Zhodani light fighter drone

[AnotherDilbert]

Of course, you could add some unarmed drones with better sensors (basic Civilian) as part of the squadron (akin an Early Warning or Electronic Warfare plane in a combat squadron flight today), as you could add some sandcaster/laser armed ones for PD squadron defense...

Absolutely, that is why I made the barbette modular in my fighter.

But a minimum sensor with enh. processing and array is 9 Dt, giving Limited sensor resolution at Distant range and Minimal at Very Distant range.

Minimum sensor with array is 3 Dt, giving Minimal sensor resolution at Very Distant range.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In fact, that would be a must, as otherwise the Tactics check for initiative (I make it mandatory as chained, as told as optional in page 73, if they want to use initiative in the options given in pages 81-83) would be made at -3, as drones have no tactics skill. If the chained rolls are not used, I'd still apply a negative DM to initiative to represent that (unless human led, off course).

Drones can use Expert software to use Tactics?

 

[McPerth]

Core computers on fighters, eh...

I guess you skiped my post (peobably you were writing yours when I posted it):

Core computers are specifically in the Capital Ship design, and so, as I understand the rules, should only be usable on them. Otherways, they sould be in the Spacecraft Options section, where the changes that also may apply to non-capital ships are listed.


See also that it is specified that their tonnage is included in the command modules of a ship, and this cannot apply to fighters, and probably neither to the non-capital ships.

Drones can use Expert software to use Tactics?

It's not among the skills on the list for them in MgT1e:HG page 60. IDK if the book Robots changes that, as I don't own it.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I guess you skiped my post (peobably you were writing yours when I posted it):

Yes, sorry, I missed that.

Core computers are specifically in the Capital Ship design, and so, as I understand the rules, should only be usable on them. Otherways, they sould be in the Spacecraft Options section, where the changes that also may apply to non-capital ships are listed.

I would agree, except:

Other Components
A small craft may have any of the components allowed to larger vessels.

It's not among the skills on the list for them in MgT1e:HG page 60. IDK if the book Robots changes that, as I don't own it.

That only means it is not included in the Drone Brain?

You can always run other Expert on the ship's computer or dedicated secondary computer?

 

[Ulsyus]

That only means it is not included in the Drone Brain?

You can always run other Expert on the ship's computer or dedicated secondary computer?

Could you use a robot brain to make decisions, utilising the shop computer to carry out its normal functions? The two would operate independently but interactively, the former using the latter just as a non-machine-intelligence sophont crewman would.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Could you use a robot brain to make decisions, utilising the shop computer to carry out its normal functions? The two would operate independently but interactively, the former using the latter just as a non-machine-intelligence sophont crewman would.

As far as I understand you need an active intelligence (sentient, drone, robot, Intellect software) performing the action plus a computer running Expert software to supply the skill.

The computer running the Expert software can be built-in or an external laptop or hand-held.

The rules even uses a starship's navigation computer that is a dedicated computer as an example (Core, p92).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

See also that it is specified that their tonnage is included in the command modules of a ship, and this cannot apply to fighters, and probably neither to the non-capital ships.

Good point, a core computer specifically requires a command module.

Unfortunately, we can include a tiny command module in a fighter with the same excuse:

Other Components
A small craft may have any of the components allowed to larger vessels.

 

[McPerth]

Good point, a core computer specifically requires a command module.

Unfortunately, we can include a tiny command module in a fighter with the same excuse:

I'd find it as cheating the rules...

When it says A small craft may have any of the components allowed to larger vessels. I guess it means that is not limited to the Small Craft rules, but not what is specifically in the Capital ship ones, only htose in the basic ones and in Spacecraft Options section.

Of course, YMMV, but just think on a little logic instead of just the lettr of the rules...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

When it says A small craft may have any of the components allowed to larger vessels. I guess it means that is not limited to the Small Craft rules, but not what is specifically in the Capital ship ones, only htose in the basic ones and in Spacecraft Options section.

Possibly, but that is not what it actually says.

Of course, YMMV, but just think on a little logic instead of just the lettr of the rules...

Reasonably any spacecraft can mount any component that fits inside it. Saying that a 1 Dt component can be fitted to a 2001 Dt ship, but not to a 2000 Dt ship is a little too magical for me.

Core computers have no stated size, but given that any core computer, even the biggest, easily fit into the 10 Dt bridge/command module of a 2001 Dt "capital" ship it can't be all that large.

So I don't find it impossible that smaller spacecraft can mount core computers, especially 5 TLs later.

 

[McPerth]

Possibly, but that is not what it actually says.

