Frozen Watchbots

[kilemall]

Simply put, why is the Frozen Watch humans? Why not bots?


I expect part of the reason is cost, having a bunch of capable bots in reserve is capital-intensive, especially if they are not being used all the time. The robot use case is dependent on 24/7 utilization without the frailties of flesh, bots reserved for Frozen Watch (robowatch?) would be a more expensive 'ship reclamation insurance policy'


We could probably presume that robots are part of everyday operations, wrapped into the high cost of the ship equipment and the maintenance (annual/monthly, whatever). This would be for additional battle/exploration damage capabilities.


Depending on what was allowed, probably could fit 2x as many robots into the same space. Need a robot equivalent of medical station and staterooms for regular operations if the bots are to keep the ship flying after the battle back to the shipyard.



Of course you could do what I've suggested before, Ship's Robot is a fixed installation of the CPU and storage and everything else doing the work is remotely controlled drones. Save a LOT on having to pay for a full brain on every bot and can build in independent emergency power, at the price of risking centralized loss. I would recommend computer hits counting against each Ship's Robot or Robot Server Node.



I suspect this has been covered somewhere but the search isn't terribly conducive to finding it so apologies for those who 'have seen it before'.


Any other thoughts?

 

[Winged Cat]

Simply put, why is the Frozen Watch humans? Why not bots?

Multiple reasons. For one, before TL 16 (or even TL 17) there are some just a robot simply can't do - though this only applies to larger ships.

I expect part of the reason is cost, having a bunch of capable bots in reserve is capital-intensive, especially if they are not being used all the time.

This is certainly part of it. My Average Cargo Ship explored the economics of this on a commercial freighter, and indeed, the capital expense only came out profitable after many years of not having to pay salaries.

Of course you could do what I've suggested before, Ship's Robot is a fixed installation of the CPU and storage and everything else doing the work is remotely controlled drones.

On large ships, even the most advanced computers don't have the bandwidth to handle controlling all the robots it needs. Again see the Average Cargo Ship design, which was only possible with robots having their own CPUs. (At least by MgT2 rules. This might be possible in T5; I haven't checked yet.)

 

[McPerth]

This is quite version dependnet, but for CT/MT, IMHO the main reason is that robots don't become self aware until TL17. Before this, they must be supervised and somewhat directed, and you're ulikely to be able to do it when you're sort of crew (what else would you awaken your FW?).

OTOH, in MgT, the repair drones may make the needs for engineering FW quite lower tan in CT/MT, as they can make repairs when needed...

ANother of the main problems robots may have in large ships is mobility, mostly when the lifts are out (as you vcan expect in many emergency situations) to move from deck to deck, but also to go through iris valves/bulkheads if they don't reach the floor (they usually would have some relief over floor, if they are to be airthight).

Of course, this depends on several facts, as what is the robots' movement system and how do they perform (e.g. do the grav plates work well in artificial gravity? if so, what if grav is out, as is not rare to be in emergencies?).

 

[whartung]

Simply put, why is the Frozen Watch humans? Why not bots?

It would only make sense if bots were replacing bots. Introducing not just a new "crew" in to a ship, but an utterly foreign crew at that. "Those bots always think different..."

 

[kilemall]

On large ships, even the most advanced computers don't have the bandwidth to handle controlling all the robots it needs. Again see the Average Cargo Ship design, which was only possible with robots having their own CPUs. (At least by MgT2 rules. This might be possible in T5; I haven't checked yet.)

Hmm, I was approaching that solution set from LBB8. MgT1 seemed to have some cost-effective robots, the main price point break in that version is how capable you want each robot vs. how many years of service.

 

[kilemall]

It would only make sense if bots were replacing bots. Introducing not just a new "crew" in to a ship, but an utterly foreign crew at that. "Those bots always think different..."

Well, you could say a FW constitutes a new crew if they are 'on ice' for more then two years, changes are occurring while they are tucked away.


Plus I'm sure there would be scuttlebutt about being long term frozen making people 'funny in the head' and think different, true or false.


As I said we should probably assume robots are part of the engineering equipment, an extension of today's Building Automation approaches. So I don't know how different FW bots would be from the daily bots, other then maybe more autonomy/problem solving.

 

[mike wightman]

TL12+ robots are more than capable of replacing crew. Spend the money and they can have high Int and Edu stats and skill level of 4 in every needed skill.

I'd put more trust in a TL12+ robot with a skill of 4 than in a 23 year old intellectually challenged naval rating.

Machine sentience is not the same as machine learning, ther term AI is very badly used in LBB:8 and often contradicts itself.

The real reason for crew in a frozen watch rather than robots is simple economics - the Imperium has lots of cheap meatsacks while capable robots are very expensive (and culturally mistrusted).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If we could replace the meatsack crews and save something like 5% of warship volume, and hence have much cheaper warships or much better warships, the Imperium would be fools not to do it.

Since the Imperium doesn't, it probably has a good reason.


