Self-Jump only Jump Drives

[nuclearslurpee (OP)]

Suggestion: add an in-game option to design single-ship jump drives.

Main reason for this suggestion is to enable roleplay settings where each ship has its own hyperdrive/warp drive/etc. (Star Wars, Star Trek...). Currently this can be done but (1) using the 'appropriate' tech level for jump drive efficiency (by RP) makes it very difficult to design effective ships due to the large size of low-tech jump drives, and (2) SMing to a much higher jump drive tech makes doing research into jump drives impractical, which is unfortunate for players who still want to see technological development over time.

I've thought about how this could work mechanically and my idea right now is this:

• Add a checkbox or dropdown option to the component design window for jump drives that creates a single-ship jump drive. EDIT: I forgot to specify, but if it's not clear - these should be smaller than normal jump drives.
• Single-ship jump drives can only be used to transit the ship they are mounted on, and cannot be used as jump tenders for other ships.
• Squadron jumps (of a single-ship squadron) are still possible with this drive, which means the squadron jump distance tech remains useful.
• Cost could be based on the reduced jump drive size. EDIT: Or equal to the cost of the normal jump drive divided by whatever factor the size is reduced by, to avoid a bad interaction with the cost scaling rule (size^1.8 scaling).
• This implementation would also mean that regular and single-ship drives can be used in the same campaign which maximizes decision-making and roleplay opportunities. 
• Fleets transiting a jump point would keep the current implementation of checking for a suitable multi-ship jump drive, but if this check is failed then an additional check would be run for each ship that cannot be transited to see if they have a single-ship jump drive.

Optionally, the size of a single-ship jump drive could be reduced, compared to the multi-ship version, by a factor of (Jump Squadron Size - 1). This means the Jump Squadron Size tech remains useful, although I guess maybe this could be confusing based on the name and description of that tech. However, this may be too efficient of a miniaturization approach combined with improvements in jump drive efficiency.

This implementation, since it allows both types of jump drive to coexist in the same game, also would not impact NPRs (unless Steve decided to let them use this feature), which I think is important.

[Steve Walmsley]

Suggestion: add an in-game option to design single-ship jump drives.

Main reason for this suggestion is to enable roleplay settings where each ship has its own hyperdrive/warp drive/etc. (Star Wars, Star Trek...). Currently this can be done but (1) using the 'appropriate' tech level for jump drive efficiency (by RP) makes it very difficult to design effective ships due to the large size of low-tech jump drives, and (2) SMing to a much higher jump drive tech makes doing research into jump drives impractical, which is unfortunate for players who still want to see technological development over time.

I've thought about how this could work mechanically and my idea right now is this:

• Add a checkbox or dropdown option to the component design window for jump drives that creates a single-ship jump drive. EDIT: I forgot to specify, but if it's not clear - these should be smaller than normal jump drives.
• Single-ship jump drives can only be used to transit the ship they are mounted on, and cannot be used as jump tenders for other ships.
• Squadron jumps (of a single-ship squadron) are still possible with this drive, which means the squadron jump distance tech remains useful.
• Cost could be based on the reduced jump drive size. EDIT: Or equal to the cost of the normal jump drive divided by whatever factor the size is reduced by, to avoid a bad interaction with the cost scaling rule (size^1.8 scaling).
• This implementation would also mean that regular and single-ship drives can be used in the same campaign which maximizes decision-making and roleplay opportunities. 
• Fleets transiting a jump point would keep the current implementation of checking for a suitable multi-ship jump drive, but if this check is failed then an additional check would be run for each ship that cannot be transited to see if they have a single-ship jump drive.

Optionally, the size of a single-ship jump drive could be reduced, compared to the multi-ship version, by a factor of (Jump Squadron Size - 1). This means the Jump Squadron Size tech remains useful, although I guess maybe this could be confusing based on the name and description of that tech. However, this may be too efficient of a miniaturization approach combined with improvements in jump drive efficiency.

This implementation, since it allows both types of jump drive to coexist in the same game, also would not impact NPRs (unless Steve decided to let them use this feature), which I think is important.

Interesting idea. The trick is going to be making it useful for single ships designed for operating alone, without making it so good that it becomes the default rather than an option. Perhaps half normal size would be the right ball park. Also, there is scope for bugs as I would have to find every reference to jump drives or transits in the code and modify it to deal with this.

