• 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.

Starship design question: controls (p. 345) and evaluating (p. 348)

Lycan,

In general, I co-locate the computer with the control section, though it typically is in an adjacent access area or room.

Most of my control consoles are at least semi-intelligent for redundancy. It is conceivable to have a single console do all, and be considered a bridge, but I put a size limit on the ship in that case. You get to the point it is too complex a system to have a single person responsible while still maintaining efficiency.

Bridge can be as loosely defined as you would like. I consider the bridge to be the primary focal point for control of the ship, whether they are repeaters or the true hardware.

As usual, YMMV.
 
I think the limiting factor on consoles linking to multiple control panels is the requirement to split available C+S between control panels. This creates the possibility of a one-person operated Type S Scout/Courier for routine operations while limiting it's performance for some tasks, particularly combat; at minimal staffing the one person can operate three consoles - in routine operations this would be no problem for one person; pilot ship to jump point (control console linked to M-drive plus control console linked to sensors); plot jump (operating console linked to J-drive plus control console linked to sensors plus ship's computer); initiate jump (control console linked to jump drive plus console linked to ship's computer). For many routine operations in a Jump-2 ship, available C+S of 9 or more (i.e. TL9+) means a Jump-1 calculation is a certainty, and at TL12 a Jump-2 calculation is a certainty. This would make our TL12 Type S a popular model.

If we split one control console between all of these panels, we would have to divide its available C+S between all these tasks, although the Ship's Computer could lend its power.

So although the ship's design sequence can be read on its own, for practical purposes the rulebook has to be read in an integrated way.
 
So although the ship's design sequence can be read on its own, for practical purposes the rulebook has to be read in an integrated way.

That's true, for certain. I'm trying to streamline the starship building process using RObject's notes, the T5 rules and his tool on the Pocket Empires site. Determining appropriate crew and then allocating space for them is proving my biggest challenge at the moment. I don't have a good handle on how to do it yet.
 
If we split one control console between all of these panels, we would have to divide its available C+S between all these tasks, although the Ship's Computer could lend its power.

The consoles as described are self contained computers in themselves - task enablers vs task resolvers. They are quite happy to run the systems on their own, but need an external source to execute decisions they propose. They have a C+S+K based on their tech.

The 'master' computer has a have a C+S+K based on tech, but is able to make its own decisions, or take over the functions of the console (up to its model number). So a 'model 2 bis' can control three consoles at once directly without human input.

In that case, instead of the computer "taking over" the console (limited by model), just have the computer "press the GO button" on the console and thus it has no limit on control - the actual work is done by the local console. Put a brain in the computer and you dont need anyone on the consoles no matter what the ship size. The computer just runs around pressing "Go" on the consoles which it can do in nanoseconds. Or simply rip out the consoles altogether (save money and space) and plug the system directly into the computer. You have a single pilot console and eveything else is handled directly by the computer. A model 4 should be able to handle 90% of small ships (power, drives, astrogation, sensors) by itself.

So although the ship's design sequence can be read on its own, for practical purposes the rulebook has to be read in an integrated way.

No arguements there, which is where a lot of the problems are. I've been flicking back and forth trying to find bits concerning other bits, etc
 
Back
Top