T5 Rules question
Jeffrey Schwartz
(24 Feb 2015 16:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(24 Feb 2015 17:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Richard Aiken
(24 Feb 2015 20:13 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Jeffrey Schwartz
(24 Feb 2015 20:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Richard Aiken
(24 Feb 2015 21:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Phil Pugliese
(24 Feb 2015 21:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(24 Feb 2015 21:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Phil Pugliese
(24 Feb 2015 21:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(24 Feb 2015 21:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (24 Feb 2015 21:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Richard Aiken
(24 Feb 2015 22:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(24 Feb 2015 22:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(24 Feb 2015 22:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Richard Aiken
(24 Feb 2015 22:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(25 Feb 2015 00:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Edward Swatschek
(25 Feb 2015 09:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Jeffrey Schwartz
(25 Feb 2015 14:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(25 Feb 2015 21:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Jeffrey Schwartz
(27 Feb 2015 14:29 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] T5 Rules question
Anthony Jackson
(25 Feb 2015 01:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Richard Aiken
(25 Feb 2015 01:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Kelly St. Clair
(25 Feb 2015 06:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Phil Pugliese
(25 Feb 2015 07:39 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] T5 Rules question
Phil Pugliese
(25 Feb 2015 04:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Dan Corrin
(24 Feb 2015 21:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Bruce Johnson
(24 Feb 2015 21:54 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Grimmund
(24 Feb 2015 22:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question
Kurt Feltenberger
(25 Feb 2015 02:54 UTC)
|
-------------------------------------------- On Tue, 2/24/15, Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU> wrote: Again and again we’re clubbed over the head with the fact the the writers of Traveller have only a fleeting and illusory grasp of economics. For lower TL items to maintain market share in the face of cheaper, better items made at a higher TL to those lower TL points there would either have to be substantial savings in buying them (which there isn’t) or some substantial barrier to getting the ‘low tl things made at high tl’s. This is *kind* of a indicator of a ‘low trade’ model for the OTU, but that explodes in a poof of magic smoke when it hits reality: a ‘low trade’ OTU cannot possibly support a mercantilist, heavily militarized, trillions of starships OTU. If you have very little trade, there’s no point to the IN, let alone the kinds of infrastructure that produces 200dT Far Traders. Starships would be exptremely rare and astonishingly expensive. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Actually, we've been over this point many, many times before & the answer always is; "Yes, it can!" The OTU can & does (it's 'canon', No?) support just such a 'low-trade' universe. It just depends on what eco-rules one chooses to apply. It is, after all, fantasy... =============================================================