Prev: RE: [GZG] [OFFICIAL] The latest in 15mm..... :-) Next: Re: [GZG] [FT] NAC campaign setup

[FT] Alternate Tuffleyverse interpretations (Long?) was Re: [GZG] [FT] NAC campaign setup

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:48:27 -0500
Subject: [FT] Alternate Tuffleyverse interpretations (Long?) was Re: [GZG] [FT] NAC campaign setup

One thing that bugs me is people saying the same thing, over and over

Just teasing; wanted to point out I saw the same post twice, just in
you didn't get it back twice.

Zoe wrote on 04/14/2006 01:27:06 AM:

> One thing that bugs me slightly - and this is a personal opinion, and
> what we have is probably far too good to change to correct it.

Not a unique-to-you opinion; first thought in my brain on seeing the map
the first time.

However, I hoped the numbers ON those planets, and the assumed planetary
conditions, would make the fewer, older colonies far more than balanced
value and importance. I haven't looked at the population and production
numbers people have tried to work out, but if they don't reflect the
I'd tend not to accept them.

Also, I'm a bit fuzzy on the inner colonies status. Are they divvied
amongst the supers? Does that help a bit? The names point to many being
ESU, though.

> The relative numbers of colonies for major vs minor powers.
> I think that the "Big 2", the NAC and ESU, should have 16, the "Second
> 2", the FSE and NSL 8, the other canonical minors 4 each,
> minors 2, and break-aways and fledgling powers 1.
> Those are ratios, not actual numbers, and YMMV.

Again, I'd mitigate it a bit by quality over quantity. But only a bit...

However, you might be somewhat hard on the lesser partner supers.
instead of half?

Oh, and, I even call the one-owner per system, or even planet, into
question. The central thrust of my Four Corners campaign has all of the
majors with a presence in a rim system that is low in population and
habitability, but high in strategic resources.

> For example, I think the OU is too big compared to the ESU, though
> probably about right compared to the other minors, the IC etc. Though
> given the large numbers of "M"s it has, maybe it should have an
> uncharacteristically small number of quality systems compared to
> 3 vs the usual 4 perhaps (and an effective 5-6 when M class systems
> taken into consideration)

Another point, and I can hear the wails from their 'owners' already, I
don't see the minors being as 'sovereign' as we all accept them to be.
Besides the influences of big corps, many near-major powers in their own
right, I assume that the lesser powers feel mightily the influence of
majors, running from simple, helpful suggestions as to fleet deployments
outright puppet govs.

In this case, we might have the same map, but the colors would be shades
a few dominant ones. "From a certain point of view," as an elder Obi-Wan
has said.

> Anyway, just an opinion, and I certainly don't want the change the
> - unless a cmplete re-draw is needed for other reasons.

I certainly don't want to change the world. I'm always stunned by the
effort already put into this one; more stamina than I've got. However,
anyone is crazy enough to try, I'd like to see a re-write to what you
and I
see as more 'reasonable' numbers.

>From a separate thread experiencing increasing subject-relevance
> >"the OU claims all the useless M type stars"
> > They *all* get visited by OU patrol vessels
> Nightvision class fast recon corvettes, often with
> "Imperial University Astronomical Survey" painted on the side.

Not to mention licensed, private prospectors and their suppliers; after
discovery of other star civilizations, you can bet there will be folks
looking for artifacts, as well as the usual hope for valuable minerals
missed in previous surveys. Amazing number of former OU naval personnel
sprinkled among the crews, no?

However, that's a lot of volume for a struggling star nation to cover.
putting my money on as many hidden 'break-aways and fledgling powers' as
mapped ones.

Maybe even actual or posing 'failed' colonies? Isn't that how a lot of
minors got started, though around not-so-useless stars?


Gzg-l mailing list

Prev: RE: [GZG] [OFFICIAL] The latest in 15mm..... :-) Next: Re: [GZG] [FT] NAC campaign setup