Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 16, 2009, 04:59:47 AM
1) Design and build their own ships, including warships, escorts, jump ships, survey ships, freighters, colony ships, terraformers, etc.
2) Select starting tech in a rational way
3) Conduct further research based on a set of priorities that will differ from race to race
4) Update their ship and missile designs as their technology improves
5) Upgrade their own shipyards
6) Build new installations as required, including additional shipyards, etc.
7) Build missiles according to the needs of their race
8) Survey systems and system bodies and explore any jump points they discover
9) Build their own jump gates
10) Setup additional colonies and terraform them if required. Colony ships and freighters will function in the same way as the civilian ships of player races
11) Fight in tactical combat based on their racial weapon-mix
12) Assemble ships into squadrons with an appropriate jump ship and re-organise as required due to losses or new construction.
NB: The Officer corp will use the same automated promotions and assignments as players
For version 4.0, NPRs will not use diplomacy so its going to be a hostile universe. You may be able to conquer their populations though and eventually add them to your own Empire. The hardest part of the above was tactical combat followed by intelligent tech selection and intelligent ship design. When designing a ship the program has to match up the weapons, sensors, fire control systems and power systems, as well as ensuring the same speed for ships that operate together, such as various-sized warships and their escorts. Missiles have to be designed to match ship capabilities. Below is a selection of designs from an reasonably low tech level NPR I just generated for my current campaign. All the ships, their component tech systems and their missiles were all generated entirely by the program. All I did was press the Create Empire button on the F9 window and select random.
Code: [Select]
Broadsword class Freighter 4600 tons 216 Crew 325.8 BP TCS 92 TH 360 EM 0
3913 km/s Armour 1-24 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 169% IFR: 2.4% Maintenance Capacity 44 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
Cargo 25000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 5
Ion Engine E8 (6) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 48.9 billion km (144 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
This design is classed as a freighter for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Reconquista class Freighter 8900 tons 412 Crew 614.4 BP TCS 178 TH 720 EM 0
4044 km/s Armour 1-38 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 633% IFR: 8.8% Maintenance Capacity 43 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
Cargo 50000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 10
Ion Engine E8 (12) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 50.6 billion km (144 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
This design is classed as a freighter for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Warhorse class Colony Ship 4600 tons 241 Crew 775.8 BP TCS 92 TH 360 EM 0
3913 km/s Armour 1-24 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 169% IFR: 2.4% Maintenance Capacity 105 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
Colonists 50000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 5
Ion Engine E8 (6) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 48.9 billion km (144 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
This design is classed as a freighter for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Baldwin class Colony Ship 8900 tons 462 Crew 1514.4 BP TCS 178 TH 720 EM 0
4044 km/s Armour 1-38 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 633% IFR: 8.8% Maintenance Capacity 106 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
Colonists 100000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 10
Ion Engine E8 (12) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 50.6 billion km (144 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
This design is classed as a freighter for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Sepulchre class Geosurvey Ship 2200 tons 211 Crew 328.2 BP TCS 44 TH 180 EM 0
4090 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-15 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/6/0/1 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 38% IFR: 0.5% Maintenance Capacity 93 MSP Max Repair 100 MSP
J3750(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 3750 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (3) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 102.3 billion km (289 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Geological Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points
This design is classed as a non-combatant for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Partisan class Survey Ship 3000 tons 286 Crew 561.4 BP TCS 60 TH 240 EM 0
4000 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-18 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/6/3/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 72% IFR: 1% Maintenance Capacity 117 MSP Max Repair 100 MSP
J3750(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 3750 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (4) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 75.0 billion km (217 days at full power)
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Gravitational Survey Sensors (3) 3 Survey Points
This design is classed as a non-combatant for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Crossbow class Destroyer 5450 tons 639 Crew 962.4 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 4-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 30
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 441 MSP Max Repair 84 MSP
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 150,000 Litres Range 61.9 billion km (162 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (5) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (5) Total Power Output 22.5 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S84-R90 (1) GPS 7560 Range 75.6m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Dagger class Jump Destroyer 5450 tons 616 Crew 890.2 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 2-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 18
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 408 MSP Max Repair 121 MSP
J5500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 5500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 41.3 billion km (108 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (3) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (3) Total Power Output 13.5 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S84-R90 (1) GPS 7560 Range 75.6m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Hospitaller class Heavy Cruiser 10900 tons 1334 Crew 1903.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 4-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/12/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 66
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 873 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 82.6 billion km (217 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (11) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (10) Total Power Output 45 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Clairvaux class Jump Cruiser 10900 tons 1296 Crew 2004 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/12/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 42
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 919 MSP Max Repair 484 MSP
J11000(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 11000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 72.2 billion km (189 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (7) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (7) Total Power Output 31.5 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Crusade class Battlecruiser 16350 tons 2071 Crew 2720.2 BP TCS 327 TH 1440 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 5-57 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/12/0/0 Damage Control Rating 12 PPV 114
Annual Failure Rate: 178% IFR: 2.5% Maintenance Capacity 1248 MSP Max Repair 77 MSP
Ion Engine E8 (24) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 48.2 billion km (126 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (19) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (17) Total Power Output 76.5 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S63-R90 (1) GPS 5670 Range 56.7m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Antioch class Jump Battlecruiser 16350 tons 2031 Crew 3254.6 BP TCS 327 TH 1440 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-57 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/12/0/0 Damage Control Rating 12 PPV 78
Annual Failure Rate: 178% IFR: 2.5% Maintenance Capacity 1493 MSP Max Repair 1089 MSP
J16500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 16500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (24) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 48.2 billion km (126 days at full power)
20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (13) Range 256,000km TS: 4403 km/s Power 10-4 RM 4 ROF 15 10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (12) Total Power Output 54 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S63-R90 (1) GPS 5670 Range 56.7m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Halberd class Destroyer Escort 5450 tons 507 Crew 990.4 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 3-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 17
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 454 MSP Max Repair 133 MSP
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 950,000 Litres Range 392.1 billion km (1030 days at full power)
Quad 10cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (1x4) Range 64,000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 12-16 RM 4 ROF 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-16000 (1) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (4) Total Power Output 18 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Morning Star class Jump Destroyer Escort 5450 tons 574 Crew 911.2 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 17
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 418 MSP Max Repair 133 MSP
J5500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 5500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 150,000 Litres Range 61.9 billion km (162 days at full power)
Quad 10cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (1x4) Range 64,000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 12-16 RM 4 ROF 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-16000 (1) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (4) Total Power Output 18 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Montgisard class Escort Cruiser 10900 tons 1152 Crew 1888.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 4-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 68
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 866 MSP Max Repair 133 MSP
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 41.3 billion km (108 days at full power)
Quad 10cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (4x4) Range 64,000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 12-16 RM 4 ROF 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-16000 (2) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (15) Total Power Output 67.5 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Guisarme class Jump Escort Cruiser 10900 tons 1121 Crew 2000.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 2-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 34
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 918 MSP Max Repair 484 MSP
J11000(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 11000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 600,000 Litres Range 123.8 billion km (325 days at full power)
Quad 10cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (2x4) Range 64,000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 12-16 RM 4 ROF 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-16000 (2) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (8) Total Power Output 36 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Glaive class Missile Destroyer 5450 tons 500 Crew 818.4 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 4-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/6/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 15
