• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Computer Damage

vegascat

SOC-13
When computers take damage from weapons fire or radiation, they do not stop functioning, instead they degrade in function. How can we account for that? You slam a hunk of shrapnel through any computer and you have scrap metal, not a functional machine. You hit a Mod 9 computer with a ship laser and you end up with the computing power of a Mod 8.
 
Originally posted by vegascat:
When computers take damage from weapons fire or radiation, they do not stop functioning, instead they degrade in function. How can we account for that? You slam a hunk of shrapnel through any computer and you have scrap metal, not a functional machine. You hit a Mod 9 computer with a ship laser and you end up with the computing power of a Mod 8.
I assume a parallel computer architecture, with one hit only knocking out part of the system. The rest of the parallel architecture reroutes itself around the damaged area.
 
MAssive parallel computer architeture could be another good reason for having computers take up so much tonnage on a ship. Programing and isolating systems so damage doesn't frag the entire system would be a programmers dream of job security.
 
Progressive computer damage also makes for a more interesting game, as you're forced to work with gradually decreasing resources. If the computer just died with a single hit, the ship would die along with it, since it'd be unable to maneuver or fire weapons.

Oh, and I like your take on the way this reinforces Traveller's "too big" computers. Some folks whine that "my desktop/laptop/palm could run a ship." Yeah, well hit it with a massive laser and see if it still works! ;)
 
OK, so the ship's computer is four shoe-boxes distributed around the bridge instead of a hatbox. Or more likely twenty cigarette packs.

Trying to make it 24 m3 or more in the name of redundancy shows a 1970 Popular Mechanics view of computer technology. What is even more preposterous is the idea that computers get bigger at higher tech levels.

I can't argue against it working in abstract game terms, but it shatters "suspension of disbelief" for tech-savvy players. If you ignore the program rules, a la Book 5, you can treat the "computer" percentage as a sensor/fire control suite that could well be that size.
 
questions about Traveller and computers goes all the way back to"77". this questionis more on the human side of the equasion....should humans or what ever turn over the operation of ship systems, ENTIRLY to computers - even if extreamly advanced??? would you trust them???? would you feel right in giving up controll?? :confused: :confused:
 
Not if the Virus is around! :eek:
toast.gif
 
how about this for a solution - Thousand o computers (pin head size) scattered around, all over the ship with many safty devices around each one.....therefor you would have to destroy the entire ship to stop it!!! you would not ever lose control. ;)
 
Computers above "3" normally affect targetting, so I assumed the "computer" tonnage was a sensor/fire control suite, which degraded with hits as various sensors and processors were damaged.

As for Navigation and ship operations I assumed they would be controlled by dedicated processors distributed around the ship, many on the bridge or in Engineering. One obvious difference would be how the systems interfaced with the crew. I worked out some rules on that.

These interfaces were generally standard on computers at the appropriate TL, no extra cost. They are first introduced on big dedicated machines, +1 TL on ship and office computers, +2 TL on personal computers, +3 TL on handheld computers. (ie, at TL 13 your Ships computer may be an AI, and your pocket PDA would have an Artificial Personality.

Punchcards & teletype (or alphanumeric display) TL5

Keyboard & Graphic display (GUI) TL6

Verbal Interface (TL7) Just uses verbal commands and spoken responses instead of the keyboard. Think classic Star Trek. I used maritime protocals to prevent mistakes from misinterpreted orders (if it works shouting orders in a gale, it should work for a dumb machine on a quiet bridge.)
For example, "Shut down engines"
"Shut down power plant, aye"
"Belay that! Secure the MANEUVER drive."
"Belay powerplant shutdown aye. Secure maneuver drive, aye."
pause
"Maneuver drive is secured"

Artificial Personality (TL9) Adds social amenities, but may not always be appropriate (like the ship in Hitch Hikers Guide). Seldom used for crew functions, but often for PDA.
"Good morning, Ms Vanaprul, this is the morning of your seventh day on 'The Duchess of Regina', and thank you for choosing Tukhera lines, the safest way to travel in the Spinward Marches. Breakfast is now being served in the lounge, or a continental breakfast can be sent to your room. The Captain asked me to tell you that we did not come out of jump as expected last night, and that may cause some inconvenience. Have a GREAT day."

Artificial Intelligence TL12 The computer is aware of it's environment and can draw conclusions and make appropriate choices, but, like an idiot savant, only in some areas. Like Hal 9000, "We have a problem in engineering. I know we have been using it heavily, but following the guidelines programmed at the last overhaul, I am shutting down the maneuver drive for repairs." With expert systems (and sometimes a manipulator or robot) installed it can act as a crewman in an emergency at a skill level 1/2 the expert program.

