You might take a peek in http://traveller.mu.org/archive/HIWG/dod-nsc/ - Leroy Gautney may have beaten you to it. He provides the 1117 data (from DGP) and the 1200 data (from RS).
UWP Changes
- Thread starter far-trader
- Start date
Thank you, Daryen, no worries.
And you bring up Next Steps.
I don't know how the data will be updated. I've got a script to generate mainworlds with the "new" system, but others can implement it, too. The best scenario would be to run lots of scripts independently on the data, just to get a feel for the results, but to have Marc actually generate the data from his Second Survey spreadsheet using Excel, if that's possible.
There's quite a bit of history and some current discussion on Traveller5.com on Second Survey. We should discuss methods, code fragments, and ideas about things like stellar generation there.
If possible, I think the best solution would be to write functions in Excel that regenerate the missing UWP fields. The not-best solution would be to run mainworld generation on each AOTI entry until the results match the baseline.
Thank you Jim. That helps a lot. Generally, the gas giants are almost always correct. In other words, the errors fall within the margin of human proofreading error, so we're not likely to find them all unless six pairs of eyes look at the same data. I'm not very concerned.
And you bring up Next Steps.
I don't know how the data will be updated. I've got a script to generate mainworlds with the "new" system, but others can implement it, too. The best scenario would be to run lots of scripts independently on the data, just to get a feel for the results, but to have Marc actually generate the data from his Second Survey spreadsheet using Excel, if that's possible.
There's quite a bit of history and some current discussion on Traveller5.com on Second Survey. We should discuss methods, code fragments, and ideas about things like stellar generation there.
If possible, I think the best solution would be to write functions in Excel that regenerate the missing UWP fields. The not-best solution would be to run mainworld generation on each AOTI entry until the results match the baseline.
Report for Dagudashag Sunbane
First off, I've been spelling the name wrong for years. In AOTI, it's spelled "Dagudashag", not "Dagudashaag". One vowel can spell the difference between peace and war.
Next, the bases, ggs, and starports are all A-OK, as far as my eyes can tell. I changed all allegiances (St, Li, Fi) back to Imperial.
Finally, a lot of Sunbane "Fl" worlds were assigned to AOTI wet worlds. I fixed those.
Warning I have not regenerated the trade codes for any of the sectors I've 'fixed'.
Current list: here
First off, I've been spelling the name wrong for years. In AOTI, it's spelled "Dagudashag", not "Dagudashaag". One vowel can spell the difference between peace and war.
Next, the bases, ggs, and starports are all A-OK, as far as my eyes can tell. I changed all allegiances (St, Li, Fi) back to Imperial.
Finally, a lot of Sunbane "Fl" worlds were assigned to AOTI wet worlds. I fixed those.
Warning I have not regenerated the trade codes for any of the sectors I've 'fixed'.
Current list: here
jfetters
SOC-14 1K
Very good - see you at the T5 board then (I have been playing catch up on all these threads).
Also, I am assuming that this also includes the stellar generation system detailed on your site? Not sure about other sectors, but one of the huge problems in Antares anyway, is an overabundance of D stars.
One other question - in order to not conflict with previously published data, is there a site that lists ALL the previous TNS releases? Giving Antares sector as an example, I know that Antares itself and Sabmiqys have published values. I'd like to see if there are any other mentions as well.
Also, I am assuming that this also includes the stellar generation system detailed on your site? Not sure about other sectors, but one of the huge problems in Antares anyway, is an overabundance of D stars.
One other question - in order to not conflict with previously published data, is there a site that lists ALL the previous TNS releases? Giving Antares sector as an example, I know that Antares itself and Sabmiqys have published values. I'd like to see if there are any other mentions as well.
jfetters
SOC-14 1K
Report for Antares Sunbane
Below are the inconsistencies between the Sunbane map as posted by Rob and the AOTI for Antares:
Below are the inconsistencies between the Sunbane map as posted by Rob and the AOTI for Antares:
The following worlds had incorrect water settings in Sunbane. Note that this is from map comparison only - I do not know what the UPP stats for these are (i.e., if they are fluid worlds):
All other worlds were fine. Gas giant presence aslo checked out, but again was unable to determine whether the numbers listed on the Sunbane maps were accurate.
jfetters
SOC-14 1K
Just to toss 0.02Cr in...
Having spent far too much $$$ recently acquiring issues of the DGP magazines (Travellers' Digest, MegaTraveller Journal), ....