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 375 MSP Max Repair 84 MSP
Magazine 265
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 500,000 Litres Range 206.4 billion km (542 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC21-R90 (1) Range 56.7m km Resolution 90
Behemoth Anti-ship Missile (53) Speed: 16300 km/s End: 59.7 minutes Range: 58.4m km Warhead: 8 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S84-R90 (1) GPS 7560 Range 75.6m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Ranseur class Jump Destroyer 5450 tons 536 Crew 774.2 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 2-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/6/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 10
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 355 MSP Max Repair 121 MSP
Magazine 210
J5500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 5500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 41.3 billion km (108 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (2) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC21-R90 (1) Range 56.7m km Resolution 90
Behemoth Anti-ship Missile (42) Speed: 16300 km/s End: 59.7 minutes Range: 58.4m km Warhead: 8 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S84-R90 (1) GPS 7560 Range 75.6m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Scimitar class Missile Cruiser 10900 tons 1050 Crew 1571.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 5-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 40
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 721 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Magazine 690
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range 51.6 billion km (135 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (8) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC42-R90 (2) Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Washakie Anti-ship Missile (138) Speed: 12000 km/s End: 156.2 minutes Range: 112.5m km Warhead: 5 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Battleaxe class Jump Cruiser 10900 tons 1104 Crew 1788.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 2-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 25
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 820 MSP Max Repair 484 MSP
Magazine 425
J11000(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 11000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 82.6 billion km (217 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (5) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC42-R90 (2) Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Washakie Anti-ship Missile (85) Speed: 12000 km/s End: 156.2 minutes Range: 112.5m km Warhead: 5 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Gaza class Strike Cruiser 16350 tons 1616 Crew 2263.2 BP TCS 327 TH 1440 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 5-57 Shields 0-0 Sensors 18/18/0/0 Damage Control Rating 12 PPV 65
Annual Failure Rate: 178% IFR: 2.5% Maintenance Capacity 1038 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Magazine 1115
Ion Engine E8 (24) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 48.2 billion km (126 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (13) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC42-R90 (2) Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Washakie Anti-ship Missile (223) Speed: 12000 km/s End: 156.2 minutes Range: 112.5m km Warhead: 5 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH3-18 (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 18m km
EM Detection Sensor EM3-18 (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 18m km
Code: [Select]
Aragon class Jump Battlecruiser 16350 tons 1716 Crew 2912.6 BP TCS 327 TH 1440 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-57 Shields 0-0 Sensors 18/18/0/0 Damage Control Rating 12 PPV 45
Annual Failure Rate: 178% IFR: 2.5% Maintenance Capacity 1336 MSP Max Repair 1089 MSP
Magazine 795
J16500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 16500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (24) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 48.2 billion km (126 days at full power)
Size 5 Missile Launcher (9) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 50
Missile Fire Control FC42-R90 (2) Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Washakie Anti-ship Missile (159) Speed: 12000 km/s End: 156.2 minutes Range: 112.5m km Warhead: 5 MR: 10 Size: 5
Active Search Sensor S126-R90 (1) GPS 11340 Range 113.4m km Resolution 90
Thermal Sensor TH3-18 (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 18m km
EM Detection Sensor EM3-18 (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 18m km
Code: [Select]
Mace class Destroyer Escort 5450 tons 452 Crew 808.2 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 2-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 8
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 371 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Magazine 558
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 82.6 billion km (217 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (8) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC42-R1 (1) Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Freja Anti-missile Missile (558) Speed: 31200 km/s End: 12 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Voulge class Jump Destroyer Escort 5450 tons 497 Crew 802.2 BP TCS 109 TH 480 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-27 Shields 0-0 Sensors 12/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 59% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 368 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Magazine 304
J5500(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 5500 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (8) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 82.6 billion km (217 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (4) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC42-R1 (1) Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Freja Anti-missile Missile (304) Speed: 31200 km/s End: 12 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 12m km
Code: [Select]
Covenant class Escort Cruiser 10900 tons 881 Crew 1515.2 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s Armour 3-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 18
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 695 MSP Max Repair 126 MSP
Magazine 1218
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 72.2 billion km (189 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (18) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC42-R1 (2) Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Freja Anti-missile Missile (1218) Speed: 31200 km/s End: 12 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m km
Code: [Select]
Solomon class Jump Escort Cruiser 10900 tons 989 Crew 1745 BP TCS 218 TH 960 EM 0
4403 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-43 Shields 0-0 Sensors 6/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 11
Annual Failure Rate: 118% IFR: 1.7% Maintenance Capacity 800 MSP Max Repair 484 MSP
Magazine 761
J11000(3-50) Jump Drive Max Ship Size 11000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Ion Engine E8 (16) Power 60 Efficiency 0.80 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 82.6 billion km (217 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (11) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC42-R1 (2) Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Freja Anti-missile Missile (761) Speed: 31200 km/s End: 12 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S126-R1 (1) GPS 126 Range 1.3m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 6m kmThe addition of NPRs add some complication in other parts of the game. For example, given the way in which time is incremented its possible an NPR might launch missiles at you that you aren't aware of until they hit. Therefore I will be putting some code in to shorten increments where it is possible to anticipate those type of situations. For example, before incrementing time by five minutes or more the program will check if any NPR missiles in flight will reach their targets in less time than the length of the increment. If so, the increment will be shortened to somewhere between 30-120 seconds less than the arrival time of the missiles. I will add other similar functionality where possible. The SM will still get messages about alien ships, etc when you enter a system so you can proceed cautiously and use sub-pulses as required. However, you will have no way to know if that is an alien survey ship, listening post, battle fleet or homeworld. I am concerned that this might make things too easy though so I am considering omitting the SM warning for NPR contacts or maybe adding one or two SM warnings when there is no alien present :)Although I will be playtesting a lot over the next few weeks, I am sure there will be things I miss and there may be one or two weird bugs during the first few NPR campaigns. Please bear with me though because the NPRs will add a lot to the game. Precursors will be back too in v4.0 so ruins will probably be defended.
Steve
Post by: jfelten on January 16, 2009, 08:07:02 AM
Post by: James Patten on January 16, 2009, 09:06:04 AM
(In case there are problems with errors, of course. I wouldn't dream of spying on them, oh no...
)
Post by: jfelten on January 16, 2009, 09:16:30 AM
Post by: Father Tim on January 16, 2009, 09:52:51 AM
Referring to your sample NPR, I note that every warship design has a corresponding JumpShip. This means five or six 5450-ton JumpShips that differ only by the weapons they mount. The problem is repeated in your cruiser and battlecruiser fleet. That seems like a lot of shipyards (or shipyard time at least) to waste among the multiple designs, but it's possible the refit costs are small enough that some or all of the variants could be built without renovating the yard.
I also note that your escorts mount 10cm C4 lasers, which is over-engineering for a 3-power required weapon. I suspect the problem will be repeated throughout your energy weapon arsenal, and possibly the missile tubes as well (utilizing an increased reload rate which doesn't actualy drop the time increment to reload).
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 16, 2009, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Keep in mind the SM might be a different person. I understand that unlike SA, Aurora is pretty much designed from the ground up to be single player only, but I have some hope of finding a way to use it multiplayer, probably with a dedicated SM. Actually that is the main thing I'm hoping to use it for in the end.That's an interesting statement. As far as I was aware, SA and Aurora are exactly the same when it comes to suitability for solo vs multi-player. What was is it about SA that made it better for multi-player?
Steve
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 16, 2009, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: "Father Tim"
I too am uneasy about the 'invisible to the SpaceMaster' part. Perhaps we need two levels of Spacemaster - the current version and a 'God Mode' that grants access to everything. I am sad to say I will not be using the new computer-controlled NPRs for this reason. (Well, actually I'll run one game them with them turned on, wait for oneto show up, then disable the game option to see if that gives the Spacemaster access to them.)NPRs are exactly the same as civilian ships and the same rules apply to both. At the moment there is no general desire for access to civilian fleets. As I improve the general intelligence of NPRs, it will affect civilians too. I may also introduce additional civilian ships such as jump gate construction ships and terraformers as I am coding for them anyway. I want players to play the game with no access to the NPRs so I can see what problems they run into with no foreknowledge of their enemy. That is how I have managed to get civilians working with no problems (in v4.0 at least). There is already a God Mode I can switch on that lets me see all NPRs and civilian fleets in v4.0 as I need it for coding. If there are serious problems I can give access to players who are tracking down particular bugs.