Reasonably any spacecraft can mount any component that fits inside it. Saying that a 1 Dt component can be fitted to a 2001 Dt ship, but not to a 2000 Dt ship is a little too magical for me.

If we force this way of interpreting the rules, you could probably fit A rated jump, maneuver and PP drives in a 25 dton ship, along with its fuel for a jump, so not allowing ships under 100 dtons to jump is equally magical....

I understand that Capital Ship rules are only for Capital Ships.

They mainly include batteries bearing according configuration, a percentage based drives system, Core computers, spinals, sections and little else that really difers from basic ships.

Of course, there is a gray área on the higher end of basic rues or lower end of Capital Ships ones, where both systems could overlap, but I don't believe they should be merged.

I once designed a 800 dton semi-military ship, J3 M3. WIth the same capacities, it costed about MCr 750 and had 200 dtons cargo built with core rules, and about MCr 420 and 250 dtons cargo with HG rules. Symilar effects occured in CT.

That's why I don't think merging systems to be a good idea...

Core computers have no stated size, but given that any core computer, even the biggest, easily fit into the 10 Dt bridge/command module of a 2001 Dt "capital" ship it can't be all that large.

So I don't find it impossible that smaller spacecraft can mount core computers, especially 5 TLs later.

On the Core Compuers specifically:

As explained in MgT:HG page 65, the Core Computers central computers that control the drives and the multiple distributed computer networks any Capital Ship has.

Of course, this does not apply to ACS, and even less to small crafts.

It's also specified that their tonnage is included among the command modules one, Those control modules have a tonnage, for the minimal Capital Ship (3000 dtons) of 30 dtons (one 15 dtons module per section, 2 sections), and grow as the ship goes bigger.

Of course, not all of it is occupied by the Core computer, and unfortunatelly the rules don't talk about it any more, but I guess they should occupy several of them, and don't fit in most ACS, and less so in a small craft.

You're right in that the letter of the rules don't forbide it, but here's where I say the logics should apply. As a lawyer would say, the "spirit of the law".

 

[McPerth]

Of course, better computer may be used, but the cost increases (and as it is lineal, ir afects more the light ones). This would also depend on if the cost modifiers in the sidebar of page 91 of the CB apply to the ships computers, soemthing never clarified...

p91 is certainly interesting... It applies to "computers" and ship's computers are certainly "computers". I would be tempted to let it apply to ship's computers. It would trivialise the cost of computers, but not software.

Any such effects would be mostly noted i nsmall ships, where the computer cost is a bigger share of the total price. For a multibillion battleship, the fact its core computer costs MCr 100 or 50 is peanuts.

If we assume retrotech applies to computers, the next question would be about drone command module...

See that this would reduce the cost of the drone fighers, as the command module is TL13, so costing only MCr 5 at TL 14 (our drones), and only MCr 2.5 at TL 15...

Of course, it would not affect size, as it includes everything a usual cockpit does.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If we force this way of interpreting the rules, you could probably fit A rated jump, maneuver and PP drives in a 25 dton ship, along with its fuel for a jump,

Not quite. Jump drives are explicitly banned: HG, p56 "Small craft cannot use jump engines.".

It is only "other systems" that can be borrowed from larger craft. Hulls, drives and bridges are already detailed for small craft so can't really be "other systems". Computers on the other hand are not specified in the Small Craft chapter so are "other systems".

... so not allowing ships under 100 dtons to jump is equally magical....

It is completely magical, just like jump itself, but also intrinsic to the setting. Since I accepted that decades ago it does not disturb me.

Computers are not supposed to be magical?

Of course, there is a gray área on the higher end of basic rues or lower end of Capital Ships ones, where both systems could overlap, but I don't believe they should be merged.

Most systems are usable in any of the systems, where-ever they are specified. E.g. Repair Drones are only specified for in the Core book for Core ships, not Capital ships, yet they are perfectly usable in Capital ships as the examples show, despite having no rule stating so.

But I agree that using core computers on small craft is an interpretation of the rules, and perhaps not intended.

As explained in MgT:HG page 65, the Core Computers central computers that control the drives and the multiple distributed computer networks any Capital Ship has.

Of course, this does not apply to ACS, and even less to small crafts.

Why not? Ships can only have one main computer that control the drives, but as the example of Specialised Computers on Core p92 show it can have other small computers. Reasonably they are networked.

It's also specified that their tonnage is included among the command modules one, Those control modules have a tonnage, for the minimal Capital Ship (3000 dtons) of 30 dtons (one 15 dtons module per section, 2 sections), and grow as the ship goes bigger.