In MgT2 good, well-trained crew with enhancements and computer support has a lot higher effective skill than automation or robots.

 

[mike wightman]

If we could replace the meatsack crews and save something like 5% of warship volume, and hence have much cheaper warships or much better warships, the Imperium would be fools not to do it.

The Imperium are culturally biased against smart machines, not to mention life is cheap in the Imperium but machinery is expensive.

The Hive Federations does build robots that are better than Imperial kit - so much so it is a criminal offense to try and bring Hive warbots into the Imperium.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Imperium are culturally biased against smart machines, ...

The Imperium is as far as I know prejudiced against armed robots, not smart robots.

The Shudusham Concords specifically deals with armed robots.

Gunnery robots might be considered armed, but hardly Engineering or Piloting robots.

... not to mention life is cheap in the Imperium but machinery is expensive.

Sure sophont life is cheap, but trained starships crew and the multiple Dton living space on board warships are definitely not cheap. Robots are cheap in comparison.

It obviously does not make sense to take raw recruits and put them in charge of billions of credits worth of warship components. Warship crews will be well-trained before they are allowed on board, just like, say, current pilots.

 

[McPerth]

TL12+ robots are more than capable of replacing crew. Spend the money and they can have high Int and Edu stats and skill level of 4 in every needed skill.

See that the URP in LBB8 specifies apparent intelligence and apparent education. This is not the same than true intelligence or education, that only appear at TL17+

The real reason for crew in a frozen watch rather than robots is simple economics - the Imperium has lots of cheap meatsacks while capable robots are very expensive (and culturally mistrusted).

OTOH the robot will not receive pay nor need life support each month... Only in life support saved, each crewmemeber less saves Cr4000/month. How long will it take to amortize it?

Reasons not to use robots are clearly not economics, so they must be other ones, as may be the difference among real intelligence and apparent one.

I'd put more trust in a TL12+ robot with a skill of 4 than in a 23 year old intellectually challenged naval rating.

Imperial Navy (and all ship builders, for what's worth) seem to disagree...

 

[whartung]

Well, you could say a FW constitutes a new crew if they are 'on ice' for more then two years, changes are occurring while they are tucked away.

Does it say somewhere that folks are put in to FW for two years? I would think they would be rotated regularly, notably for the issue you mentioned - just to keep the training and procedures up to date, if nothing else. Not to mention I'd argue it's borderline inhumane to keep someone under that long.

No, they're not hurt, but losing 2 years of your life, and everything that goes on around you. Pretty awful seems to me.

Which brings up a question, how much do you age in low berth?

 

[aramis]

Which brings up a question, how much do you age in low berth?

Barring mishaps, None at all.

 

[kilemall]

Does it say somewhere that folks are put in to FW for two years? I would think they would be rotated regularly, notably for the issue you mentioned - just to keep the training and procedures up to date, if nothing else. Not to mention I'd argue it's borderline inhumane to keep someone under that long.

No, they're not hurt, but losing 2 years of your life, and everything that goes on around you. Pretty awful seems to me.

Which brings up a question, how much do you age in low berth?

Eh, only making an internet arguing point that crew cohesion may not be a major goal here, FW or bot, but certainly the ship type, challenges and preparation for the dire circumstances of battle activation would be.
Certainly not arguing for a specific cycle of FW here, but given loss rates at least in CT for the technology, I can't see anyone being asked to do it but at least once per career in peacetime and you can't afford to do it many more times in war.
So I would think FW would be loaded up and used for a major deployment, and given travel times and likely patrol patterns, a year minimum, maybe 1-3 years for wartime.


Want to protest the practice? Well, consider the main weapons in use, lower tech nuclear weapons and higher tech PA and meson guns, all bringing a nightmare of radiological crew maim and kills to every space battle. I think if we were in nation-state space society now, we would be in arms limitation talks over those things, as they would be chewing through our fleet crews.



Years stolen is a relative thing- certainly the classic low berth risk would be a bigger ask in my mind. Could be some could see FW duty as 'pay for no work', possibly earning some extra hazard pay and avoiding the boredom of normal deployment routine or being stationed on Ice Moon Zebra.

Hey, survival roll has to have a reason, yes?

What would be stealing is if you are equally aged in addition to the risks. Arguments both ways, by definition low berth stops all life processes and allows for later thawing and rescue medical procedures, but is a harsh process that does damage itself.


I come down on the stops aging/risk side, but I also treat it more like a routine activity like the Alien/Aliens movies with damage done rather then death saves.

 

[Condottiere]

The game is biased towards humans.

More practically, it probably depends on function,combat roles tend to be rather straight forward,astrogation may not be.

OSHA may require a sophont supervising specific machinery, like fusion reactors and jump drives.

 

[kilemall]

The game is biased towards humans.

More practically, it probably depends on function,combat roles tend to be rather straight forward,astrogation may not be.

OSHA may require a sophont supervising specific machinery, like fusion reactors and jump drives.

That's what I have going on IMTU for commercial vessels. Military may be another matter.