"Wilderness" UWP Gen

[robject]

Anyone have divergent rules when determining a sector of "wilderness" space?

My current method: When generating population, if the digit is 6 or less, I set it to zero and remove the starport. Otherwise, I demote the starport one letter, in some cases demoting it to a spaceport. (I'm still working on the "best" way to demote a starport).

You can try out a proof of concept (still being developed) of this algorithm here: http://eaglestone.pocketempires.com/survey/t5-prog/t5sysgen.pl. Just switch the generation option from "Civilized" to "Wilderness" and press "Submit Query" to see the differences between the two. They generate the same data, but the Wilderness option applies a different filter to the UWP data.

This results in a sector with plenty of populated worlds (one example has 24% of the worlds with a population), and some worlds that are capable of building jump drives (same example, 6% of the worlds at TL9+), with only a handful at TL C-E. Obviously, this is a nascent "sector at war" setting, with population and TL together playing the biggest part on which worlds are powerful and which aren't.

To a certain degree, the above is similar to applying a "hard times" algorithm. So, perhaps a more generalized algorithm that's useful in both contexts would be more useful.

 

[thalassogen]

Oh, I like that idea! Maybe I even pull out Hard Times myself and put that algorithm to use. Any reason you did your own instead of reusing that algo?

 

[HG_B]

Anyone have divergent rules when determining a sector of "wilderness" space?

I define "wilderness" as an area that has seen the presence of a star faring species for less than 100 years. I have a gen system written (but still in flux) for such areas.

 

[esampson]

I've got some ideas, but I think that before you can really talk about alternative systems for generating wilderness UWPs you need to establish exactly what is meant by "wilderness". Right now I can see three separate conditions that could be termed wilderness, each of which I would approach in a very different manner.

Type Ia wilderness would be a pre-development wilderness. This is an area where travel between stars has only recently developed and there has not been enough time for a real empire to develop. Most systems are pretty much on their own, though there may be some trade between nearby neighbours if one of them is star faring. In such a case I.would start off work generating the size, atmosphere and hydrographics of the system and use that to modify the population. Tech level would be some base modified by an adjusted flux roll and the star port or lack thereof would be based on that (with a little random adjustment as well as adjustment based on neighboring systems).

Type Ib wilderness would be a post-development wilderness. This is an area where there was a strong star travel presence but the system has broken down. Again most systems are pretty much on their own, but since systems could have been settled in the past you could have airless worlds that still retain populations. In that case I would probably use a system more like Hard Times where you generate a pre-collapse system and then adjust it.

Type II wilderness isn't really a wilderness at all but a frontier. Systems are semi-independent but still receive regular supplies from some central authority. In their case I would generate size, atmosphere, and hydrographics, modify the population roll by a different chart than the type Ia, and compute a tech level based on planet conditions and how far the system is from "home". Then I would use that to generate the star port, again modifying it with a random roll as well as the system vicinity to certain neighbours.

 

[robject]

It sounds like the variable you're describing for all three is "external infrastructure". But you distinguish between post-development and frontier, so perhaps I can't summarize it with one concept.

Ia is identical to the case where ancient civilizations once existed, but have long gone, and there is no inherited infrastructure.

 

[esampson]

Yes. The difference of all three is one of external infrastructure.

In a Ia wilderness the effect of external infrastructure is completely non-existent. It is possible that an external infrastructure once existed in the region but it was so long ago that it no longer has any appreciable effect. Under such a situation environmental effects would very strongly influence the population of a planet. It would be almost impossible to have people living under extreme atmospheres (vacuum, trace, corrosive, exotic, etc.). Without the effect of a pre-existing infrastructure the population would not be able to survive. Other environmental effects (low or high hydrographics, being one orbit inside or outside of the habitable zone, etc.) would have pronounced effects but there would still be at least the possibility of a small population.

In the case of a Ib wilderness the external infrastructure is no longer in existence but elements of it have converted into internal infrastructures, so the previous external infrastructure still has some effect. Thus you might have a system where people were living in the asteroid belt or in other hostile conditions and where they have managed to retain enough of their technology that they are able to maintain a reasonable portion of their population. In other situation a society living under such conditions may have lost the ability to maintain their technology and so the population, or vast majority of the population, is gone (through a combination of death and emigration).

Type II are not actually wilderness because there is an external infrastructure, thus the area is not "wild". It hasn't been fully civilized and settled but there is still an external pressure being brought to bear which makes it far more likely for situations such as asteroid colonies to exist with average technology levels below what such a society would need in order to survive (the vital technology being provided by the external infrastructure).

I suppose that the type II could be broken down into both type IIa and type IIb frontiers with the IIa being an expanding frontier and a IIb being a receding frontier such as Britain during the decline of Rome which might be an interesting campaign setting. You could also probably add type Ic for systems that are currently "in collapse" but that might also be viewed simply as a variant of Ib with modification charts that have lesser effects since not as much time has passed.

 

[robject]

Ah, so we have "external infrastructure - waxing" and "external infrastructure - waning", perhaps as a continuum with the +5 side being "this is part of an empire" and -5 being "this is unblemished wilderness". Somewhere in between includes a waxing influence of an external empire, and a weak or decaying influence of such an empire.

It's tough, because there's the "current" level of involvement, but also a momentum factor, kind of like the difference between acceleration and velocity.

 

[BeRKA]

I used another algorithm in my Random Subsector Generator. Try the "OuterLimit" setting. Maybe this is something that can be used for T5 as well?

 

[robject]

I used another algorithm in my Random Subsector Generator. Try the "OuterLimit" setting. Maybe this is something that can be used for T5 as well?

Anyone who codes in Perl is worthy of extra consideration.