If this was intended for large ships only, an alternative would be to scale jump drives so they become more efficient with size. That way the Enterprise or a Star Destroyer could have a jump drive that is small in proportion to its size. That would require only a minor code change. If however, you want jump-capable X-wings, it wouldn't work.

Or a combination - self-jump-only drives scale with size, but squadron jump drives don't.

Or we just move to a model where self-jumping is the norm and jump drives are expensive but compact, so that you would tend to use jump drives on most military ships while using tenders and jump gates for commercial traffic. In fact, this could be done very easily by just changing the efficiency of jump drives so they are a lot smaller. You could still have squadron jumps, but you generally wouldn't need them because most ships would be jump-capable.

In fact, I'll start a separate thread so we don't hog the suggestions thread.

[Steve Walmsley]

(Response from Xenoscepter)

 --- Since we're bringing it up, I've floated a few ideas of differing levels of involvement here before. Jump Drives, and particularly Self-Jump drives were one of the things I've proposed on more than one occassion before.

 --- http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12495.msg150013#msg150013 On the subject of a quick n' dirty implementation of Self-Jump.

 --- http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11754.msg138830#msg138830 A full-bore revamp of Jump Mechanics, making them work in a way that allows far more flexibility for jump ship desgins and jump doctrine in general.

[nuclearslurpee (OP)]

Interesting idea. The trick is going to be making it useful for single ships designed for operating alone, without making it so good that it becomes the default rather than an option. Perhaps half normal size would be the right ball park. Also, there is scope for bugs as I would have to find every reference to jump drives or transits in the code and modify it to deal with this.

This was originally my reason for having the size reduction be a factor of (Jump Squadron Size - 1), so that an actual squadron jump ship of a given number would always be more efficient than the same number of single-ship jump drives. I was worried that this would make the single-ship jump drives too small, and since increasing the squadron size of a jump drive also increases the drive size, I think it would not work as well as I originally thought which is why I labeled it as "optional".

Another model could be to add a size reduction tech, in that case I would probably recommend having it follow the Gauss progression - Single-Ship Jump Drive Size Reduction 2 costs 5000 RP, Single-Ship Jump Drive Size Reduction 3 costs 15000 RP, and so on. This way Jump Squadron Size is comparatively cheaper but we can still get up to some large size reduction at higher tech levels which are reflective of an Enterprise, Imperial II, etc.

If this was intended for large ships only, an alternative would be to scale jump drives so they become more efficient with size. That way the Enterprise or a Star Destroyer could have a jump drive that is small in proportion to its size. That would require only a minor code change. If however, you want jump-capable X-wings, it wouldn't work.

Yes, I think the player base clamors for X-wings. 

Or we just move to a model where self-jumping is the norm and jump drives are expensive but compact, so that you would tend to use jump drives on most military ships while using tenders and jump gates for commercial traffic. In fact, this could be done very easily by just changing the efficiency of jump drives so they are a lot smaller. You could still have squadron jumps, but you generally wouldn't need them because most ships would be jump-capable.

I think we still want squadron jumps, even if they are single-ship squadrons, otherwise jump point assaults become very thorny.

In fact, I'll start a separate thread so we don't hog the suggestions thread.

One other benefit I've thought of for single-ship jump drives, mechanically, is that it opens up a lot more space for early-game survey ship designs - I'm thinking that it would become easier to mount light point defenses or other defensive weapons, or become feasible to put a small buoy dropper + magazine on smaller survey ships.

[Steve Walmsley]

Maybe the change is much simpler. I just make jump drives smaller - maybe half their current size, but still about the same cost. All the other mechanics remain the same. All I need to do is double the efficiency techs. Perhaps also adding some increased efficiency for larger ships.

[xenoscepter]

 --- I had a 1am brainfart as I passed into sleep.

What if, there was a dropdown or a checkbox or something, labeled "Compact Jump Drive" It doubled the Efficiency of said Jump Drive and halved the size of it as well. This means that the resultant Compact Jump Drive is the same efficiency as a normal one, since Jump Efficiency scales to size AFAIK.