Quote
Referring to your sample NPR, I note that every warship design has a corresponding JumpShip. This means five or six 5450-ton JumpShips that differ only by the weapons they mount. The problem is repeated in your cruiser and battlecruiser fleet. That seems like a lot of shipyards (or shipyard time at least) to waste among the multiple designs, but it's possible the refit costs are small enough that some or all of the variants could be built without renovating the yard.Because Aurora is such a complex game, NPRs will be cheating a little to make up for a lack of a human brain to direct their actions. They won't need fuel or maintenance (like civilians) and they won't need to retool shipyards. In the end I am trying to create an interesting and challenging game for players. The time I would need to spend on the AI calculating an overall shipbuilding strategy with all the nuances that entails (and which would have minimal impact on the player experience) can be spent on far more interesting areas. Because of that, I can use a brute force approach to NPR ship design and create everything they might need.
Quote
I also note that your escorts mount 10cm C4 lasers, which is over-engineering for a 3-power required weapon. I suspect the problem will be repeated throughout your energy weapon arsenal, and possibly the missile tubes as well (utilizing an increased reload rate which doesn't actualy drop the time increment to reload).I am refining the design code as I go and that is one of the things I need to fix.
Steve
Post by: Erik L on January 16, 2009, 03:32:43 PM
And with your automated NPRs... Pirates. We must have pirates, aarrrh!
Post by: Sotak246 on January 16, 2009, 07:03:38 PM
Mark
Post by: welchbloke on January 17, 2009, 08:36:54 AM
I'd also like to add my voice to those clamouring for pirates and security ratings for systems. I would hate to see my pesky civilian ships cruising obliviously into the teeth of an alien invasion fleet. No really I would
Post by: Erik L on January 17, 2009, 12:15:14 PM
I also like the idea of being able to mark a colony as a military/government installation, off limit to civilians. Though I think there should be requirements (population under X millions, no more than Y installations).
Post by: xtfoster on January 17, 2009, 02:23:52 PM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
SA is/was better for Multi-Player because it is not real-time. Because of the Real-Time aspect of Aurora you can't really "pass around" the database and run a months worth of turns, at least not easily because of the need for micro-management.Quote from: "jfelten"Keep in mind the SM might be a different person. I understand that unlike SA, Aurora is pretty much designed from the ground up to be single player only, but I have some hope of finding a way to use it multiplayer, probably with a dedicated SM. Actually that is the main thing I'm hoping to use it for in the end.That's an interesting statement. As far as I was aware, SA and Aurora are exactly the same when it comes to suitability for solo vs multi-player. What was is it about SA that made it better for multi-player?
Steve
Post by: waresky on January 20, 2009, 11:16:57 AM
So an NPR,cunning,hostile are welcome.BUT..please careful.Set the Alien difficult carefully.Or setup a options:Simple,Normal,Advance,Merseia Empire Level:) (Merseia from Flandrys books)
AH!!! a humbly request!!!!
PLS in GALACTICAL MAP can u design a GRID layer? for better mapping.ty:) (am a older loving mapper from Megatraveller system)
Post by: Erik L on January 20, 2009, 11:36:43 AM
Quote from: "waresky"
PLS in GALACTICAL MAP can u design a GRID layer? for better mapping.ty:) (am a older loving mapper from Megatraveller system)
If you "Snap to grid" in the Galactic map, it would do what I think you are looking for.
Post by: jfelten on January 21, 2009, 06:08:47 AM
Quote from: "xtfoster"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"SA is/was better for Multi-Player because it is not real-time. Because of the Real-Time aspect of Aurora you can't really "pass around" the database and run a months worth of turns, at least not easily because of the need for micro-management.Quote from: "jfelten"Keep in mind the SM might be a different person. I understand that unlike SA, Aurora is pretty much designed from the ground up to be single player only, but I have some hope of finding a way to use it multiplayer, probably with a dedicated SM. Actually that is the main thing I'm hoping to use it for in the end.That's an interesting statement. As far as I was aware, SA and Aurora are exactly the same when it comes to suitability for solo vs multi-player. What was is it about SA that made it better for multi-player?
Steve
Exactly what I was getting at. I'm not being critical. Steve wrote the game for himself to play solo. But it would be nice if there was some way to play it multiplayer. If I can get a couple old SA player friends to help, I'm going to try playing around to see if there is some way to use the current Aurora software in some sort of multiplayer way that isn't too cumbersome. Maybe a dedicated SM to play out any battles. Although being able to control their side of battles is a big allure to most players. That wasn't an issue in SA since SA didn't really support playing Starfire battles (although it had tools to help). We always just got the actual Starfire game out to resolve battles which was good fun. That did necessitate face to face meetings. These days it probably wouldn't be hard to whip up a cyberboard gamebox for such things.
Post by: Bellerophon06 on January 21, 2009, 12:50:07 PM
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 23, 2009, 11:04:20 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
All the changes that are coming with V4.0 sound great; I've also got some reservations about lack of SM access to NPRs but I'll give it good go before passing judgement.
I'd also like to add my voice to those clamouring for pirates and security ratings for systems. I would hate to see my pesky civilian ships cruising obliviously into the teeth of an alien invasion fleet. No really I would :). Its a little thin but it does provide a reason for 'pirates'
I am not sure about pre-set security ratings though. In a game like EVE, the pre-set security ratings are set by the various NPR empires to advise shipping based presumably on historical pirate activity. There would be no reason for such pre-set ratings in Aurora. However, its possible that security ratings might evolve over time and they would be different for each Empire. Assume all ratings start as zero, which is assumed to be safe. If ships are attacked by hostile Empires or pirates are spotted, the security rating of that system would rise accordingly for the Empire involved. As time passed without any incidents, the security rating would gradually fall. Civilian shipping would presumably avoid systems with higher security ratings.
By the way, the Commonwealth has encountered a computer-controlled Empire that detected, intercepted and destroyed a Commonwealth Survey Ship entirely on automatic.
Steve
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 23, 2009, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: "jfelten"
With Aurora the players would issue orders as and when needed. In many cases, especially early on, the game can run for months without the need for a lot of player interaction. The database would be passed to a particular player when events warranted it, rather than passing it round everyone at set intervals. With regard to combat, Aurora combat is a lot faster than in Starfire and require a lot less player involvement once it gets going (which was deliberate because it was taking me days to play out a single battle in the Rigellian Campaign). The SM could play the battles out based on general orders from the player (as would be necessary in a remote Starfire campaign). You could even communicate with the players via email during the battle and implement their instructions accordingly.Quote from: "xtfoster"SA is/was better for Multi-Player because it is not real-time. Because of the Real-Time aspect of Aurora you can't really "pass around" the database and run a months worth of turns, at least not easily because of the need for micro-management.Exactly what I was getting at. I'm not being critical. Steve wrote the game for himself to play solo. But it would be nice if there was some way to play it multiplayer. If I can get a couple old SA player friends to help, I'm going to try playing around to see if there is some way to use the current Aurora software in some sort of multiplayer way that isn't too cumbersome. Maybe a dedicated SM to play out any battles. Although being able to control their side of battles is a big allure to most players. That wasn't an issue in SA since SA didn't really support playing Starfire battles (although it had tools to help). We always just got the actual Starfire game out to resolve battles which was good fun. That did necessitate face to face meetings. These days it probably wouldn't be hard to whip up a cyberboard gamebox for such things.
Steve
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 23, 2009, 11:27:22 AM
Quote from: "Bellerophon06"
The NPR system sounds excellent, and something that I have personally being wanting to see. I would like to see the ability to take a PR and change it at a later date to an NPR race. This would allow the player the ability to set up a single system with multiple empires, split them up, and then have the program run the empires later on. It would work very well for a varient of the Trans Newtonian Campaign that Steve has set up that I would like to run.This probably wouldn't be that hard to setup in terms of converting ships and pops. The main problem would be that the NPR movement and combat code is aware of what happens in the NPR design code so it makes certain assumptions. With player-designed ships it is possible it might run into something unexpected. That will become less of a problem as the NPR code become more sophisticated so I should be able to add it in the not-too-distant future.
