Eric:
>Is the Sloan an SDB? if not, why are we paying for jump drives? I
The only reason for a Jump drive is that we were discussing the
employment of the Imperial Navy on worlds near the frontier (read: no
system squadrons)
Bertil:
> The reason for the strange number of HUDs is that it is that one HUD
>per panel is the most optimum combination to get a high number of CPs.
>I think it was Paul Dale that discovered this.
Actually, optimum under MT rules is to use only large HoloDisplays.
Then you don't need panels at all.
>> Sigh... TCS already sets crew and basing costs at 99% of the Naval
>> Budget. Which is where the 10% base comes from.
>
> Well, I've never even seen a copy of TCS in real life so I think I
>might be forgiven some blundering about it, but I still think that it
>is too low to assume that a ship, crewed, serviced and based will cost
>just 10% of its budget each year.
>
> I'm basing my comments upon Mercenary where it said that a mercenary
>force will have to pay 10% equipment cost each year on maintainance and
>replacements, and on top of that the wages and exceptional expenses are
>added.
Consider yourself forgiven:)
Crew and service costs for a US Navy submarine (annually, excluding
shipyard visits for refits) is less than 5% of cost. Basing is a whole
different ballgame, but the last Navy budget that I saw published had
about 40% to maintain existing bases. The remainder was new
construction, which tells you how long its been since I've seen one.
>> And if we make automobiles fifty times as expensive, people will stop
>> buying them.
>
> Hmm, have you been talking to some politicians here in Sweden? :)
:)
>> Of course, the pirates will then cost fifty times as much,
>> too. If they don't, then they are built like merchant ships, and a
>> Naval vessel that could fight them could be built that way, too.
>
> Why fight them on their own terms and risk a loss?
If the choice is fight them on their terms, or let them run amok, then
the Navy will fight them on their terms. Check history. They may not
succeed, but they will try.
> I'm assuming that while everything can be produced everywhere, the
>production costs vary quite heavily from system to system. And when the
>cost of making them on Cheapo/Massilia plus the cost of transporting
>them to Not-so-cheapo/OldExpanses (including losses to piracy) is lower
>than the cost of making them on Not-so-cheapo/OldExpanses some shrewd
>businesssophont(3 's'?) on Not-so-cheapo/OldExpanses will start
>importing them again, undercutting the local production. First the
>local Not-so-cheapo government will impose taxes and stuff and travel
>to Cheapo/Massilia to persuade them to impose voluntary quotas, and if
>the profit is big enough smuggling will appear. Sooner or later
>Not-so-cheapo will discover that many can play that game, and discover
>that they as a whole will gain from free trade, and remove the tariffs.
>And trade will start up again.
Assuming you don't use MT concept of trade, anyway. Under MT rules,
cost of transporting something is a high enough fraction of cost of
goods that moving something more than 2 jumps is prohibitive. Assuming
you use Lo Ni Po Ba goods Crwhatever. If you want a real economic
system, where goods are priced according to type of goods, then you will
find that transport fees are reasonable for high value/low bulk goods,
and start moving them.
But if there is a significant price difference between various Imperial
planets, do you let PCs buy ships from the cheap places? Or do price
variations only apply to NPCs?
>> In any case, by the time you finish
>> building a missile of the correct size, you will notice that it has
>> room for a Minuteman RV as a warhead.
>
> This will cause missile turrets to take up more space, making them
>less attractive to merchants as a byproduct:)
But the Navy will LOVE them...
Baranski:
>True... However, in my opinion, not all systems are organized enough
>to have jump points defined, published and guarded. Cretainly and A or
>B starport will, but maybe not C, and probably not D or E.
In the Imperium, they do. That's what the Scout Service does. Note
that I don't believe in Jump points, but id=f they were there, the
Scouts would have maped them 600 years ago.
>Then again, how many people will rather not use a defined jump point
>for secrcy, privacy, skuldugery, and whathaveyou. Possibly 10%. Some
>people will want to avoid your pleasant customs agents, etc.
And your pleasant customs people will be most curious about a ship that
arrived on planet without using a Jump point. A planetary sensor system
should be able to track any ship within 100 diameters, wherever it
arrives. I believe NORAD can do that now, By TL9 it should be geedunk.
>RE: 'gas giant refueling loses money'
>
>Nice analysis...
>
>I figure most people gas giant refuel when there is no refined fuel
>available. Certainly that was the main reason that I liked having a
>refinery, because lots of places I went to didn't have refined fuel.
>Then again, there are those people who would rather refuel anonamously
>at the gas giant then line up at the pump. See above.
Notice that I assumed unrefined fuel refined on board. And if your
people don't mind losing money and anonymity at the same time, that's
their privilege. Remember that their are SDBs lurking in gas giants,
and they probably notice people refueling there...
Later...
- -- Via DLG Pro v0.985b
[email removed]
I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
--W. von Braun