snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello everyone,
I think I have stumbled upon why the EP listed for the various Ship's Computers in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) table on p. 263 and the Standard Designs table on p. 282 are different. Further, I may have a rough idea on how to fix the EP differences.
Simply put the two tables are based on different criteria. The SSDS is based on the Computer Models Table in CT: Book 5 High Guard p. 26, while the Standard Design table on p. 282 are based on a combination of the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) and SSDS rules.
IIRC, Hunter Gordon mentioned that the fuel purification plant on p. 267 of the SSDS is based on the Starship Construction rules in CT: Book 5 High Guard (HG) p. 36, which is an expansion of CT: Book 2 Starships. Combining the 4 tables of the Ship's Computer steps in the SSDS, pp.263-264, into one table and then comparing this table with HG's Computer Models table, p. 26, we see that they are similar. Here is a breakdown of how similar the combined T20 Ship's Computers tables match with HG's Computer Models table:
1. CT/T20 Model #, TL, EP, CT-Ship/T20-Ship Size
are the same.
2. 8 of 11 CT Ton/T20 Size match in volume.
3. 3 of 11 Cost factors match.
4. None of the CT Capacity match with T20
Processing Power numbers.
The Computer Models listed in HG are, at least in my view, the most advanced and optimized systems at the indicated TL. However, HG doesn't break down the systems into the different sub-systems as in the SSDS or the CDS on which the Ship's Computer table on p. 282 is based.
Please note that Errata dated Nov. 02 and Mar. 03, indicated that the ship's computer models on p. 282 are based on advanced synaptic core units which appear at TL 13 and are Master systems. Also note that the latest errata updates for Chapters 13 have dropped any mention of Standard Ship's Computer.
The Ship's Computer table on p. 282 is based on a combination of requirements from the Computer Core and Type and Model rules/tables and the text rules listed in the CDS and Ship's Computer section of the SSDS.
Light bulb blinks on: Possible Errata suggestion: Change Type column header to Model and Model to Type/Rating of the table on p. 282. Hopefully that eliminates some of the confusion. Okay, back to my explanation.
To help illustrate and, hopefully, dispel mass confusion I'll start comparing the Size (p. 263) and Volume (p. 282) from tables for Ship's Computer(s), which I feel provides a link between the two tables. Additionally, I determined that using 1350 vl per displacement ton results in an exact match between the units of measure in the CDS and SSDS. Additionally, if 1400 vl is used a close match can be made by rounding. I will use the Model/1 M1 from the Ship's Computer table p. 282 and use 1350 vl to, hopefully, support my idea.
1. The SSDS Ship's Computers table lists a Model/1 as having a Size of .1 dtons, while the Stand Design table has a Model/1 M1 (Master/Rating 1) with a Volume of 135 vl. Multiplying .1 by 1350 vl results in a volume of 135 vl, which matches the Volume on Standard Design table. As indicated errata dated Nov. 02 and Mar. 03 the computers in the table on p. 282 use an advanced synaptic core which is available at TL 13.
2. Multiplying the 1000 units from p. 282 by the Advanced Synaptic volume factor of .135 a match is created with the Volume in the standard design table and by dividing 135 by 1350 we verify that the Size is also a match.
3. Multiplying 1000 by .009 EP factor in the CDS matches the 9 EP listed on p. 282. Unfortunately, p. 282 does not, even with the suggested action of dividing the EP by 10, match with p. 263.
4. Multiplying 1000 by 10 results in a CPU Output of 10,000, which after multiplying 2500 by 4 under the Column header is a match. My interpretation is that the total CPU Output is broken down to support the core, flight avionics, sensors, and communications system components.
