 April 14, 2015 - 7:01am | I've always thought that the way computers work in SF is a little... clunky. It seemed that way in the 80s when I first started playing and running the game, and it still seems that way now. The rules I've been working on for a Void drive have led to some tweaking of some of the ways computers work with ships, but I think this can translate across to other computers in general use on the Frontier. So I'm going to open up a discussion about this by proposing a different way of doing things. It seems to me that it might better to not use the sort-of backward system for building a computer as per the SF rules in Alpha Dawn. I think it might better that the deciding factor about any given computer is its level. In this sense, level denotes how powerful it is at running programs - raw CPU power (and perhaps also GPU, but mostly CPU). Function points (FP) could remain, but ostensibly they just denote how much memory they take up (eg something akin to hard-drive space). A computer of any given level comes with X amount of FP as standard. But it can be upgraded. In turn, some programs need to be run on a computer of a certain level to work at their optimum - it perhaps needs a base level and otherwise cannot run. At the same time, some programs are fairly simple and can run on quite low level computers and always work on higher level computers. Programs require a certain amount of FP to work and so any time they're installed on your computer, they use up their FP in space. Levels also go in some way to denote how powerful that computer is, but this is limited by a maximum possible level for any given computer. So, say I buy a level 4 computer that has 50 FP. This computer can run any program of level 4 or lower, and can store those various programs as long as their total FP does not amount to more than 50. I could possibly buy more FP, which would allow me to store more programs of levels 1 to 4 on my computer. If I want to upgrade the level of my computer, I can spend money on doing so. However, as it is my computer cannot be upgraded past, say, level 6. If I want to get anything of a level higher than that, I need to buy a new computer. FP and programs can be copied over to this new computer if I require. I can also start running programs of levels 6 and 7, as well as those of levels 1 to 4 (either ones I already own, or new ones). Note that in all of the above cases there is a single operating system for all computers. Maybe very powerful computers need a different type of operating system, but that's open to discussion. Either way, if I have a small tablet-like or laptop-like computer, or a body comp, or PC-like computer they all run on the same operating system. All that divides them is: - their initial level - their initial FP - the max level up to which they can be upgraded - the extra FP a user may have installed I think that covers a fair few things. Let me know what you think. |
 April 14, 2015 - 11:19am | I think your conceptual hurdle is that in Star Frontiers a program is not software that runs under an operating system; it is software and hardware that gets integrated into the computer. When you add a program to a computer, you are making the computer physically bigger. You may be adding circuit boards, control panels, video screens, or anything else required by the program. I'm not sure what benefit your changes make, except satisfying your modern sensibilities. |
April 14, 2015 - 1:50pm | Well, size is one problem of the SF system as far as computers are concerned. And then there's cost for the various other things that are needed. Yes, it may be all part of my modern sensibilities, but the AD version is a product of a more analog world. We'd have to guess whether the type of technology would, by a process of elimination and practicality, follow the one we have in the 21st century or the one sort-of envisaged from the 20th century when SF was first designed. Where do you stand on the various computer-related things as described in Zeb's Guide? |
 April 15, 2015 - 5:44am | "Programs" are more than just an added collection of "circuit boards, control panels, video screens, [etc.]". Programs are an abstract representation of the components needed to make all the necessary functions possible. This includes core components, sub-systems, auxiliary systems, supplemental hardware, etc. For example, a computer with Life Support programs includes the systems that are needed to control the lighting, temperature control, heating, food storage and preparation, and water, atmosphere and waste processing and disposal. That is a lot of systems for just a single computer system, because that is all apart of the computer! If anything, some of the programs needs to be boosted at the low end to make something like a level 1 or 3 Analysis programs being nothing more than just glorified pocket or scientific calculators (respectfully). Basic calculations should be second nature to any computer system. So a level 1 Analysis program should work like a scientific calculator — anything more basic would be a side function of a chronocom or bodycomp. See Computer (mainframe) at the Star Frontiers Wiki for more information. |