Self Aware TL 14 We are talking about a full silicon-germanium NPC here. Its feelings can be hurt (although it also has professionalism) and with social skills even. "When I was fixing the coolant leak after the Pirates chased us, I saw some suspicious tool marks on the fittings. Captain, I know the manager of Smithson's Shiprights is a friend of yours, but the pirates may have bribed one of his techs. I suggest we get our repairs done in a different yard this time." A self-aware computer can take full advantage of Expert system programs, and may or may not pass port clearance regulations as a crewman.

At TL16 we can have fully automated ships.

You can also buy "expert systems" programs that will assist a player with specialist knowledge and proceedures.
If the PC has no expertise in that field but a basic understanding of the tools and equipment (i.e. a Engineer trying to Navigate, etc), he can perform as if he had a skill of 1/2 the program level. If the character has at least one level of the appropriate skill he can use his skill or the programs skill, whichever is higher.
TL applies to engineering programs: -1 for every 2 TL higher, -1 for every 3 TL lower. I.e., a +2 TL10 program is +1 with a TL12 or TL13 drive, no help with a TL14+. A +2 TL14 pogram is only +1 with an old TL8-11 drive

Price varied. Ship skills were about a 100KCr/level
 
Think about the avionics on a modern 777. Modern Airliners use 3 computers for each flight system. 2 out of the 3 computers must agree on a result before it is passed to the pilot, and this is without "combat damage". Now lets take a look at the space shuttle, while it was designed a LOONG time ago and alot of its systems are badly in need of an update there are a lot of things that it doesn't do that a free trader would need to do. Jump drive computations come to mind right away. You DEFINATELY want redundant systems on that. Finally, even if the computers were tiny remember that the user interface will hit a minimum size. Sure you may be able to run a starship on your pocket watch, but try to fly it on those itty bitty buttons with your 50 year old space marine fingers. Membrane keyboards went out in the late eighies for a reason.
 
Interface is why you have that fat bridge percentage. And IIRC the shuttles computers have been upgraded, so now the three shoeboxes are half empty.
 
So the reasons computers are so large and degradable when taking damage is:

The computer mass includes sensors.
The computer is sublocated in many different systems.
Computer systems are built in parallel with several processors working in sinc.
The computer connection boxes and wireing take room.
Computer interfaces, keyboards, screens take room.
The computer does a huge amount of processing when needed.
Storage of data takes room, star charts, programs, ect.

Any adds to the list?
 
Just a thought to chew on.

I have read many posts in many places about the size of computers in Traveller. I agree, the rules were probably quite heavily influenced by 1970's understanding of computer technology. However, practically all of the arguements for reducing the computer size are based on 1990's understanding of computer technology. Both sides are using the same assumption, namely: "computers in the future will be like computers are now." This is a logical fallacy. There is simply no way to predict what any technology will be like two hundred or five thousand years from now. In my Traveller universe, I accept the computer sizes as given because to do otherwise makes my ship designs incompatible with anyone else playing Trav or HG. Whether or not its plausible for a ship to be run by a 24 ton mainframe or a 2 lb laptop is not the issue. If you prefer smaller computers, go that way and no hard feelings, but you lose compatability with other published designs.

Jut my Cr0.02,

Bob
 
Uh, we know that the TL 7-8 computers are wrong. It would appear that TL15 computers are less powerful than RW computers.

For the cannon computers to be near right we must assume the concept of the integrated circuit was lost shortly after contact with the 1st Empire, and never rediscovered in a thousand years on ten-thousand worlds.

I would rather tweak a couple of paragraphs in Books 2 and 5 than make that leap. And my tweaks don't require changing the designs or the Book 5 combat.
 
Uh, we know that the TL 7-8 computers are wrong. It would appear that TL15 computers are less powerful than RW computers.
Sorry, Uncle Bob I can't agree. Since this is a game, we can theorize and guess about the computational requirements necessary to run a Jump-3 program or integrate all the electronics on a 100 KDtn starship. But that's all it is, a guess. The LBBs never say why computers are such-and-such size. Which is unspecific enough that we can make the computers IYTU the size we want because it works for us, not because they have to be that way.
I would rather tweak a couple of paragraphs in Books 2 and 5 than make that leap. And my tweaks don't require changing the designs or the Book 5 combat.
Well, if you shrink the computers down to shoebox size, yes that does change the designs. On a Tigress that change is a tiny % of the total tonnage, but for PC ships, especially the Type S, those extra tons matter - you can put more other stuff in instead. Which means your Type S is probably a better ship than mine, but an unfair one if it crosses over to MTU.
Which was my conclusion from before. If your small-computer ships never get used outside a game where everyone has them, you can ignore everything I'm saying.

Peace,

Bob
 
Back
Top