Just got out of the chat room with Denny and The Beast.
...keep in mind that I have not been following this thread, and this is
just my take on what I've been told - and of course what I've added to
it
;-)
As I understand it, the discussion is on an adaptive race that can change
its systems with DCPs - or something to that effect.
The first thing I thought of when "variable systems" came up was: Sa'Vasku.
So what if we were to use a similar mechanic related to power, rather than
DCPs.
In other words, you select a MASS, which provides power generators (just like
the S'V). Do FTL and Main Drive like the S'V as well.
Now add generic nodes of various MASSes. These nodes could then be changed
in funtionality by the application of power (to the R-pool), but they
would have to be powered (out of the appropriate pool) after they changed.
Thus a node could not be powered for use on the same turn it changes.
This puts a 1 turn delay into the morphing system, which I think is a good
thing.
The node could morph into any system of equal or less MASS. Thus a MASS 9 node
could become a hangar bay, or a Class 3 Beam with 360. If you wanted to have
more adaptability, you could also let the same node become 3 Class 2 Beams
(360). I'd limit it to identicle systems for multiple system on one node.
Hangar bays would use "bio"MASS the same way the S'V do.
OK; that's my idea. Now you guys get to rip into it :-)
> The node could morph into any system of equal or less MASS. Thus a
But would you need to allocate the mass of the fighters as well as paying
biomass, ie a 14 pt node require for fighters plus hanger?
:D
From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <s_schoon@pacbell.net>
> Just got out of the chat room with Denny and The Beast.
So you've been corrupted by evil companions....
> As I understand it, the discussion is on an adaptive race that
Then we have "SV type 2", which isn't what I'm trying for. I'm trying for an
effect more like AI robots plus Motie
Brownies--except for the boarding/assault units, which will not
necessarily try to get inside your ship--they may just eat it
from the outside. <Snip Schoon's description>
As described thus far, the Machine People use Mass Pools which are divided
into the effects available. Thus a Mass 100 ship might have:
Hull Pool 40 (Default: 30 hull + 10 armor)
Drive Pool 30 (default: MD4 + FTL)
Energy Weapon Pool 25 (default: 5 PDS plus 20 mass of Beam2 and Beam3) Sensor
Pool 5 (default: 3 FC, 1 ADFC)
To change a system, you use DCP (perhaps 1 per 2 Mass?) to take it apart; on
the next turn, you can attempt to build something else, of the same or lesser
mass, with a regular DCP roll.
> But would you need to allocate the mass of the fighters as well as
No, it would still be a 9 MASS node (which is the required MASS for a fighter
bay), but you would have to use 6 "biomass" during gameplay to create to
fighters to fill the bay.
> Then we have "SV type 2", which isn't what I'm trying for.
Fair enough.
> As described thus far, the Machine People use Mass Pools which
At first glance:
1) Have the Hull pool be all hull initially - I'd say that armor would
have to be fabricated, but at an accelerated rate, like deconstruct 10 hull &
then make 10 armor out of it - rather than 1 point at a time.
2) Drive pool works for me, though to add to it, would you deconstruct weapons
and then add to the drives? That's what I would guess, but I could be wrong.
3) Say a percentage of the Weapons Pool (I wouldn't call it the Energy Pool)
is PDSs, but after that, things get more dicey. I'd say that there
would be a default percentage for each beam type (like 25%/50%/25%) with
zero of the given weapon if the result is less than the MASS for the given
battery. 4) Sensor Pool: kill the ADFC, If they need it, they can build it.
Your could thus reduce the percenytage to 3%, which is closer to existing
ships anyway.
> To change a system, you use DCP (perhaps 1 per 2 Mass?) to take
OK, your MASS 100 ship would have 5 DCPs. So it could deconstruct 10 MASS per
turn if it did nothing else with them. Construction should them also require a
number of DCP per MASS, with multiples adding to the chance of getting it
done.
If kept at 1 per 2 MASS, then you could work on 5 MASS of Class 2 Batteries
with all of them with a better chance of success.
Have I got this more or less the way you intended?
Laserlight said:
> >As described thus far, the Machine People use Mass Pools which
(My Mass 100 ship was just an example, I've not thought a great deal about
what the "real" defaults would be. And the MP would
need some new weapons and/or defenses).
Schoon said:
> At first glance:
Why?
> - I'd say that armor would have
I'd think it would be slower. Actually, I'd think it probably wouldn't happen,
I'm sure there will usually be better things to do with your limited DCP
resources.
> 2) Drive pool works for me, though to add to it, would you
I'm somewhat leary of letting people change back and forth between drives and
weapons but it might be ok.
> 3) Say a percentage of the Weapons Pool (I wouldn't call it the
I know standard FB designs have a mix of beam types but I've never understood
why. One would think we were still waiting for Dreadnought to be built.
> OK, your MASS 100 ship would have 5 DCPs.
Actually, someone--Brian Bell?--suggested the MP get 1 DCP per 10
mass.
> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
...
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, John Leary wrote:
> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
Bat Squad!! Narn Bat Squad!!!
**WHACK**WHACK**WHACK**
Now watch this thread Lear off into strange topics...
> Laserlight said:
OK.
> 1) Have the Hull pool be all hull initially
First, it would be inefficient use of MASS to have all that armor sitting
there when not needed, and you're not going to need it against all opponents.
It also gives the DCPs something to do during the approach if it turns out
that you do need it.
> - I'd say that armor would have
Initially there might not be. I'd imagine that a "generalist" MP ship would be
pretty well off "out of the box" to deal with more threats.
> I'm somewhat leary of letting people change back and forth
Otherwise you're limiting your ships to one thrust rating - EVER, and
that seems too restrictive. The thing that I think is kind of neat about the
MP is their ability to do just that: use MASS to build whatever's needed at
the time.
> I know standard FB designs have a mix of beam types but I've
The same reason that destroyers still have deck guns: designs have to be
generalist, able to deal with any eventuality - not just slugging it out
with the big boys.
Now I'll admit that it's tempting to mini-max designs solely for game
play, but I prefer to keep the spirit of "flawed" designs.
> Actually, someone--Brian Bell?--suggested the MP get 1 DCP per 10
I'd suggest tailoring the abilities of the DCPs to keep the 1 DCP per 20 MASS.
It keeps things simple, and it's much easier to adjust the abilities of the
DCPs. If you want them to be able to do more, then make them able to tinker
with 3 or 4 MASS.