April 15, 2015 - 8:28am | IIRC, Life Support doesn't include all of those systems - it just handles them at various scales depending on the computer level. It's just the front end. The actual systems that do the various jobs are seperate. |
 April 15, 2015 - 4:46pm | While Life support does not include the systems it would include the wires and relays to control the systems and also the sensors to tell the computer when changes need to be made. Similar to a Fire Control program needing to have some way of tracking the targets and then triggers to fire the weapons. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
April 16, 2015 - 12:27am | Yeah, Life Support was a bad example on my part. I seldom use the Knight Hawks rules and forgot that the "computer programs" and "actual hardware" are two different things. Same thing with Industry programs, as they still need robots to do the physical labor. Normally, I just treat computers and programs as an assembly of machines and electronics that can preform what functions they were built for, which includes all necessary sub-systems to make it all possible, and the added weight (form program levels and complexities) is just a representation of all that equipment that may not even fill a single box or room. It is simple and we don't have to deal with a lot of bookkeeping to account for all the loose components. But yeah, the rules notes that computers and programs are all the electronics needed to coordinate a system, but you still need the proper equipment (like robots, life support equipment, astrogation instruments, etc.) to make it all work. |
April 16, 2015 - 6:10am | So perhaps it's just me that thinks it's all a bit clunky  |
April 16, 2015 - 8:56am | So perhaps it's just me that thinks it's all a bit clunky Would you rather have a creamy computer-jelly sandwich instead?  |
 April 16, 2015 - 1:24pm | We could introduce a hardware component like FP... nah.. So FP's in AD, I think those really are more akin to RAM then harddrive. I believe the FPs of a computer indidcate how many pograms a computer can be running at the same time. So you might have more FP's of programs on a computer but you can't have them loaded at all times, you have to decide what programs to unload if you want to run a not yet running program to free up RAM. Harddrive space is basically close to free in the future. Perhaps, if you want, programs can be giving a keyword or indicator that they require special hardware... so some programs easy to get on your tablet while others require more installation. ----------------------------------------------- |
April 16, 2015 - 3:57pm | I've always seen FPs as being more akin to a blend of RAM and a footprint of how much 'space' it needs on a system to operate. By 'space' I mean how much of the computer's processing time it needs to have dedicated to it to run. |
 April 17, 2015 - 6:46am | When talking about computers and the equipment they are meant to monitor and/or control, we have to divide the system into three parts: Computer, Network and Remote Interface. We can set the computer size using the rules outlined in SF, but nowhere in the rules are the network and remote systems discussed. The only hint we have is a general rule about work stations for each piece of equipment installed. If I were to tackle this problem, I would link it to the hull size of the craft. Develop a chart for the size of computer required for each hull size (simuliar to the engine size chart). Network would be realated to hull size (a network of 1 for a hull size of 1). Remote interface would be realated to hull size as well. The issue then would come down to using either weight or FP to determine the actual size of the the equiment. again, hull size could be used such to determine either one. For this I would use the lowest number (diameter) on the chart to indicate the weight times a multiplier or this number could be use as the FP per additonal component (Hull size one: Network 2 FP + Remote Interface 2 FP + Computer Level 1 10 FP = 14 FP) This is just a thought...
|
April 17, 2015 - 7:38am | I've always seen FPs as being more akin to a blend of RAM and a footprint of how much 'space' it needs on a system to operate. By 'space' I mean how much of the computer's processing time it needs to have dedicated to it to run.
I would agree with that yeah. But it isn't harddrive storage space. ----------------------------------------------- |
April 17, 2015 - 7:38am | Bear in mind that I'm not just thinking about ship-related computers, but all computers as described in Alpha Dawn. Computers in Knight Hawks are the same as those in Alpha Dawn. Zeb's Guide bought along a few other options, but I don't know how widespread they are in peoples games (we used them in ours, but Zeb's Guide isn't everyone's cup of tea...). |
April 17, 2015 - 7:40am | I've always seen FPs as being more akin to a blend of RAM and a footprint of how much 'space' it needs on a system to operate. By 'space' I mean how much of the computer's processing time it needs to have dedicated to it to run.
I would agree with that yeah. But it isn't harddrive storage space. True - there's other forms of storage described by the various rules. |
April 17, 2015 - 8:24am | Where do you stand on the various computer-related things as described in Zeb's Guide?