Minimum capital ship is 2001 Dt, included into size code CA, up to 3000 Dt. HG, p62: "Capital ships range between 2,001 and 1,000,000 tons, ...".

The Bridge (command modules) of a capital ship is 0.5% of the section per section (errata for HG p65), for a total of 0.5% of the ship.

So the minimal bridge of a capital ship is 2001 × 0.5% = 10.005 Dt.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Any such effects would be mostly noted i nsmall ships, where the computer cost is a bigger share of the total price. For a multibillion battleship, the fact its core computer costs MCr 100 or 50 is peanuts.

Agreed.

If we assume retrotech applies to computers, the next question would be about drone command module...

Drone command modules are a type of Bridge, not a type of Computer, even if it contains some computers.

See that this would reduce the cost of the drone fighers, as the command module is TL13, ...

If it was TL 13 it would also be TL 13 on the characteristic table on p60, hence have INT 8 (±0), not INT 9 (+1). We would not want that...

Of course, it would not affect size, as it includes everything a usual cockpit does.

Reasonable, but not what the rules say. Hence it is not a computer.


And, yes, I'm very literal-minded.

 

[McPerth]

And, yes, I'm very literal-minded.

IMHO, to take the rules too literally leads to many problems and allowing rules cheats.

Example

Following with ship computers and the quote above, it seems software for regular computers may be used for them too.

page 92, computer software table, under expert:

Expert programs mimic skills. (...) Only intelligence and education-based checks can be attempted)

Page 55, under Gunner skill, Turrets:

Firing a turret at an enemy ship: Intelligence or dexterity (...)

(emphasis is mine)

So, could you run an expert gunnery turret program (rating 1-3) instead of a Fire control program (rating 5-15 to attain the same modifier) and use a untrained crewmember to man it, or a fire control 1 (rating 5) to allow turret unmanned fire and an expert program to fire it as with gunnery skill 3 (rating 3) instead of using a fire control 4 (rating 20) to achieve the same result?

Of course this does not apply to Capital Ships, but can make a 400 dton ship quite powerful in combat without any gunner, just with FC/4 software and expert gunnery program(s)...

I guess even you will find this quite odd, but nothing in the rules would preclude it, if read literally.

Unfortunatelly, this thread about HG design doubts had no oficial answers...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

IMHO, to take the rules too literally leads to many problems and allowing rules cheats.

That is why we have a Referee...

Example

Expert software...

Of course we can use Intellect + Expert to automate tasks, this is explicitly what Intellect software is for. That is exactly what the Drone Command Units do, see the Characteristic table on p60. Note that I used Expert (Mechanic) software to operate the Repair Drones on my example 40 Dt drone.

Even Fire Control software alone can fire weapons without any gunner.

Core, p93: "If you want the computer to do the work for you with a human-like level of intelligence and adaptability, you want an Intellect program."

We can also use a robot with a built-in computer and Intellect + Expert software to do the work for you, see Auto-doc Core p95.

We have been able to automate entire starships since early CT with the robot system from JTAS (&LBB8).

Of course this does not apply to Capital Ships, ...

Why not?

... but can make a 400 dton ship quite powerful in combat without any gunner, just with FC/4 software and expert gunnery program(s)...

Yes, we can, but with limited skill and using noticeable computer rating.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Page 108 core book:

Ship's computers work just like personal computers (see page 91)...

Does that mean rules for Prototech and Retrotech (page 91 sidebar) also apply to them, should you want to use a higher/lower TL computer on your ship (of course they will only apply to price, as weight is irrelevant)?

After re-checking the rules I would agree that that quote is rather clear. Proto/retrotech should apply to ships computers.

According to the "Component Option" sidebar (HG, p65) this applies to Core computers too, however unfortunate the effects.

 

[McPerth]

Of course we can use Intellect + Expert to automate tasks, this is explicitly what Intellect software is for. That is exactly what the Drone Command Units do, see the Characteristic table on p60.

The Drone Command units are quite more expensive than the computer you'r need for that, and take 1.5 dton (that I guess would also be needed for a cockpit, to represent the many instruments).

A computer with intellect/2, Pilot/3 Gunner/3 (enough for the drones) would only need 8 rating, so, to keep also the prorams we gave them, a basic computer 4 would be enough, That would cost MCr 5 (assuming retrotech rules don't apply). The told software would cost MCr 0.25.

So, the cost would be MCr 5.25, against the Mcr 10.16 (Drone Command + computer), saving you nearly Mcr 5...

Note that I used Expert (Mechanic) software to operate the Repair Drones on my example 40 Dt drone.

