 March 25, 2008 - 4:19pm | Well, if I can't get the pros to go to the Computer section of AER, I'll bring it to the pros in the main forum. Here's a concept for Frontier computers I came up with earlier. If there's anything that looks wrong, rip it apart. I'm looking to make something that works for everyone and is simple to utilize. Here we will be discussing simply how the computers work, which sets the ground work for computer programming and repair. COMPUTERS Computers in the
Frontier are much more efficient than the computers used today.
Frontier computers using organic binary base (known as stage 1
computing) are able to replace large strings of decimal calculations
(stage 2) with simpler algebraic strings (stage 3) and even
three-dimensional vector logic (stage 4). This allows them to be
programmed with greater accuracy. Additionally, the original operating
language platforms have been replaced by pure logical enthymemes (stage
5) designed by Vrusk engineers, allowing specific calculations and
integers to be bypassed. Finally, memory compression is maximized by
both atomic vibration and quantum displacement in a phased
three-dimensional holographic memory chip, allowing even the smallest
of chips inside a chronocom to contain complex programs, processing
terabites of information in microseconds. Despite these advances in computing, whole computers are often dedicated to single super programs for highly efficient design. Small computers are then linked together to form super processing bundles such as bodycomps, vecomps, and micropedias. These small computers containing single super programs are known as progits. There are multiple ways in which a computer can be stored. The larger the computer, the more difficult it is to track, maintain, and repair the vast number of super processors and memory allocations. As a result, each size of computer must be repaired by a more highly experienced computer expert. A computer can be a bodycomp (Level 1), a portacomp or specialized computer (Level 2), a deskcomp (Level 3), a server (Level 4), a mainframe (Level 5), or a supercomp (Level 6). Level 1 and 2 computers come with built in monitors and ports, but no printing capability. Level 3 or higher computers come with a separate monitor, access ports, and scanner/printer. Additional components can be purchased at increased cost. |
 March 30, 2008 - 10:02am | Well... that seems like good enough semi-believable technobabble to me (which is something I'm personally cool with in my games)... but what is the purpose with the numeric stages in computer processing? Do these have some relevance? Are they necessary at all? What do the levels for computers mean? In traditional Alpha Dawn, you built a computer by assembling its programs (which had "Function Points"), and the sum of those function points told you the computer's level. You didn't buy a level 5 computer then fill it up with x number of function points worth of programs. Your approach sounds better to me (more realistic to buy the hardware and that gives you the limits for what you can put in it). But I'm curious what your plan is to use that computer's Level for something?? Does it act as a limit for how much software can be installed and running at one time? Keep the mechanics simple so it's usable in play and I think you're doing fine. 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
March 30, 2008 - 11:02am | Yes, that's exactly it. The limits of the computer. Instead of the functions defining the computer, the computer defines the limit of functions. :) |
March 30, 2008 - 6:03pm | That's more logical, more like our modern understanding of computers. I like that. 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
March 30, 2008 - 7:33pm | Well... that seems like good enough semi-believable technobabble to me (which is something I'm personally cool with in my games)... but what is the purpose with the numeric stages in computer processing? Do these have some relevance? Are they necessary at all? No, not necessary, but as long as they fit in a single paragraph, they can help define how computers are developed in game. The stages are my own theory, and the atomic vibration and quantum phasing (or "displacement") are actually current theories. Three-dimensional holographic memory is already being applied. |
 March 30, 2008 - 8:34pm | Well, I'm not so sure that departing from the Alpha Dawn model is the best method, as it strikes me as being more prophetic and alien to our current concept of computers. For example, as SSD devices (solid state devices, like flash hard drives and memory) become more and more standard I think the software industry will paradigm shift to delivering packages on pluggable SSD. This will increase security, performance, and copy-right protection capabilities. Given that, who's to say that the next step beyond that won't be "software" packages that are embedded in multicore-nanotech-processor-SSD chips that plug into relatively generic mainframes? Thereby defining the computer more by what packages you plug into it, rather than just by what it's capabilities are "out of the box." For example, one of the big problems Vista has had is driver support and certification issues for what processing and graphics power it needs. It's proving to be a legal and public relations nightmare for them... however, in my projected future, these kinds of issue would be virtually non-existant and customers will be assured 100% expected operation out of the box because it won't be very system dependent (with the presumed potential to "upgrade" as they desired.) My point being that I don't think there is a great argument to be made for changing the model SF uses for the sake of familiarity. |
March 30, 2008 - 9:01pm | Well, I'm not so sure that departing from the Alpha Dawn model is the best method, as it strikes me as being more prophetic and alien to our current concept of computers. Valid points, all. One thing to consider is that all these alien technologies are going to be more varied than what we have today... necessitating, perhaps, a common interface but each being modularly independent with subprocessors and individual memory capacities, then assemble to taste. Maybe that's the line of thought the originators were taking.For example, as SSD devices (solid state devices, like flash hard drives and memory) become more and more standard I think the software industry will paradigm shift to delivering packages on pluggable SSD. This will increase security, performance, and copy-right protection capabilities. Given that, who's to say that the next step beyond that won't be "software" packages that are embedded in multicore-nanotech-processor-SSD chips that plug into relatively generic mainframes? Thereby defining the computer more by what packages you plug into it, rather than just by what it's capabilities are "out of the box." For example, one of the big problems Vista has had is driver support and certification issues for what processing and graphics power it needs. It's proving to be a legal and public relations nightmare for them... however, in my projected future, these kinds of issue would be virtually non-existant and customers will be assured 100% expected operation out of the box because it won't be very system dependent (with the presumed potential to "upgrade" as they desired.) My point being that I don't think there is a great argument to be made for changing the model SF uses for the sake of familiarity. But there is certainly nothing wrong with adding technobabble descriptions. I personally don't see a problem with doing it the way Corjay is doing it. I sorta like it. But that's not to say everyone will... 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
March 31, 2008 - 7:13am | I reworked the computers because a couple of people said they didn't like the SF write up on computers because they weren't realistic. I have felt the same way as you, Fullbleed. But I did it to satisfy those who feel the need to be grounded in a quasi-reality. However, your explanation does give me something to put into AER to facilitate not having to change the computer design rules. Thanks.  Minimizing change and maximizing playability is the goal of AER. |
March 31, 2008 - 2:40pm | Minimizing change and maximizing playability is the goal of AER. Good goal to have. :) |
 April 1, 2008 - 12:52am | I am minded of the old backplane based computer systems... The backplane was a system bus and power supply. Various processor and io cards plugged in to it, and provided functionality. For example, one BBS had 2 processor cards (each was essentially a 286 on a card... memory, cpu, boot rom, and os on an eeprom), 4 4-port phone cards, 2 SCSI cards. When the owner took down the BBS, he added 2 more processors, and a graphics card, and a multi port 10-B-2 card and used it as a workstation and LAN server. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backplane |
April 1, 2008 - 1:53pm | That's about how I set up the explanation of the existing system for AER per Full Bleed's suggestion. |
 April 7, 2008 - 9:03am | Sounds about right. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