I pretend it never existed. So perhaps it's just me that thinks it's all a bit clunky They ARE clunky. And I like 'em that way. I like my science fiction computers to be bulky, loud, covered with knobs, switches, and dials, and reprogrammed by rewiring. |
 April 17, 2015 - 6:34pm | They ARE clunky. And I like 'em that way. I like my science fiction computers to be bulky, loud, covered with knobs, switches, and dials, and reprogrammed by rewiring. Ha! SF prepared me for working in the USAF on the AWACS which uses printed-wiring assemblies and tape drives :) Bleeding edge 1950s technology man  Randy |
April 18, 2015 - 1:42am | So, practical and portable computers aren't possible...? |
April 18, 2015 - 1:55pm | Sure they are. They're called robots. |
April 19, 2015 - 2:42am | Not really what I was asking  |
 April 19, 2015 - 4:08am | The way I see it is that the orignial game is our baseline that we use as a shared language within our fan community that allows individuals world wide to communicate within a narrow field of focus. We never fully trash the baseline even though we dont much like a segment of it. The clunky bleeding edge of 1950s technology will always be with us as there will always be someone interested in gaming that feel/era. What I'd like to see is computers that represent bleeding edge of 2015 technology projected slightly into our future and written for the game. Not so much as a replacement for the clunky computer rules but as an option for use. A game master introducing SF to new players may want something shinier and choose a more upto date option. To do this I think we may need to largely forget most of what we know about computers from AD and write new rules for computers for today. Closely related to that would be robotics and AI. Are AIs code or are they limited to a physical body? AD would suggest physical body with the description of level 6 robots as self programing and its "robotic brain" which is fairly ill defined. Yet, this overlooks the possibility of AIs exisiting in networks. Finally another game related topic would be gaming PCs navigating computer networks or information networks in a Shadowrun-esk manner which is another sci fi staple that was not handled in AD. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
April 19, 2015 - 8:41am | I think the trick would be to retain the flavour of AD in some way (FPs etc) but overhaul things a bit so at least the option is there. Whether it also has to be compatible with Zeb's Guide is another issue that will have to be considered. |
 April 19, 2015 - 8:06pm | I know SF has chunky comps, it is a result of the age the game came out in... in an older game I was reading the amount of cargo space the computer tapes eat up is huge on spaceships! Even clunker and chunkier than SF. This thread got me thinking about computers... I had boxes of computer punch cards as toys as a kid. The idea of having to feed individual cards into a machine to get it to do something is so far removed from todays tech. It seems we should be able to up date them in way that does not destroy the rules... or flavor. I also know some tech might stay chunky for a reason... for instance my cell phone is very old but it has been dropped from heights, gotten wet and is not broken, because it is tough and will not shatter if someone gets it and throws it I like it... sure it is not cool like all the new ones, but if I had one of those it would be broken within a week. I need high impact proof mobile devices & my old phone is just that. I also have an old dial phone at my house because it fits my husbands TTY machine... I should proably check into modernizing his equipment. "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
April 20, 2015 - 5:32am | This thread got me thinking about computers... I had boxes of computer punch cards as toys as a kid. The idea of having to feed individual cards into a machine to get it to do something is so far removed from todays tech. An aside here: I recently learned that my Dad's job after I was born uptil the time he volunteered for the Air Force and went to Viet Naum was entering punch cards into a computer. He spent a week entering information into a computer just so that it could print pay checks for the company at the end of the week. It was a full time job and took all week. The company was one of the mill factories in Lewiston Maine. While it was all cool that the computer could print the whole company's payroll it took all week to set that up. I suppose that might put the length of time it takes to make jump calculations into perspective. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
April 20, 2015 - 5:57am | Do function points serve any other purpose in AD other than determining the size and level of a computer? If we move to a system where the processor at time of purchase determines its level then FP need to have their purpose in life changed or be dropped. You could keep them to determine how much memory space is available in a computer, however the math might be simpler to say a computer can handle X number of levels of programs- simply total the levels of the programs till the limit is reached. For this reason I would drop them as they would no longer serve any purpose in a modern update. As to Zebs its a significant departure from AD and is a niche market computer- body comps. I'm in favor of retaining the body comps but all the progits can be viewed as apps on a cell phone. Some need to be eliminated (smart phones already do these functions automatically without an app) and some rewritten. Those that need addition hard ware like the Med Inject still have to have it. For all intents and purposes all body comps and tablet comps and smart coms should be able to load as many of these "apps" as the player wants. The only limit would be costs. These comps should fill the role of entry level computers for the computer tech PC- something that was lacking in AD. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