Wow, you've got no less than eight settings, which apparently directly affect starport, population, and TL. Directly, right? Care to share your algorithm or concept?

 

[robject]

Collapse / Recovery concepts

So the "Collapse/Recovery" concepts which evolved from Hard Times basically wiggle around "Colony worlds", and mainworld Atmosphere, Starport, Tech Level, Population, Law Level, and Bases. Accelerated collapses are caused by discrete and terrible events, while gradual collapses are more complex. The end result is the same, the time scale is just different.

Recovery also follows the tech level progression routine: it can have plateaux or setbacks (essentially minor collapses).

In other words, it is a complex system which shouldn't be applied casually.

 

[robject]

Oh, I like that idea! Maybe I even pull out Hard Times myself and put that algorithm to use. Any reason you did your own instead of reusing that algo?

The main reason is because I do not currently understand all the nuances of that process. The secondary reason is because once I do understand the process, I will tweak it, streamlining some parts of it, and expanding others.

 

[BeRKA]

Wow, you've got no less than eight settings, which apparently directly affect starport, population, and TL. Directly, right? Care to share your algorithm or concept?

The concept is that the dices are skewed.

sub d6 
 {
  return int(rand(6)+1);
 }

sub d6low 
 {
  return int(6*(rand(1)**2)+1);
 }

sub d6hi 
 {
  return int(6*(sqrt(rand(1)))+1);
 }

As an example, for population I do this:

if ($area=~m/Barren/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(2); }
elsif ($area=~m/OuterLimit/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6low()+1); }
elsif ($area=~m/Frontier/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6low()+&d6low()); }
elsif ($area=~m/Backwater/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6()+&d6low()); }
elsif ($area=~m/Mature/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6()+&d6hi()); }
elsif ($area=~m/Hub/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6hi()+&d6hi()); }
elsif ($area=~m/Capital/) {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6hi()+6); }
else {
$popz[$hexa] = &poplo(&d6()+&d6()); }

This means that for a Frontier world, it may still have a population=A, but it is much less likely than for a Standard world. This also means that all UWP values will be "legal". (Just adding or subtracting to population may make a "legal" UWP "illegal".)

 

[thalassogen]

I like this approach far better than that of Hard Times which seems to be tuned too much towards war and especially Black War aftermath. (Not that this would be a surprise to anybody... )

 

[robject]

The concept for Hard Times is that collapse is at least to some degree dependent on how desirable a target a world is. A value like Importance would make a decent representative DM for that. Pair it with a task roll, where the region's "safety" maps to the difficulty of the task roll, and we have the germ of a T5 Collapse mechanic.

 

[TWTP]

for a wilderness area, untouched by any external influence.
I first roll for system presences as normal and then roll for a possibility of a civilization. kind of like for system presence
if no civ I roll the first three stats of the mw and all others are 0, sp = "x".
if a civ is present I roll for pop, gov, law and tech (but I limit them to tech 12 with out jump drives or above).
I then roll for starport. limited to c for tech 6-8, b for 9+, e for all others.

another option under t5 is just roll it up normally and then eliminate populations from worlds with out native sophonts.

 

[HG_B]

for a wilderness area, untouched by any external influence.
I first roll for system presences as normal and then roll for a possibility of a civilization. kind of like for system presence

What are your odds for that? I know it is probably is modified by planet type.

 

[TWTP]

I use the same roll for system presence(page 421 of T5), with a few name changes. Type of planet does not matter, the sophont rolled up will obviously be adapted to it. thats why i roll up the uwp AFTER the roll for native sophonts

Native sophont presence rolls:
Extremely rare= 3 or less ( on 3D ) 1%
Rare= 2 or less ( on 2D ) 3%
Sparse= 1 or less ( on 1D ) 17%
Scattered= 2 or less ( on 1D ) 33%
Standard= 3 or less ( on 1D ) 50%
Dense= 4 or less ( on 1D ) 66%
very Dense= 5 or less ( on 1D ) 83%
it's every where!= 11 or less ( on 2D ) 91%

 

[aramis]

My version of the same principle is easier for implementation by meat-puppets...

Roll Xd6, keep 2 of them.
If it's atmosphere 4-9, and Hydro 4-8, 3d6, keep highest 2, then subtract 2 unless the roll was 6,5,5, or 6,6,6. (this allows up to pop 12)

If Atmo is in the ecosphere, atmo 2-A, and not Frigid nor boiling, 3d Keep lowest 2, subtract 2
Otherwise, 4d, keep lowest 2, subtract 4

Presume native intelligent life or seeded by ancients semi-native life, unless population is within Jn jumps range of a TL 9+ population, as the terrain allows. (So, a TL11 pop can't get to the 3 Pc away system unless there's one in between)

 

[rancke]

What are your odds for that? I know it is probably is modified by planet type.

In the OTU the canonical numbers for minor non-human races are about 100 inside the Imperium and about 400 known to Imperial scientists. Which works out at roughly one per 100 systems (one per three subsectors). Obviously a native biosphere is required, but I've no idea what the proportion of systems with at least one world with a biosphere to systems without any such world is.


Hans

 

[TWTP]

In the OTU the canonical numbers for minor non-human races are about 100 inside the Imperium and about 400 known to Imperial scientists. Which works out at roughly one per 100 systems (one per three subsectors). Obviously a native biosphere is required, but I've no idea what the proportion of systems with at least one world with a biosphere to systems without any such world is.


Hans

I think that T5 delivers A Higher percentage of Native Sophonts. I cant remember the exact percentage but I seem to recall the algorithm would create about 5 native sophonts species per subsector using standard system density.

Either way it looks like we have a top down and a bottom up approach to generating a wilderness area.