Steve
Post by: jfelten on January 23, 2009, 11:48:16 AM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
The problems with pirates in any strategic space game is that there has to be a reason for them to be there. I have been giving it some thought and I think I have come up with a plausible reason. Already within the background for the game there are the Precursors, an ancient race that was wiped out but still maintains robot ships at some of their old colonies, or perhaps it is their conquerors that maintain those forces. Although Precursors haven't been in the game for a while they are back in v4.0. Perhaps the surviving precursor units are not limited to those at ruin sites. Smaller ships, lacking jump drives, may have been trapped in various star systems when the Precursor civilization fell. Their instructions to fight the invaders would still remain and they would attack any forces entering the system in which they are trapped. Of course, if you happen to build a jump gate into their system, they wouldn't be trapped any longer :). Its a little thin but it does provide a reason for 'pirates'
I am not sure about pre-set security ratings though. In a game like EVE, the pre-set security ratings are set by the various NPR empires to advise shipping based presumably on historical pirate activity. There would be no reason for such pre-set ratings in Aurora. However, its possible that security ratings might evolve over time and they would be different for each Empire. Assume all ratings start as zero, which is assumed to be safe. If ships are attacked by hostile Empires or pirates are spotted, the security rating of that system would rise accordingly for the Empire involved. As time passed without any incidents, the security rating would gradually fall. Civilian shipping would presumably avoid systems with higher security ratings.
By the way, the Commonwealth has encountered a computer-controlled Empire that detected, intercepted and destroyed a Commonwealth Survey Ship entirely on automatic.
Steve
I don't care for pirates much in space fiction but they are obviously popular and I have few ideas, especially if you don't take the term pirate too literally. One is that in addition to Precursor robot warships there are also Precursor scavenger ships (ancient warships probably need some way to get maintenance materials even if they can fabricate their own repair parts) out there. Perhaps they have a high tendency to have powerful cloaking devices and engines making them hard to catch. They try to avoid ships they calculate are warships but will attack a ship(s) they think is a freighter and carry off its cargo or pieces of the freighter itself. They could also attack civilian ships that they encounter and there could be some mechanism added for the civilian sector to demand the navy "do something" about it. Maybe the civilian ships go on strike for awhile or something whenever one is attacked. Although in 3.2 I kind of wish they would sometimes.
Another thought is that they prey on trade routes or whatever they are called. Some of that income starts disappearing until the navy tracks down the scavenger.
Yet another thought is one of the civilian ships is actually a pirate in disguise. Hunts for other lone civilian ships and somehow boards them when away from busy star systems. Perhaps they mount a hidden beam weapon or tractor beam or such. You might even have the rare event when 2 civilian pirates encounter each other and slug it out.
Of course there is also the giant space goat out there somewhere . . .
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 23, 2009, 12:05:10 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
I don't care for pirates much in space fiction but they are obviously popular and I have few ideas, especially if you don't take the term pirate too literally. One is that in addition to Precursor robot warships there are also Precursor scavenger ships (ancient warships probably need some way to get maintenance materials even if they can fabricate their own repair parts) out there. Perhaps they have a high tendency to have powerful cloaking devices and engines making them hard to catch. They try to avoid ships they calculate are warships but will attack a ship(s) they think is a freighter and carry off its cargo or pieces of the freighter itself. They could also attack civilian ships that they encounter and there could be some mechanism added for the civilian sector to demand the navy "do something" about it. Maybe the civilian ships go on strike for awhile or something whenever one is attacked. Although in 3.2 I kind of wish they would sometimes.It would be difficult for the 'pirate' to tell the difference between a warship and a freighter, just as its difficult for a player to tell unless the contact starts firing at him. However, the idea that the civilians would require naval forces to protect them is a good one. Perhaps as an addition to the possible security ratings mentioned earlier, those ratings would be offset based on the PPV of warships in the same system. Its entirely possible that two NPRs or an NPR and a 'pirate' would fight each other. Neither can distinguish the other from a player race. With the way v4.0 is set up, NPR Empires could fight entire wars out of the sight of players and destroy each other's colonies. Player races may find wrecks and irradiated worlds as a result of such conflicts
Another thought is that they prey on trade routes or whatever they are called. Some of that income starts disappearing until the navy tracks down the scavenger.
Yet another thought is one of the civilian ships is actually a pirate in disguise. Hunts for other lone civilian ships and somehow boards them when away from busy star systems. Perhaps they mount a hidden beam weapon or tractor beam or such. You might even have the rare event when 2 civilian pirates encounter each other and slug it out.
Quote
Of course there is also the giant space goat out there somewhere . . .I will be adding some weird stuff at some point in the future. Planet Eaters, Space Dragons, etc.
Steve
Post by: Erik L on January 23, 2009, 12:10:54 PM
Steve[/quote]
That I like
How about something where a ship commander goes rogue? Or a crew mutinies? Until they are hunted down and captured, they would act as a pirate.
Post by: jfelten on January 23, 2009, 12:17:07 PM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
It would be difficult for the 'pirate' to tell the difference between a warship and a freighter, just as its difficult for a player to tell unless the contact starts firing at him. However, the idea that the civilians would require naval forces to protect them is a good one. Perhaps as an addition to the possible security ratings mentioned earlier, those ratings would be offset based on the PPV of warships in the same system. Its entirely possible that two NPRs or an NPR and a 'pirate' would fight each other. Neither can distinguish the other from a player race. With the way v4.0 is set up, NPR Empires could fight entire wars out of the sight of players and destroy each other's colonies. Player races may find wrecks and irradiated worlds as a result of such conflicts.
Steve
I have heard that the Precursors have some amazing technology . . . Actually it wouldn't be beyond the realm of science fiction to be able to calculate the density of a ship based on sensor data. Depending on what was being hauled an educated guess could be made as to whether something is a freighter from a distance. Above a certain density it is probably a freighter carrying bulk cargo such as ore. Below a certain density is is probably a freighter either empty or carrying a low density cargo such as giant space goat mohair. And sometimes they might make a fatal mistake and attack a warship. Or, another "freighter" could come so close as to be able to make a visual identification, perhaps by feigning a distress of some sort. Or they might have obtained a copy of the flight plan and just know here to be when. I'm sure we could think something up that was reasonably believable.
Post by: Erik L on January 23, 2009, 12:21:02 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"It would be difficult for the 'pirate' to tell the difference between a warship and a freighter, just as its difficult for a player to tell unless the contact starts firing at him. However, the idea that the civilians would require naval forces to protect them is a good one. Perhaps as an addition to the possible security ratings mentioned earlier, those ratings would be offset based on the PPV of warships in the same system. Its entirely possible that two NPRs or an NPR and a 'pirate' would fight each other. Neither can distinguish the other from a player race. With the way v4.0 is set up, NPR Empires could fight entire wars out of the sight of players and destroy each other's colonies. Player races may find wrecks and irradiated worlds as a result of such conflicts.
Steve
I have heard that the Precursors have some amazing technology . . . Actually it wouldn't be beyond the realm of science fiction to be able to calculate the density of a ship based on sensor data. Depending on what was being hauled an educated guess could be made as to whether something is a freighter from a distance. Above a certain density it is probably a freighter carrying bulk cargo such as ore. Below a certain density is is probably a freighter either empty or carrying a low density cargo such as giant space goat mohair. And sometimes they might make a fatal mistake and attack a warship. Or, another "freighter" could come so close as to be able to make a visual identification, perhaps by feigning a distress of some sort. Or they might have obtained a copy of the flight plan and just know here to be when. I'm sure we could think something up that was reasonably believable.
The thing with "magic" tech for Precursors is that all of that tech is potentially available via ruins.
Post by: jfelten on January 23, 2009, 12:50:59 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
The thing with "magic" tech for Precursors is that all of that tech is potentially available via ruins.
I don't think it would be too unbalancing if a player was to find a "freighter detector". Or maybe it is something that without constant maintenance crumbles to dust. Or requires some unique material, that is perhaps consumed with use and needs to be replenished, of which a source is yet unknown. Or some such excuse.
If all civilian ships always had their IFF on that would be another way to pick them out one the system was known.
The commercial engines being discussed on another thread are another possibly way to guess at what is a civilian ship and what is military.