HOWEVER, this Compact Jump Drive is self-jump only. So, while being half the size, and the same efficiency per ton, it only jumps one ship. Potentially make it a third option in the Military / Commerical dropdown, and have it be universal for the sake of simplicity. Or a function of the Squadron Jump selection dropdown, replacing the current Self-Jump option therein.

EDIT: Oops, we had the same idea Steve... lol!

[Nori]

I like this idea. The last few games I just forwent jump drives and built gates everywhere. Slowed down exploring but one less ship type to build.

[nuclearslurpee (OP)]

Maybe the change is much simpler. I just make jump drives smaller - maybe half their current size, but still about the same cost. All the other mechanics remain the same. All I need to do is double the efficiency techs. Perhaps also adding some increased efficiency for larger ships.

I like this idea, since even with 'normal' jump ships they are probably my least favorite class to design. With this change jump ships can have more creativity in design, but will be correspondingly more expensive if jump drive costs remain the same (i.e., 2x the cost for the same size compared to presently).

[Steve Walmsley]

I'm considering the change below, which improves efficiency considerably as jump rating increases. I'd also halve all the existing research costs for size rating, so 6 would be equivalent to the current 5 in terms of research cost.

This doesn't add self-jump as a concept, but it does make jump drives much more of a normal design consideration, rather than reserved for specialised ships.

I might still play around with cost or the modifier a little, but this shows the general principles

[nuclearslurpee (OP)]

Cost = Military HS / Base Efficiency * 5

Do my eyes deceive me, or does this mean the end of the Size^1.8 scaling we've had since forever?

To be honest, I kind of like the current cost scaling in principle because it means that the ability to cost-effectively transit larger ships through jump points is progressively enabled as you tech up. However, in practice it is more restrictive than fun especially when trying to do things like WH40K roleplay with big ships. I could go either way on this one.

Otherwise looks good, a relatively light touch compared to the single-ship jump drive idea but it will open up a lot of design space for jump ships that are still useful contributors to a fleet.

[Steve Walmsley]

Cost = Military HS / Base Efficiency * 5

Do my eyes deceive me, or does this mean the end of the Size^1.8 scaling we've had since forever?

To be honest, I kind of like the current cost scaling in principle because it means that the ability to cost-effectively transit larger ships through jump points is progressively enabled as you tech up. However, in practice it is more restrictive than fun especially when trying to do things like WH40K roleplay with big ships. I could go either way on this one.

Otherwise looks good, a relatively light touch compared to the single-ship jump drive idea but it will open up a lot of design space for jump ships that are still useful contributors to a fleet.

Yes, I tried different scaling all the way down to 1.1x, but in the end I questioned why larger jump drives had to be much more expensive per HS of jump rating as there are no other components that follow a similar rule. Now the larger jump drives are more expensive per HS of jump drive size, but the same in terms of HS rating.

On the second point, I was originally trying to make larger jump drives harder to achieve but you are correct that the game play restriction seems more of an issue. Also, for very large, expensive ships I found myself not creating jump-capable versions because I could only afford a limited number and a jump drive seemed wasteful. For smaller, more numerous, ships jump-capable versions were more useful. With the above, I can do both.

The other advantage of this is that the AI code can mainly be left alone but NPRs will still receive the benefits of the change. I may adjust the composition of some operational groups, but that is just database editing.

[superstrijder15]

Larger components such as large jump drives already get higher costs in that they require more maintenance supply when they break down and they are more likely to be hit when a maintenance failure happens, so in that way building larger ships is also already discouraged as I understand it

[nuclearslurpee (OP)]

On the second point, I was originally trying to make larger jump drives harder to achieve but you are correct that the game play restriction seems more of an issue. Also, for very large, expensive ships I found myself not creating jump-capable versions because I could only afford a limited number and a jump drive seemed wasteful. For smaller, more numerous, ships jump-capable versions were more useful. With the above, I can do both.

I've found something similar, particularly because while you can build a lot of large ships in principle they each require a lot more facilities and MSP production to maintain, which already limits their numbers quite a lot. Using one or more of your limited capital ships for a jump drive version always feels sad, so this new change should help a lot with that.

[Steve Walmsley]

I've updated the code and the above change will be in v2.4.0
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13367.msg166586#msg166586