Warp Travel in the SFU

[Falconer]

In the Star Fleet Technical Manual, the Federation has a diameter of 9,500 pc. That’s 19.8 times the length of the diameter used in Star Trek Maps (480 pc), 52.8 times the length of the diameter used by FASA (180 pc), and 309.8 times the length of the diameter used by ThrorII (100 ly). The differences are even bigger in 2 or 3 dimensions, but this post is about linear travel.

The SFU’s Federation Space is based on the SFTM, and divides its map into hexes with 500 pc sides. (Note that each hex is way bigger than the size of the entire Federation per the other sources!)

Federation Space ships have a movement rating which represents the number of hexes they can move in a turn. A turn is supposed to be 6 months, or 180 days. Going through my set, the ships all have one of the following movement values: 2, 3, 4, or 6. I understand Federation & Empire adds 7 and 12*. Let’s calculate out the speeds (in terms of multiples of c, or light years per year):

Mv. Value	Speed (c)
2	6,618
3	9,927
4	13,236
6	19,854
7	23,163
12	39,709

For GURPS Prime Directive, they made the somewhat clunky decision of retaining these as the SFU’s “established speeds,” but then calculating out equivalents based on the traditional W^3 formula multiplied by 64. Thus:

Warp Factor	Speed (c)
4.5	5,832
5.5	10,648
6	13,824
7	21,952
7.25	24,389
8.5	39,304

I think it would have been preferable for them to stick with the FS/F&E movement values as their warp scale.

* - They do also add “dash speeds” which are many times greater than warp, but since they don’t adhere to the formula, they are a clunky patch to an already clunky system.

[Stan]

I hadn't looked in to this before, but this does seem to be an issue.

Are you part of the Traveller: Prime Directive beta? Would be great if someone would give them this feedback while they are doing a new edition so hopefully it can be fixed before they release the Traveller edition.

(I'm part of the beta but I'm not sure I have as firm a grasp of all the issues you're surfacing here as you do!)

[Falconer]

Here’s how I wrap my head around this. The SFU speeds are 64 times faster than the FASA speeds, but the SFU map is 52.8 bigger than the FASA map. So the SFU scale is proportionally comparable to the FASA scale, and even a bit proportionally faster. Just to illustrate:

SFU WF	Years to cross UFP	FASA WF	Years to cross UFP
4.5	5.3	5	4.7
5.5	2.9	6	2.7
6	2.2
7	1.4	7	1.7
7.25	1.3	8	1.1
8.5	0.8	9	0.8

I’ll have to check my math, here, but I think it’s right. So the two canons are really in the same ballpark when it comes to speeds.

The problem, of course, is that the FASA speeds are way too slow for the FASA map, and likewise the SFU speeds are still way too slow for the SFU map. Too slow to be practical in an RPG, in my opinion. AND clunky!

[Falconer]

Jan 13, 2022 12:23:11 GMT -5 Stan said:

I hadn't looked in to this before, but this does seem to be an issue.

Are you part of the Traveller: Prime Directive beta? Would be great if someone would give them this feedback while they are doing a new edition so hopefully it can be fixed before they release the Traveller edition.

(I'm part of the beta but I'm not sure I have as firm a grasp of all the issues you're surfacing here as you do!)

Hey, no, I am not in the playtest. And I’m not sure they’ll change it now, because they view TPD as a conversion of GPD, which just completed a major revision.

I’m mainly trying to wrap my head around it for now. I like to learn the ins and outs of the various canons on their own terms so I can easily import stuff.

Obviously the warp factor scale they use is not something I want to use in my own campaign; I do think the warp factors should be integers and should represent higher speeds; I think their solutions are a horribly inelegant patchwork, but ultimately not unusable.

I think the bigger issue comes from sticking to the F&E map for a RPG. It’s fine for a strategic wargame, but for a RPG it’s just way too “zoomed out”. When each planet or base is just given a position as a hex, somewhere (in the center or randomly determined) within a 650,000 square parsec area, well, it’s just too abstracted.

[ThrorII]

Jan 13, 2022 12:54:33 GMT -5 Falconer said:

The problem, of course, is that the FASA speeds are way too slow for the FASA map, and likewise the SFU speeds are still way too slow for the SFU map. Too slow to be practical in an RPG, in my opinion. AND clunky!

Here's another thread on that issue:

oldschooltrek.proboards.com/thread/775/fasa-federation-warp-scale

[Falconer]

Yep, that’s a great one. Added a mention in the OP.

[putraack]

How do you figure "too slow" on the SFU or FASA map? What would be more appropriate?

[Falconer]

For the SFU, sticking to all other established assumptions (9,500 pc diameter Federation, F&E 500-pc hexes), I think I would probably do something like this for maximum usability:

[putraack]

OK, so 6 F&E hexes/6 months seems to fall in between WF 4 and 5, That makes sense.

F&E also allows ships to move another 6-7 hexes (retreat one hex + 6 hex retrograde after battle), so that's more like 6500pc / 180 days = 36.1 pc/day ~ between WF 5 and 6, still a normal-sounding high speed cruise (or normal cruise speed, with bursts of higher-speed stuff)

Dash speed (GPD), or Strategic Movement (F&E) is effectively unlimited, but it's very limited, and is presumed to have behind-the-scenes logistical planning built in, and IMO, can be excluded from this conversation.

I short, I think I like your conversion table there.

[Falconer]

What’s interesting to me is that these speeds are in the right ballpark of (though still lower than!) those demonstrated on-screen in the show, which can be summarized as follows:

From ‘Bread and Circuses,’ we can calculate that a warp factor of between 2 and 5 corresponds to a velocity of about 92 pc/day or greater. From ‘Obsession,’ warp 6 works out to 360 pc/day. From ‘That Which Survives,’ warp 8.4 is calculated as 643 pc/day.

That would perhaps work out to something like this:

This is certainly less “gameable” that what I posted previously, but it’s certainly interesting to see what it “should” be, at least according to one school of thought, and its inherent compatibility with the SFU map.