5. Moving to the Computer Type and Model table on p. 224 we check-out the requirements for a Model/1 M1 (Master Rating 1) system on p. 282 and Model/1 on p. 263. Note: Erratum dated Jun. 03 changed the last column header in the SSDS Ship's Computers table from Free CPU Output to Processing Power (PP) and the data underneath to reflect Total/Max factors. The second row of the Computer Type and Model table, under the Master header across from the 1, matches the Processing Power requirements. An additional requirement to earn the rating of a Master 1 rating and Model/1 is that the Model/1 M1 (p. 282) computer meet the CPU Output? Req number of 1000. In this case a Model/1 M1 must have a minimum CPU Output? Req of 1,000. The Model/1 M1 system listed on p. 282 has a Output? of 2500 per sub-component, core, avionics, sensors, and communications, which exceeds the CPU Output? Req of 1,000 qualifying for a Model 1 but not Model 2. So far the standard design Model/1 M1 is tracking nicely, except for of course EP.
How can EP be adjusted when using the CDS to design a Ship's Computer?
One of the first items to consider is which of the Type/Ratings in the Type and Model table on p. 224 are the Computer Cores EP factor based on that will result in the EP rating of 7 for a SSDS Ship's Computer Model/7?
Here is away that appears to resolve the issue of the EP difference between the tables on pp. 263 and 282:
The highest Computer Type and Model that can be created at TL 13 is an Expert/7 Model 7. To qualify for this rating the CPU Output? Req is 153,000. To achieve this level an advanced synaptic core must have an at least 15,300 units. For a Ship's Computer to be classified as a Model/7 the system must have 153,000 (x4) or a total CPU Output of 612,000. This means that an advanced synaptic core needs 61,200 units. To match the EP statistic of 7 as listed on p. 263 the factor on the Core table p. 224 should be approximately .0001438. I found this value by 7/61,200. Of course the negative side of this suggestion also means that the Cost, Volume, and EP values in the Core table would need to be adjusted.
Another way maybe to alter the Ship's Computers table EP on p. 263 to match the results of the CDS.
This is the seventh attempt I've made at posting the above and I hope that you all can make some sense of what I wrote. This is a very difficult post.
I think I have stumbled upon why the EP listed for the various Ship's Computers in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) table on p. 263 and the Standard Designs table on p. 282 are different. Further, I may have a rough idea on how to fix the EP differences.
Simply put the two tables are based on different criteria. The SSDS is based on the Computer Models Table in CT: Book 5 High Guard p. 26, while the Standard Design table on p. 282 are based on a combination of the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) and SSDS rules.
IIRC, Hunter Gordon mentioned that the fuel purification plant on p. 267 of the SSDS is based on the Starship Construction rules in CT: Book 5 High Guard (HG) p. 36, which is an expansion of CT: Book 2 Starships. Combining the 4 tables of the Ship's Computer steps in the SSDS, pp.263-264, into one table and then comparing this table with HG's Computer Models table, p. 26, we see that they are similar. Here is a breakdown of how similar the combined T20 Ship's Computers tables match with HG's Computer Models table:
1. CT/T20 Model #, TL, EP, CT-Ship/T20-Ship Size
are the same.
2. 8 of 11 CT Ton/T20 Size match in volume.
3. 3 of 11 Cost factors match.
4. None of the CT Capacity match with T20
Processing Power numbers.
The Computer Models listed in HG are, at least in my view, the most advanced and optimized systems at the indicated TL. However, HG doesn't break down the systems into the different sub-systems as in the SSDS or the CDS on which the Ship's Computer table on p. 282 is based.
Please note that Errata dated Nov. 02 and Mar. 03, indicated that the ship's computer models on p. 282 are based on advanced synaptic core units which appear at TL 13 and are Master systems. Also note that the latest errata updates for Chapters 13 have dropped any mention of Standard Ship's Computer.
The Ship's Computer table on p. 282 is based on a combination of requirements from the Computer Core and Type and Model rules/tables and the text rules listed in the CDS and Ship's Computer section of the SSDS.
