Re: [LOTE-L] Digest Number 349
- The rule you quoted stated '50% of the total capacity'. Since the total
capacity is 60 MSP then 50% is 30 whether another nation shares control of
the city or not. Neither your nor Thomas' math is incorrect but the
interpretation of 'total capacity' seems to be the issue. I would infer that
it would be the MSP capacity before any other modifications.
Now since you stated that the fixlist for the latest GM program has as an
item 'Also updated the MSP Capacity to reflect level of control (by
multiplying the base by the Tax percentage)', that would work out to be the
same. For example, since the tax percentage of Tributary status is 50% the
result is the same when the total msp capacity of a port is multiplied by
the tax percentage.
This would also make it easier for the GM program in that it would not have
to analyze if another nation had a control status in a particular city but
the same result would be yielded.
>Subject: Re: [LOTE-L] Digest Number 349
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 00:46:28 EDT
>In a message dated 06/30/2000 10:17:59 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
> > I could not find this rule in the Basic rules (v. 5.6.13). However, it
> > the Ren rules (v. 2.0.1) under 2.7 Merchant Shipping Limits by Port
> > think that it should be noted under 9.17 in the basic rules as well.
> > Paul Flinton
>Paul the current version of the Ren rule is 2.1.0 And it does not have that
>rule but this rule which refers only to shared controlled cities.
>2.7 MERCHANT SHIPPING LIMITS BY PORT SIZE
>Each Port City has a limit on the amount of merchant
>shipping that can be based in it by one or more Nations. This
>20 � GPv of City = Maximum MSP based at port
>If the Port City is shared by two nations (being Tributary
>to each of them) then the basing capacity is also split, with
>each nation getting 50% of the total capacity.
>Only Port Cities controlled at Tributary status or better
>can be used for basing Merchant Shipping Points.
>But the way it is now it affects all controlled shared or not. The
>ports are now limited to 50% of they total capacity as a port.
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:07:07 -0500
> > From: "JJ" <jnmj@...>
> > Subject: Re: Trade and Tributary port cities
> > Regardless of finding such a ruling this should be a given. Its common
> > sense stuff. It may be strict for some GM's who have players who for
> > example want 75% of the ports capacity because they are being kind
> > let someone have a small percent of the MSP of the port city,
> > but I've not played long enough and seen that many people share
> > Status on cities to recall this being a problem where each person gets
> > 1/2 of the MSP.
> > What would be some of the reasons behind not having a 50/50 split when
> > nation controls 1/2 of the City?
> > Just curious as to the contraversy behind this.
> > Thanks
> > JJ
>See above single control tributary cities are also affected the same way as
>shared controlled tributary city is. Is that a problem, or does everyone
>that it's ok?
>For it works like this, taking this straight from Thomas now.
>the "raw", or total capacity of a City to base MSP is 20 x GPv.
>This gives a 3 GPv city (3 x 20 = 60) MSP capacity.
>(simple math so far, no?)
>When a nation controls the city at Tributary, they get half of that total:
>(60 / 2 = 30).
>So, two nations sharing a city at Tributary to each, would each get 30 MSP
>in capacity, adding up to 60 (the total).
>(math is not so simple now. For the 2.7 rule states they get 50% of the
>port's capacity but he just stated that a tributary port is worth only 30
>where does this math now being shown come from?)
>And here's cut from the fixlist for the current program available that
>that statement of MSP capacity:
>Also updated the MSP Capacity to reflect level of control (by multiplying
>by the Tax percentage).
>I never failed a math class even in college and received a minor in math
>I don't understand his calculation. Last time I sat down for a sheet of
>50% of 30 was 15 but Thomas came back with 30.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com