The repair drones need the Auto Repair program or a character directing them but then they act as skill (mechanic or Engineer) level 2, as the repair robots, as specified in their definition in page 110 of the CB.

Even Fire Control software alone can fire weapons without any gunner.

Yes, at reduced FC and without skill bonus...

Why not?

Because they have too many weapons to give an expert gunner program to each of them

Yes, we can, but with limited skill and using noticeable computer rating.

Noticeable computer rating? Intellect/1 and Expert Gunner 3 are only 4 rating for the computer for one turret, and 3 more per extra one (as I guess you need it for each turret).

So, for a 4 turret ship, you'd need 13 rating slots to fire them at skill level 2 (as they are acting alone) and a total cost of MCr 0.42. Compare this with the Fire Control/4 program you need to fire them all at 0 DM, that need 20 rating and costs MCr 8...

And, BTW, if you can give an intellect/x to your starship computer for 1-3 ratings and kCr 2-50, Why the Intellect software for starship computers in CB page 113, that needs 10 rating and costs Mcr 1?

And yet, in this same page, just over the software, it is specified that

Ship computers are fully capable of running normal software as well.

 

[McPerth]

BTW, and retourning to the Drone Fighters, I just realized that all combat rolls should have an extra DM +1 for the intellect (TL14 Drone Control Modules have INT 9, so DM +1).

I guess this will not affect the combat among them, but against a larger ship, where I don't believe the average INT DM is +1, it can have some effect...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Drone Command units are quite more expensive than the computer you'r need for that, and take 1.5 dton (that I guess would also be needed for a cockpit, to represent the many instruments).

A computer with intellect/2, Pilot/3 Gunner/3 (enough for the drones) would only need 8 rating, so, to keep also the prorams we gave them, a basic computer 4 would be enough, That would cost MCr 5 (assuming retrotech rules don't apply). The told software would cost MCr 0.25.

So, the cost would be MCr 5.25, against the Mcr 10.16 (Drone Command + computer), saving you nearly Mcr 5...

Yes, agreed. But:

A Drone Command Unit replaces the entire bridge.

Compare the price of a Drone Command Unit + m/4 against a m/6.

Intellect software has no characteristics, and hence no characteristics DM.

Also note the Multiple Actions rule on p51.

The repair drones need the Auto Repair program or a character directing them but then they act as skill (mechanic or Engineer) level 2, as the repair robots, as specified in their definition in page 110 of the CB.

They can be remote controlled by a character with Eng or Mech skill. This is exactly what Intellect + Expert (Eng | Mech) is. Intellect replaces a person, and Expert supplies the skill.

Auto-Repair can do more than one repair action, but is more expensive.

Yes, at reduced FC and without skill bonus...

Quite, but it shows that gunners can be automated.

Because they have too many weapons to give an expert gunner program to each of them

Agreed, but nothing stops you from automating a spinal or a few bays.

Noticeable computer rating? Intellect/1 and Expert Gunner 3 are only 4 rating for the computer for one turret, and 3 more per extra one (as I guess you need it for each turret).

This is not explicitly explained as far as I know, but I rule that one instance of Intellect replaces one person and needs its own instance(s) of Expert.

So, to automate four turrets you need 4 × ( 1[intellect] + 3[expert] ) = rating 16. On top of everything else you want to run that is quite a lot, the difference between e.g. a m/2 and a m/6 computer.

Or a few robots à kCr 50?

And, BTW, if you can give an intellect/x to your starship computer for 1-3 ratings and kCr 2-50, Why the Intellect software for starship computers in CB page 113, that needs 10 rating and costs Mcr 1?

Starship Intellect will talk to you and execute routine orders, perhaps opening doors? It will not replace crew.
Personal Intellect will perform specialised tasks for you.
They are not the same thing as far as I understand.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

BTW, and retourning to the Drone Fighters, I just realized that all combat rolls should have an extra DM +1 for the intellect (TL14 Drone Control Modules have INT 9, so DM +1).

Agreed, and also -2 for multiple actions. I misremembered it as -1 for multiple actions, so I was happy with a total skill of 2.

I guess this will not affect the combat among them, but against a larger ship, where I don't believe the average INT DM is +1, it can have some effect...

I generally assume that a good professional crew has skill 2 and char DM +1 (as we used for ships above).

In a competitive setting I would add +1 for Expert system support. And skill augmentation. And possibly characteristic augmentation, but that is quite expensive.

About 25-30% of the general public has DM+1 in any given char. I guess that recruiting people with DEX DM+1 is quite possible, but INT, EDU, SOC might be more difficult. I assume any good Navy makes an effort to recruit people with the right aptitude given the massive effect on space combat.