Light bulb blinks on: Possible Errata suggestion: Change Type column header to Model and Model to Type/Rating of the table on p. 282. Hopefully that eliminates some of the confusion. Okay, back to my explanation. To help illustrate and, hopefully, dispel mass confusion I'll start comparing the Size (p. 263) and Volume (p. 282) from tables for Ship's Computer(s), which I feel provides a link between the two tables. Additionally, I determined that using 1350 vl per displacement ton results in an exact match between the units of measure in the CDS and SSDS. Additionally, if 1400 vl is used a close match can be made by rounding. I will use the Model/1 M1 from the Ship's Computer table p. 282 and use 1350 vl to, hopefully, support my idea.
1. The SSDS Ship's Computers table lists a Model/1 as having a Size of .1 dtons, while the Stand Design table has a Model/1 M1 (Master/Rating 1) with a Volume of 135 vl. Multiplying .1 by 1350 vl results in a volume of 135 vl, which matches the Volume on Standard Design table. As indicated errata dated Nov. 02 and Mar. 03 the computers in the table on p. 282 use an advanced synaptic core which is available at TL 13.
2. Multiplying the 1000 units from p. 282 by the Advanced Synaptic volume factor of .135 a match is created with the Volume in the standard design table and by dividing 135 by 1350 we verify that the Size is also a match.
3. Multiplying 1000 by .009 EP factor in the CDS matches the 9 EP listed on p. 282. Unfortunately, p. 282 does not, even with the suggested action of dividing the EP by 10, match with p. 263.
4. Multiplying 1000 by 10 results in a CPU Output of 10,000, which after multiplying 2500 by 4 under the Column header is a match. My interpretation is that the total CPU Output is broken down to support the core, flight avionics, sensors, and communications system components.
5. Moving to the Computer Type and Model table on p. 224 we check-out the requirements for a Model/1 M1 (Master Rating 1) system on p. 282 and Model/1 on p. 263. Note: Erratum dated Jun. 03 changed the last column header in the SSDS Ship's Computers table from Free CPU Output to Processing Power (PP) and the data underneath to reflect Total/Max factors. The second row of the Computer Type and Model table, under the Master header across from the 1, matches the Processing Power requirements. An additional requirement to earn the rating of a Master 1 rating and Model/1 is that the Model/1 M1 (p. 282) computer meet the CPU Output? Req number of 1000. In this case a Model/1 M1 must have a minimum CPU Output? Req of 1,000. The Model/1 M1 system listed on p. 282 has a Output? of 2500 per sub-component, core, avionics, sensors, and communications, which exceeds the CPU Output? Req of 1,000 qualifying for a Model 1 but not Model 2. So far the standard design Model/1 M1 is tracking nicely, except for of course EP.
How can EP be adjusted when using the CDS to design a Ship's Computer?
One of the first items to consider is which of the Type/Ratings in the Type and Model table on p. 224 are the Computer Cores EP factor based on that will result in the EP rating of 7 for a SSDS Ship's Computer Model/7?
Here is away that appears to resolve the issue of the EP difference between the tables on pp. 263 and 282:
The highest Computer Type and Model that can be created at TL 13 is an Expert/7 Model 7. To qualify for this rating the CPU Output? Req is 153,000. To achieve this level an advanced synaptic core must have an at least 15,300 units. For a Ship's Computer to be classified as a Model/7 the system must have 153,000 (x4) or a total CPU Output of 612,000. This means that an advanced synaptic core needs 61,200 units. To match the EP statistic of 7 as listed on p. 263 the factor on the Core table p. 224 should be approximately .0001438. I found this value by 7/61,200. Of course the negative side of this suggestion also means that the Cost, Volume, and EP values in the Core table would need to be adjusted.
Another way maybe to alter the Ship's Computers table EP on p. 263 to match the results of the CDS.
This is the seventh attempt I've made at posting the above and I hope that you all can make some sense of what I wrote. This is a very difficult post.