Like I wrote, I would just as soon there be no "pirates" in the game. But if people want them, the whole Aurora universe has no solid basis or background so we can come up with something that can be made to fit without being too unbelievable. If you can swallow reactionless propulsion at sizable fractions of the speed of light, "warp points" that link to distant star systems, guiding missiles at millions of kilometers distance with enough accuracy to hit another missile, robotic Precursor spaceships still functional after centuries, etc. etc., something that can judge whether something is a freighter or warship with reasonable accuracy sounds pretty trivial.
Post by: Erik L on January 23, 2009, 01:05:46 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Quote from: "Erik Luken"The thing with "magic" tech for Precursors is that all of that tech is potentially available via ruins.
I don't think it would be too unbalancing if a player was to find a "freighter detector". Or maybe it is something that without constant maintenance crumbles to dust. Or requires some unique material, that is perhaps consumed with use and needs to be replenished, of which a source is yet unknown. Or some such excuse.
If all civilian ships always had their IFF on that would be another way to pick them out one the system was known.
The commercial engines being discussed on another thread are another possibly way to guess at what is a civilian ship and what is military.
Like I wrote, I would just as soon there be no "pirates" in the game. But if people want them, the whole Aurora universe has no solid basis or background so we can come up with something that can be made to fit without being too unbelievable. If you can swallow reactionless propulsion at sizable fractions of the speed of light, "warp points" that link to distant star systems, guiding missiles at millions of kilometers distance with enough accuracy to hit another missile, robotic Precursor spaceships still functional after centuries, etc. etc., something that can judge whether something is a freighter or warship with reasonable accuracy sounds pretty trivial.
I'd rather see privateers than pirates, but one government's privateer is another's pirate.
I'm just thinking of novels like Honor Harrington (Pirates in the Silesian Confederacy) & Vatta's War which all have multiple established empires and pirates/privateers.
Post by: jfelten on January 23, 2009, 01:24:44 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I'd rather see privateers than pirates, but one government's privateer is another's pirate.
Very true.
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I'm just thinking of novels like Honor Harrington (Pirates in the Silesian Confederacy) & Vatta's War which all have multiple established empires and pirates/privateers.
Well, I'll probably get boo'ed off stage by saying I don't like Weber. Someone gave me his War of Meetings book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Honor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Honor)) as a gift years ago and after a couple hundred pages of some of the worst science fiction writing I've ever read I tossed it. Horrible.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 23, 2009, 01:30:26 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
I have heard that the Precursors have some amazing technology . . . Actually it wouldn't be beyond the realm of science fiction to be able to calculate the density of a ship based on sensor data. Depending on what was being hauled an educated guess could be made as to whether something is a freighter from a distance. Above a certain density it is probably a freighter carrying bulk cargo such as ore. Below a certain density is is probably a freighter either empty or carrying a low density cargo such as giant space goat mohair. And sometimes they might make a fatal mistake and attack a warship. Or, another "freighter" could come so close as to be able to make a visual identification, perhaps by feigning a distress of some sort. Or they might have obtained a copy of the flight plan and just know here to be when. I'm sure we could think something up that was reasonably believable.The Precursors have the same available tech as player races. They just start with a lot more research points so they have ships based on better technology. Unlike the first incarnation of Precursors, in each game their tech and the designs of their ships will be generated from scratch rather than relying on a set number of pre-generated designs.
Precursors, like player ships, can learn about active sensor contacts if they study them long enough. Just as players can eventually figure out which alien ships have cargo holds and which have missile launchers, so can Precursors. The problem is that it takes time to get that information and while the Precursor is studying the contact, the player would be summoning assistance.
Steve
Post by: Erik L on January 23, 2009, 03:54:22 PM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Quote from: "Erik Luken"I'd rather see privateers than pirates, but one government's privateer is another's pirate.
Very true.Quote from: "Erik Luken"I'm just thinking of novels like Honor Harrington (Pirates in the Silesian Confederacy) & Vatta's War which all have multiple established empires and pirates/privateers.
Well, I'll probably get boo'ed off stage by saying I don't like Weber. Someone gave me his War of Meetings book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Honor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Honor)) as a gift years ago and after a couple hundred pages of some of the worst science fiction writing I've ever read I tossed it. Horrible.
Weber does have a tendency towards deus ex machina. And a penchant for details.
Post by: sloanjh on January 23, 2009, 09:25:43 PM
This model also works for "privateers" or "freedom fighters" - a conquered population might have a high chance of producing "pirate" (actually rebel) bases, while another government might spontaneously commission civilian Q-ships. The lawlessness and/or pirate/privateer probability could also be skewed by government type.
I don't have detailed knowledge of it, but my recollection is that the vast majority of historical pirates didn't have a blue-water capability; instead they were short-ranged boats full of men which preyed on coastal traffic. This seems to be what's been going on off Somalia until recently, and also the sort of pirates that have been active in Indonesia (Straights of Malacca, IIRC) for many years now. It seems like the Somalian pirates have recently gained blue-water capability by using "tenders"; this is where the idea above for civilian cargo ships that actually have hangar space for GB or fighters came from. Another observation here is that, in both cases, they're operating near choke points or navigational obstructions - the Aurora equivalent would be to find an asteroid near a heavily used asteroid and park a pirate base there.
John
Post by: welchbloke on January 25, 2009, 04:45:57 AM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "welchbloke"All the changes that are coming with V4.0 sound great; I've also got some reservations about lack of SM access to NPRs but I'll give it good go before passing judgement.
I'd also like to add my voice to those clamouring for pirates and security ratings for systems. I would hate to see my pesky civilian ships cruising obliviously into the teeth of an alien invasion fleet. No really I would :). Its a little thin but it does provide a reason for 'pirates'
I admit I hadn't thought the rational behind 'pirates' all the way through. What I was really after was ensuring that empires actually had to worry about escorting freighters beyond the front lines. I like the idea of the trapped precursor ships; it would provide the right sort of impetus for people to start worrying about providing escorts. Particularly if the precursor don't pop up for a few months/years after system is discovered(because they haven't detected the PR ships) :D
Post by: Erik L on February 09, 2009, 12:29:25 AM
Post by: jfelten on February 09, 2009, 05:02:50 AM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.
What about just using the sectors or whatever it is called where you flag systems as being grouped together?
Post by: Erik L on February 09, 2009, 11:03:44 AM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Quote from: "Erik Luken"I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.
What about just using the sectors or whatever it is called where you flag systems as being grouped together?
I mean a programatic limit, so that you don't have the Bugs right next to you. Gives you a chance to at least start in relative safety.
Post by: welchbloke on February 09, 2009, 02:30:15 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
Quote from: "jfelten"Quote from: "Erik Luken"I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.
What about just using the sectors or whatever it is called where you flag systems as being grouped together?
I mean a programatic limit, so that you don't have the Bugs right next to you. Gives you a chance to at least start in relative safety.
Now that the NPR generation is automatic this is probably something that should be considered; Aurora should be sporting enough to give Player Races at least a fighting chance
Post by: backstab on February 09, 2009, 07:36:55 PM
Will the NPR's conduct planetry invasions with Ground Troops ??
Post by: SteveAlt on February 10, 2009, 02:07:59 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.What might be easier, and would also avoid allowing players to expand slowly in the knowledge they are perfectly safe, would be an amount of time at the start of the game during which no alien races would be created. Although in v4.0, at least one NPR starts at the same time as you in an unconnected system, so they will be building up too.
Steve
Post by: SteveAlt on February 10, 2009, 02:09:23 PM
Quote from: "backstab"
Steve,They don't at the moment. Aurora is such a large and detailed game that I am going to try and get NPRs to the point where they are a reasonable threat and then add new NPR abilities, such as ground attacks, in subsequent versions.
Will the NPR's conduct planetry invasions with Ground Troops ??
Steve
Post by: welchbloke on February 10, 2009, 02:20:47 PM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
Sneaky!Quote from: "Erik Luken"I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.What might be easier, and would also avoid allowing players to expand slowly in the knowledge they are perfectly safe, would be an amount of time at the start of the game during which no alien races would be created. Although in v4.0, at least one NPR starts at the same time as you in an unconnected system, so they will be building up too.
Steve
certainly gives you an incentive.
