planetary resources are distributed fairly evenly. Map Only As Really Necessary.
2. Regarding negative RU. RU isn't GDP. It's an abstract number that represents potential economic output based on the world's resources, labor force, infrastructure and a flux for, "efficiencies." A negative RU represents a dysfunctional world whose society is collapsing and cannot produce. Ok, I guess it's kind of like GDP, but GDP is calculated after the period of economic activity. RU is calculated before to determine what that economic activity will produce.
Personally, the efficiencies thing bugs me, because if I got stuck with a land grant on a planet with negative efficiencies, how do I turn that around so I can build that new Starport? Think about it. The resources are fixed, but you can build infrastructure and you can import or build additional labor. Efficiencies? How do you address that? The example in the text bugs me too. Assuming that a society that doesn't value wealth can't produce efficiently, or that somehow a welfare state is inefficient and therefore an economic drag, is wrong. Look at the Nordic countries, for example. They have extensive social welfare systems and very flat wealth distribution and they are models of economic output and efficiency.
Like I said, that is probably the more practical approach. If you wanted to add some more realism though, you could perhaps take those averages and for any particular hex, just add flux. You wouldn't have to worry about them adding up because like you said, MOARN.
So it sounds like we agree on that then.
I can see lots of ways to role-play affecting efficiencies, but you are right, many of them would be likely based on various assumptions and biases, as many people have. It sounds like your 'biases' would likely be close to mine, as I don't see social welfare programs as inherently inefficient either (quite the opposite in fact). In my house rules for the game I've expanded greatly on the economic side of things, and there are provisions for affecting efficiency (based on my assumptions and observations). Basically, efficiency is no longer a flux value (although it can be added optionally), but is calculated by comparing the world's Gov stat to a new Econ stat I introduced (although I'm considering changing the Gov stat to Law in that equation). With this, I now have easy rules for determining people's quality of life, causes for revolution, and how to both prevent and show the result of them. Perhaps it's time I posted them.
Similar threads