April 20, 2015 - 7:43am | As to Zebs its a significant departure from AD Form the looks of things, Maxiprog Computers are mainframe computers akin to the AD computers, Specialized Computers are single-function electronics, and BodyComps are wearable electronics. I think the idea was to merge the electronics into broad categories — more so with Specialized Computers. No a bad idea. I like the idea of BodyComps, but I hate the way they are presented in the book. To me, a BodyComp should be a set of devices that one wears across one's body — not just as an ugly studded belt - and can include chronocomm wristwatches (or in any other form) and Poly-Voxes. Much like computer programs, progits/apps levels would represents the level of sophistication of the application and they would come in a number of fairly broad categories (communication, language, interface, scanners, etc.), while the BodyComp Level would represents the general bulk of it all — the level determines weight, power-usage, conceivability, etc. The idea with this is to cut-down on the paperwork, to list all the wearable tech as a single item with a few add-ons. But that is just me... |
April 20, 2015 - 9:01am | Do function points serve any other purpose in AD other than determining the size and level of a computer? If we move to a system where the processor at time of purchase determines its level then FP need to have their purpose in life changed or be dropped. You could keep them to determine how much memory space is available in a computer, however the math might be simpler to say a computer can handle X number of levels of programs- simply total the levels of the programs till the limit is reached. For this reason I would drop them as they would no longer serve any purpose in a modern update. As to Zebs its a significant departure from AD and is a niche market computer- body comps. I'm in favor of retaining the body comps but all the progits can be viewed as apps on a cell phone. Some need to be eliminated (smart phones already do these functions automatically without an app) and some rewritten. Those that need addition hard ware like the Med Inject still have to have it. For all intents and purposes all body comps and tablet comps and smart coms should be able to load as many of these "apps" as the player wants. The only limit would be costs. These comps should fill the role of entry level computers for the computer tech PC- something that was lacking in AD. I think it's possible to keep FPs and just use them in the manner I've descibed in my initial post. FPs could be useful in denoting how complex any given piece of software is, even if two pieces of software almost do similar things. For example, MS Paint and Photoshop are 2D image programs, but Photoshop is a much more wide-ranging and capable piece of software. Therefore, if we're talking about FPs, Photoshop would require more FPs than MS Paint. |
April 20, 2015 - 11:48am | Do function points serve any other purpose in AD other than determining the size and level of a computer? If we move to a system where the processor at time of purchase determines its level then FP need to have their purpose in life changed or be dropped. You could keep them to determine how much memory space is available in a computer, however the math might be simpler to say a computer can handle X number of levels of programs- simply total the levels of the programs till the limit is reached. For this reason I would drop them as they would no longer serve any purpose in a modern update. As to Zebs its a significant departure from AD and is a niche market computer- body comps. I'm in favor of retaining the body comps but all the progits can be viewed as apps on a cell phone. Some need to be eliminated (smart phones already do these functions automatically without an app) and some rewritten. Those that need addition hard ware like the Med Inject still have to have it. For all intents and purposes all body comps and tablet comps and smart coms should be able to load as many of these "apps" as the player wants. The only limit would be costs. These comps should fill the role of entry level computers for the computer tech PC- something that was lacking in AD. I think it's possible to keep FPs and just use them in the manner I've descibed in my initial post. FPs could be useful in denoting how complex any given piece of software is, even if two pieces of software almost do similar things. For example, MS Paint and Photoshop are 2D image programs, but Photoshop is a much more wide-ranging and capable piece of software. Therefore, if we're talking about FPs, Photoshop would require more FPs than MS Paint. Ok and the impact on the game would be? I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
April 20, 2015 - 12:55pm | It's explained in my initial post |
April 20, 2015 - 6:21pm | Punch cards? R.H had us going to the Moon in an Atomic Torch Ship flown by a "robot" pilot reading a "camoid" :) http://nptel.ac.in/courses/112103174/17 Randy |
April 21, 2015 - 5:03am | Punch card http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card Sort of tantalizing to imagine a space civilization using punch cards LOL "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