Post by: Erik L on February 10, 2009, 02:34:40 PM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
Quote from: "Erik Luken"I was thinking, maybe there should be an exclusion zone around a homeworld. Maybe 1 or 2 jump radius where no other NPR homeworlds are found.What might be easier, and would also avoid allowing players to expand slowly in the knowledge they are perfectly safe, would be an amount of time at the start of the game during which no alien races would be created. Although in v4.0, at least one NPR starts at the same time as you in an unconnected system, so they will be building up too.
Steve
I don't mind that at all, as long as I don't pop through a homesystem jp and encounter them :)
Post by: IanD on February 10, 2009, 03:21:01 PM
Quote
What might be easier, and would also avoid allowing players to expand slowly in the knowledge they are perfectly safe, would be an amount of time at the start of the game during which no alien races would be created. Although in v4.0, at least one NPR starts at the same time as you in an unconnected system, so they will be building up too.
Erik wrote
Quote
I don't mind that at all, as long as I don't pop through a homesystem jp and encounter them
But would the delay also affect Precursors’? The problem an Empire could face is going through a home jump point, finding a Precursor, spending time to hopefully overcome it, assuming it doesn't find your JP too soon! Then not having expanded very far before the hostile NPRs kick in and possibly find you. It would certainly focus the mind! Do you have a definite period of time in mind?
Regards
Ian
Post by: Erik L on February 10, 2009, 03:34:04 PM
Quote from: "IanD"
Steve wroteQuoteWhat might be easier, and would also avoid allowing players to expand slowly in the knowledge they are perfectly safe, would be an amount of time at the start of the game during which no alien races would be created. Although in v4.0, at least one NPR starts at the same time as you in an unconnected system, so they will be building up too.
Erik wroteQuoteI don't mind that at all, as long as I don't pop through a homesystem jp and encounter them
But would the delay also affect Precursors’? The problem an Empire could face is going through a home jump point, finding a Precursor, spending time to hopefully overcome it, assuming it doesn't find your JP too soon! Then not having expanded very far before the hostile NPRs kick in and possibly find you. It would certainly focus the mind! Do you have a definite period of time in mind?
Regards
Ian
I'd prefer to not even see Precursors within a 2 jump radius of the homeworld. Just to give the race a bit of breathing room.
And if you wanted them, the "Add Ruin" button should take care of that
Post by: IanD on February 10, 2009, 04:04:02 PM
Quote
I'd prefer to not even see Precursors within a 2 jump radius of the homeworld. Just to give the race a bit of breathing room.
And if you wanted them, the "Add Ruin" button should take care of that
Not having had the pleasure of Precursors I was never sure if you pressed the “Add Ruins” button for Mars, it wouldn’t deposit a Precursor in the Oort Cloud. Your nascent Empire could then be measured in months!
Regards
Ian
Post by: Erik L on February 10, 2009, 04:07:43 PM
Quote from: "IanD"
Erik wroteQuoteI'd prefer to not even see Precursors within a 2 jump radius of the homeworld. Just to give the race a bit of breathing room.
And if you wanted them, the "Add Ruin" button should take care of that
Not having had the pleasure of Precursors I was never sure if you pressed the “Add Ruins” button for Mars, it wouldn’t deposit a Precursor in the Oort Cloud. Your nascent Empire could then be measured in months!
Regards
Ian
It doesn't in 3.2
4.0... well... Maybe Steve should add another button "Add Precursor" and leave the ruin button just adding a ruin.
Post by: Larac on February 14, 2009, 11:43:55 AM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
Quote from: "jfelten"Quote from: "Erik Luken"The thing with "magic" tech for Precursors is that all of that tech is potentially available via ruins.
I don't think it would be too unbalancing if a player was to find a "freighter detector". Or maybe it is something that without constant maintenance crumbles to dust. Or requires some unique material, that is perhaps consumed with use and needs to be replenished, of which a source is yet unknown. Or some such excuse.
If all civilian ships always had their IFF on that would be another way to pick them out one the system was known.
The commercial engines being discussed on another thread are another possibly way to guess at what is a civilian ship and what is military.
Like I wrote, I would just as soon there be no "pirates" in the game. But if people want them, the whole Aurora universe has no solid basis or background so we can come up with something that can be made to fit without being too unbelievable. If you can swallow reactionless propulsion at sizable fractions of the speed of light, "warp points" that link to distant star systems, guiding missiles at millions of kilometers distance with enough accuracy to hit another missile, robotic Precursor spaceships still functional after centuries, etc. etc., something that can judge whether something is a freighter or warship with reasonable accuracy sounds pretty trivial.
I'd rather see privateers than pirates, but one government's privateer is another's pirate.
I'm just thinking of novels like Honor Harrington (Pirates in the Silesian Confederacy) & Vatta's War which all have multiple established empires and pirates/privateers.
Also remember Pirates normally have spies spread out to give them info on juicy targets.
Of course if we have pirates we need Q Ships to fool them with.
Lee
Post by: waresky on February 15, 2009, 06:06:37 AM
but "casualty" are ever a word:"CASUALTY":D
Steve remeber very good the situation on Megatraveller (hhim love same me this game) Solomani: Vilani EMpire span in 10000 worlds ALL AROUND the puny Sol race:))))...but Vilani are Humanoid and more peaceful and oldest race,good for FIRST encounter...but "Merseians" "khanate Of orions" isnt a same "GOOD" encounter on 1 jump away..this a END of human race..
Post by: SteveAlt on February 22, 2009, 04:35:13 PM
Steve
Post by: backstab on February 23, 2009, 12:42:39 AM
Have you got an ETA on when 4.0 will be available ?
Post by: SteveAlt on February 23, 2009, 09:35:50 AM
Quote from: "backstab"
Steve,Nothing firm yet - I did think about two weeks but I keep adding new things
Have you got an ETA on when 4.0 will be available ?
, which means more testing. I also recently subscribed to Lord of the Rings Online, which is a little distracting. It's the first MMORPG in which I take time to enjoy the scenery. Rather than power-levelling as I did in EQ, DAOC, Warcraft or Warhammer, I am enjoying a leisurely stroll through a (so-far) well constructed and atmospheric game.I have a list of about thirty additional pieces of work for NPRs but very few of them will make it into v4.0 because otherwise I will never release it. Most of the remaining work for v4.0 involves testing, part of which can be done through playing my own campaign but some that will require me to setup brief new campaigns to test areas such as NPRs updating technology and ship designs as a result of research. I won't be reporting on these though. At some point I am just going to have to release it though as players will find far more bugs than I can. I just want to avoid any major problems.
Steve
Post by: Shinanygnz on February 23, 2009, 03:21:16 PM
"Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!"
And anyway, "What is this talk of 'release'? Klingons do not make software 'releases'. Our software escapes, leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake!"
And when the inevitable happens,
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Our software does not coddle the weak.
By filing this bug report you have challenged the honour of my family. Prepare to die!
You question the worthiness of my code? I should kill you where you stand!
Post by: waresky on February 23, 2009, 03:33:59 PM
from 1995 (UO my first MMOG) atm (EVE) ive been playing too many..and TOO many are DAMNED same each others..probably best (housing,skilling,research,build-items) remain forever: StarWagalaxy.
STEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVE! left the horrorifc LOTR and return into SPACE!!!
D..sigh..sigh..we awaitn with passion 4.0...sigh..pleeeeeeeeeease:)
See ya.
i will encounter Zhodani around Regina's Solar system:)))
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 23, 2009, 04:01:12 PM
Quote from: "Shinanygnz"
Think like a Klingon software developer Steve...
"Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!"
And anyway, "What is this talk of 'release'? Klingons do not make software 'releases'. Our software escapes, leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake!"
And when the inevitable happens,
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Our software does not coddle the weak.
By filing this bug report you have challenged the honour of my family. Prepare to die!
You question the worthiness of my code? I should kill you where you stand!
I see someone has been into the Emperor's Bloodwine again. (or was it his stash of Romulian Ale?)
Post by: Erik L on February 23, 2009, 04:13:54 PM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
Quote from: "backstab"Steve,Nothing firm yet - I did think about two weeks but I keep adding new things ;)
Have you got an ETA on when 4.0 will be available ?