</font>[/QUOTE]Oh! THat was you!!
Yeah, having begun to start detailing a few systems, I think at the very least a STELLAR correction is needed with the data, but I am all for having anything else change that makes sense (such as the whole "low tech civilization on a vaccuum world" cliche).
Thank you, Jim!! This is a big help. I've fixed the allegience codes as well, so Antares sector is now prepped for regeneration.
Current status: here
0501 has been dubbed "Iimashirer" ('Fetters' in Vilani)
0834 has been moved to 0634.
These worlds were (incorrectly) "Fl" in Sunbane:
0134
0319 INSONT
1013
1038 GAAKISH
1731
2115
2137
2308
2638
2805
2922
There is no world at these hexes, Jim:
0502 ?
1805 ?
2612 was (incorrectly) "Ic" in Sunbane.
Numbers don't matter!
Mainworld Regeneration Logic
I've started a topic to discuss and develop regeneration functions here:
http://traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1928#1928
We have a sister topic to deal with star generation here:
http://traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=164
I've started a topic to discuss and develop regeneration functions here:
http://traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1928#1928
We have a sister topic to deal with star generation here:
http://traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=164
Are Supp3: Spinward Marches and Supp 10: Solomani Rim data considered canon (i.e. a superset of AOTI)?
IIRC there are places where the Spinward Marches poster (and possibly Supplement 10) use the convention of Ic := No Water Present in the maps. So it should be matter of comparing the SM and SR data to AOTI to determine the *intent* of AOTI.
(I don't have the sources handy, and of course Marc can contradict the sources.)
The Marches and the Rim are special cases. Amnesty. Grandfathered in, if you will. The Marches is such a deliberately engineered sector.
That being said, your point is still valid, and taken.
Can someone compare AOTI to Supp3 and Supp10 for how Ice worlds are classified? I see that on my Spinward Marches map, 0108 and 0303 (Fl and Ic worlds) are both classified as NO WATER.
I've become worried about Ice worlds. I mean, the intent of AOTI seems to be largely fuel-based: the gas giant, starport class, and 'water present' indicators all point to refuelling.
But you're right. AOTI probably intended Ice worlds to be one of the "no freely available water" worlds.
I'm wondering if that's a bad assumption.
For example, Marc sent me this:
I asked Marc, but he's not replying. Yet.
That being said, your point is still valid, and taken.
Can someone compare AOTI to Supp3 and Supp10 for how Ice worlds are classified? I see that on my Spinward Marches map, 0108 and 0303 (Fl and Ic worlds) are both classified as NO WATER.
I've become worried about Ice worlds. I mean, the intent of AOTI seems to be largely fuel-based: the gas giant, starport class, and 'water present' indicators all point to refuelling.
But you're right. AOTI probably intended Ice worlds to be one of the "no freely available water" worlds.
I'm wondering if that's a bad assumption.
For example, Marc sent me this:
So what do you think about Ice mainworlds? Is that water ice as available as liquid water for refueling purposes? If so, then Ic worlds are more likely to be among the "water present" worlds. If not, then Ic worlds are more likely to be as they were intended to be in AOTI: "no water present".
I asked Marc, but he's not replying. Yet.
Interesting. I just have a few seconds to look at Aramis:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Hex Name UWP AOTI SM Poster
2510 Dhian C9A769D-4 Wet Dry
2602 Corfu X895674-8 Wet Dry
2905 Pavanne E210000-0 Wet Dry
3002 Yebab C9A489A-7 Wet Dry
3102 Rugbird BAC5634-A Dry Dry
3110 Aramis A6B0556-B Dry Dry
3202 Junidy B434ABD-9 Wet Dry
3209 Natoko B582211-8 Wet Dry
3210 Reacher C9A8542-8 Wet Dry</pre>[/QUOTE]Also, double check the UWP we have for Pavanne. Sunbane has C669452-A, Supp 3 has E210000-0!
I'm too sleepy to draw conclusions right now.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The Spinward Marches Campaign has the C669452-A as well.
I'm beginning to think the errors (eg Regina's TL increase etc.) are due to mistakes in the SMC that have then propogated through later canon.
That or there was a whole lot of retconning going on
I'm beginning to think the errors (eg Regina's TL increase etc.) are due to mistakes in the SMC that have then propogated through later canon.
That or there was a whole lot of retconning going on
Similar threads