Post by: Larac on February 25, 2009, 05:49:27 PM
1: Where there are goods worth money there will be those seeking to take them.
Like today they take the ship off load the goods then sale the ship back to the owners or Insurance company, as the ship many time is close to value as the cargo.
2: Where there are Political groups a Privateer system allows capture of ships and crew, cargo and information, without having to Declare War.
Also it serves to weaken the bonds of the farthest colonies as the home worlds are not the ones providing tech. A pirate base set up in a remote system that takes care of the populace will find a lot of friends.
And deep down it is fun to think about them.
Did you know the Age of Sail Pirates had a disability system, death benefits, and many other systems in place to t take care of their people.
Pirates in Space will work much like the wet navy ones, spies will be bribed to tell them when and where a cargo ship will be, what it is carrying and so on. Many Civ ships will also run routes supplying X to one system and carrying Y to the next, this type of commerce is very open to pirates, each stop is information.
Good Luck looking forward to the 4.0 stuff even though I am still lost on 3.2
Lee
Post by: SteveAlt on March 03, 2009, 07:25:39 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I'd ask you what server... but the EU and NA servers are separate... Silverlode is the one I'm onI am on the European roleplay server, although I can't remember the name
Steve
Post by: SteveAlt on March 03, 2009, 07:33:11 PM
Quote from: "Larac"
For me it seems there are 2 reasons to have Pirates.The problem is going to be how the pirates build the ships and how I simulate the gain of goods within the game. I have tried to simulate that players do not have total control of ther Empire through the use of civilians. To have true pirates rather than precursors I need to introduce some way for civilians to build a secret base/shipyard without being detected and then somehow use their pirate acivity to increase their capabilities or simply make money. So far I haven't found a realistic way to set that up but I haven't given up on th eidea.
1: Where there are goods worth money there will be those seeking to take them.
Like today they take the ship off load the goods then sale the ship back to the owners or Insurance company, as the ship many time is close to value as the cargo.
Quote from: "Larac"
2: Where there are Political groups a Privateer system allows capture of ships and crew, cargo and information, without having to Declare War.I like the privateer idea, although when it comes to alien races they may not distinguish so easily between privateers and the rest of the same species. Setting up some sort of government sponsored piracy though might be a possibility.
Also it serves to weaken the bonds of the farthest colonies as the home worlds are not the ones providing tech. A pirate base set up in a remote system that takes care of the populace will find a lot of friends.
Quote
And deep down it is fun to think about them.I completely agree. Having pirates to fight without having to deal with a major war adds a lot to the quiet periods in any game. I hope with precursors and hostile AI races though, players will have plenty to occupy them. Once NPRs are working well, I also intend to revisit some of the space monster ideas I have had in the past
Steve
Post by: sloanjh on March 03, 2009, 08:16:43 PM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
The problem is going to be how the pirates build the ships and how I simulate the gain of goods within the game. I have tried to simulate that players do not have total control of ther Empire through the use of civilians. To have true pirates rather than precursors I need to introduce some way for civilians to build a secret base/shipyard without being detected and then somehow use their pirate acivity to increase their capabilities or simply make money. So far I haven't found a realistic way to set that up but I haven't given up on th eidea.
Hi Steve,
Did you see my post in another thread with the idea of having pirate gunboats, or did it get lost in the noise? I assume a gunboat base is simpler to justify hiding within an existing population, and it actually is fairly realistic in terms of current day (read Somali/Indonesian) and historical pirates, most of whom (I vaguely recall reading somewhere, perhaps in Sid Meier's Pirates! docs) were a bunch of guys in a dinky boat attacking coastal trade.
If you want me to go dig it up, let me know.
Thanks,
John
Post by: SteveAlt on March 03, 2009, 08:21:44 PM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Did you see my post in another thread with the idea of having pirate gunboats, or did it get lost in the noise? I assume a gunboat base is simpler to justify hiding within an existing population, and it actually is fairly realistic in terms of current day (read Somali/Indonesian) and historical pirates, most of whom (I vaguely recall reading somewhere, perhaps in Sid Meier's Pirates! docs) were a bunch of guys in a dinky boat attacking coastal trade.Please could you repost it as I don't remember reading it.
If you want me to go dig it up, let me know.
Steve
Post by: sloanjh on March 04, 2009, 01:28:57 AM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
Please could you repost it as I don't remember reading it.
Here's a link to the thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1390&p=11915&hilit=Somalia#p11915 (http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1390&p=11915&hilit=Somalia#p11915)
Quote from: "sloanjh"
On pirates: I'm hoping this would couple in with a "domestic unrest" system, i.e. rebellious planets, economically oppressed planets, etc. One way to do this might be through gunboats (or even fighters) rather than full-up ships. I forget how hard it is to detect GB bases on a planet, but if it isn't an autodetect situation, then they could pop up on poorly-governed worlds in the same way civilian space centers do. Or a civilian cargo ship could drop a GB base off on a nearby asteroid or moon, and regularly perform re-supply runs. Or the cargo hold on a civilian ship might actually be a hangar bay for fighters. The core idea here is that piracy would be a function of lawless populations, and could actually be based on worlds controlled by the empire. One nice part of this is that it gives a motivation for having armed fleet units (and security/military units?) even if no external threats to the empire (NPR races) are present - they would be needed for piracy suppression. It could also change the garrison requirements from being hard-wired to being a decision made by players: pirate attacks would increase unhappiness (leading to lower productivity); ground forces would reduce lawlessness (reducing the chance of pirates springing up) while naval patrols would provide protection.
This model also works for "privateers" or "freedom fighters" - a conquered population might have a high chance of producing "pirate" (actually rebel) bases, while another government might spontaneously commission civilian Q-ships. The lawlessness and/or pirate/privateer probability could also be skewed by government type.
I don't have detailed knowledge of it, but my recollection is that the vast majority of historical pirates didn't have a blue-water capability; instead they were short-ranged boats full of men which preyed on coastal traffic. This seems to be what's been going on off Somalia until recently, and also the sort of pirates that have been active in Indonesia (Straights of Malacca, IIRC) for many years now. It seems like the Somalian pirates have recently gained blue-water capability by using "tenders"; this is where the idea above for civilian cargo ships that actually have hangar space for GB or fighters came from. Another observation here is that, in both cases, they're operating near choke points or navigational obstructions - the Aurora equivalent would be to find an asteroid near a heavily used asteroid and park a pirate base there.
John
ISTR making another post about this (saying that I'd really like to play an uplift game where the navy is primarily an anti-piracy force before 1st contact), but I can't find it. The central idea I'm pushing is that a GB or Fighter base could be easy to hide in the "noise" of a population. I hadn't thought in terms of trying to model the economics of the piracy - it's probably one of those low probability/high payoff things that keeps a steady flow of entrepenuers joining up. In other words, drive the probability of pirates appearing on a world based on a "lawlessness" factor rather than on economics - the model is essentially "if pirates aren't suppressed they will show up."
John
Post by: SteveAlt on March 04, 2009, 07:39:45 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
That's a very interesting idea. I guess if civilians can build a civilian space port and construct freighters, it would be possible for them to build smaller, hidden versions and construct small FAC size ships for piracy operations. The downside is that they would be fairly easy to spot leaving the planet with the use of a single tracking station and even a small PDC could then pick them off. However, if we take your second idea then it does become a real possibility. I am already considering additional missions for civilian freighters so adding a clandestine mission to create or resupply a pirate base would not be too difficult. Instead of adding infrastructure to an existing colony, they would identify a suitable out of the way moon and create or add to a new facility type (Pirate Base) that could build its own FACs in the same way a civilian space centre builds freighters. Those FACs would behave like NPR ships, except they would attempt to capture ships or their cargo, I would need to add rules for surrendering unarmed ships but I was considering that anyway. Hmm, definite possibilities! I had better not try and do it for v4.0 thoughQuote from: "SteveAlt"Please could you repost it as I don't remember reading it.
Here's a link to the thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1390&p=11915&hilit=Somalia#p11915 (http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1390&p=11915&hilit=Somalia#p11915)Quote from: "sloanjh"On pirates: I'm hoping this would couple in with a "domestic unrest" system, i.e. rebellious planets, economically oppressed planets, etc. One way to do this might be through gunboats (or even fighters) rather than full-up ships. I forget how hard it is to detect GB bases on a planet, but if it isn't an autodetect situation, then they could pop up on poorly-governed worlds in the same way civilian space centers do. Or a civilian cargo ship could drop a GB base off on a nearby asteroid or moon, and regularly perform re-supply runs. Or the cargo hold on a civilian ship might actually be a hangar bay for fighters. The core idea here is that piracy would be a function of lawless populations, and could actually be based on worlds controlled by the empire. One nice part of this is that it gives a motivation for having armed fleet units (and security/military units?) even if no external threats to the empire (NPR races) are present - they would be needed for piracy suppression. It could also change the garrison requirements from being hard-wired to being a decision made by players: pirate attacks would increase unhappiness (leading to lower productivity); ground forces would reduce lawlessness (reducing the chance of pirates springing up) while naval patrols would provide protection.
This model also works for "privateers" or "freedom fighters" - a conquered population might have a high chance of producing "pirate" (actually rebel) bases, while another government might spontaneously commission civilian Q-ships. The lawlessness and/or pirate/privateer probability could also be skewed by government type.
I don't have detailed knowledge of it, but my recollection is that the vast majority of historical pirates didn't have a blue-water capability; instead they were short-ranged boats full of men which preyed on coastal traffic. This seems to be what's been going on off Somalia until recently, and also the sort of pirates that have been active in Indonesia (Straights of Malacca, IIRC) for many years now. It seems like the Somalian pirates have recently gained blue-water capability by using "tenders"; this is where the idea above for civilian cargo ships that actually have hangar space for GB or fighters came from. Another observation here is that, in both cases, they're operating near choke points or navigational obstructions - the Aurora equivalent would be to find an asteroid near a heavily used asteroid and park a pirate base there.
John
ISTR making another post about this (saying that I'd really like to play an uplift game where the navy is primarily an anti-piracy force before 1st contact), but I can't find it. The central idea I'm pushing is that a GB or Fighter base could be easy to hide in the "noise" of a population. I hadn't thought in terms of trying to model the economics of the piracy - it's probably one of those low probability/high payoff things that keeps a steady flow of entrepenuers joining up. In other words, drive the probability of pirates appearing on a world based on a "lawlessness" factor rather than on economics - the model is essentially "if pirates aren't suppressed they will show up."
Steve
Post by: welchbloke on March 04, 2009, 08:01:37 AM
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
*SNIP*
That's a very interesting idea. I guess if civilians can build a civilian space port and construct freighters, it would be possible for them to build smaller, hidden versions and construct small FAC size ships for piracy operations. The downside is that they would be fairly easy to spot leaving the planet with the use of a single tracking station and even a small PDC could then pick them off. However, if we take your second idea then it does become a real possibility. I am already considering additional missions for civilian freighters so adding a clandestine mission to create or resupply a pirate base would not be too difficult. Instead of adding infrastructure to an existing colony, they would identify a suitable out of the way moon and create or add to a new facility type (Pirate Base) that could build its own FACs in the same way a civilian space centre builds freighters. Those FACs would behave like NPR ships, except they would attempt to capture ships or their cargo, I would need to add rules for surrendering unarmed ships but I was considering that anyway. Hmm, definite possibilities! I had better not try and do it for v4.0 though :D If you are keeping notes, can I suggest that you incoporate an oreder to turn off transponders when completing the Pirate Base actions? Also, maybe a random number of other freighters that turn off their transponders when not on pirate missions; otherwise I'm going to follow any freighter that turns off its transponder. Anti-piracy patrols would be driven to distraction.
Post by: sloanjh on March 04, 2009, 09:19:18 PM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "SteveAlt"*SNIP*
That's a very interesting idea. I guess if civilians can build a civilian space port and construct freighters, it would be possible for them to build smaller, hidden versions and construct small FAC size ships for piracy operations. The downside is that they would be fairly easy to spot leaving the planet with the use of a single tracking station and even a small PDC could then pick them off. However, if we take your second idea then it does become a real possibility. I am already considering additional missions for civilian freighters so adding a clandestine mission to create or resupply a pirate base would not be too difficult. Instead of adding infrastructure to an existing colony, they would identify a suitable out of the way moon and create or add to a new facility type (Pirate Base) that could build its own FACs in the same way a civilian space centre builds freighters. Those FACs would behave like NPR ships, except they would attempt to capture ships or their cargo, I would need to add rules for surrendering unarmed ships but I was considering that anyway. Hmm, definite possibilities! I had better not try and do it for v4.0 though :D If you are keeping notes, can I suggest that you incoporate an oreder to turn off transponders when completing the Pirate Base actions? Also, maybe a random number of other freighters that turn off their transponders when not on pirate missions; otherwise I'm going to follow any freighter that turns off its transponder. Anti-piracy patrols would be driven to distraction. :-)
John
Post by: welchbloke on March 05, 2009, 02:48:04 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Quote from: "welchbloke"Quote from: "SteveAlt"*SNIP*The idea of hordes of small craft flitting around in system has its appeal; it would certainly make the game feel more 'real'. I agree that the performance implications could be pretty big another consideration is how to display these extra craft without overwhelming the player. THe current system view would get swamped pretty quickly. Still, hopefully Steve will file this away under 'possible future upgrades' and concentrate on V4.0
That's a very interesting idea. I guess if civilians can build a civilian space port and construct freighters, it would be possible for them to build smaller, hidden versions and construct small FAC size ships for piracy operations. The downside is that they would be fairly easy to spot leaving the planet with the use of a single tracking station and even a small PDC could then pick them off. However, if we take your second idea then it does become a real possibility. I am already considering additional missions for civilian freighters so adding a clandestine mission to create or resupply a pirate base would not be too difficult. Instead of adding infrastructure to an existing colony, they would identify a suitable out of the way moon and create or add to a new facility type (Pirate Base) that could build its own FACs in the same way a civilian space centre builds freighters. Those FACs would behave like NPR ships, except they would attempt to capture ships or their cargo, I would need to add rules for surrendering unarmed ships but I was considering that anyway. Hmm, definite possibilities! I had better not try and do it for v4.0 though :D If you are keeping notes, can I suggest that you incoporate an oreder to turn off transponders when completing the Pirate Base actions? Also, maybe a random number of other freighters that turn off their transponders when not on pirate missions; otherwise I'm going to follow any freighter that turns off its transponder. Anti-piracy patrols would be driven to distraction. :-)
John
Post by: sloanjh on March 05, 2009, 07:11:38 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
another consideration is how to display these extra craft without overwhelming the player. THe current system view would get swamped pretty quickly.
Oh, that's easy - the player would simply push a "filter out small craft" button on the display and they'd all disappear. Works like a charm - right up until the point where one of those small craft makes a missile run on your battlecruiser that's sitting in a parking orbit!
John
Post by: Erik L on March 05, 2009, 10:34:43 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Quote from: "welchbloke"another consideration is how to display these extra craft without overwhelming the player. THe current system view would get swamped pretty quickly.
Oh, that's easy - the player would simply push a "filter out small craft" button on the display and they'd all disappear. Works like a charm - right up until the point where one of those small craft makes a missile run on your battlecruiser that's sitting in a parking orbit!
John
I believe Steve mentioned he was making active targetting an event. (or something to that effect).
Post by: welchbloke on March 06, 2009, 12:50:56 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
That sounds manageable.Quote from: "sloanjh"Quote from: "welchbloke"another consideration is how to display these extra craft without overwhelming the player. THe current system view would get swamped pretty quickly.
Oh, that's easy - the player would simply push a "filter out small craft" button on the display and they'd all disappear. Works like a charm - right up until the point where one of those small craft makes a missile run on your battlecruiser that's sitting in a parking orbit!
John
I believe Steve mentioned he was making active targetting an event. (or something to that effect).