• If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at stararmy@gmail.com or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy

Discussion: Tweaking FTL Travel

Wes didn't like the 'non-universe friendly' idea for the uber-fast FTL means of travel. It sounded too much like something that happened in Star Trek TNG around a certain region of space - actually, the whole variable warp nacelles the U.S.S. Voyager had were built with that in mind.

I don't see this being accepted. I mean - I tried convincing Wes about the same excuse and it didn't make the cut.

I mentioned it before, but no one seems to have paid attention to it : Hyper-space fold systems (I picture a Xenosaga-esque/Freespace tunnelway here) could be restricted to only being able to transit a ship from one place to another in that exactly data would be needed to make a safe transit between the departure point/arrival point. Such data would be acquired by going to the said system and obtaining sensor survey data or the like so that the information could be added to the PANTHEON network.

PROs : Well, it makes it so that ships have to go over to an unknown system using CDD speed to access it later through hyperspace. This allows ships to actually make deep space exploration missions and have them take some while to do, instead of making them trivial affairs.

The disadvantages are actually rather negligible. You can easily justify the whole 'need to survey the a starsystem' that wasn't needed before by the simple mention that Star Army starchart as done from Yamataian observatories / telescopes / sensor arrays could have picked things up as far as 30 LY and that going further would require different methods as well as the building of research stations farther out. (added value in making friends to getting info on their starcharts too?)

Also, I mentioned something about reducing the number of ships equipped with hyperspace fold systems. The excuse could go that fold systems are large and, with the SA trying to streamline their number of ships/size of ships in use, they could go to only placing the hyperspace fold systems on the larger cruisers/capital ships.

PROs : it keeps the SA as powerful as it's neighbors in term of fleet movements for defending their systems and such. Cruisers and Battleships gain an edge on the smaller ships by litterally being the backbone of the fleet in more ways than just because they are big ships. The smaller ships, since they have CDD capabilities, are thus better for sending over to explore and patrol areas (patrolling means something more when you consider that instead of making large jumps systems to systems, they'd actually move around to survey things).

There's also the issue of cargo transports, like it was mentioned before. Both time of transit and their vulnerability by not getting to their destination right away are both good factors, in my opinion.
 
Here's my plan:
  • Limit hyperspace to larger vessels, for the most part.
  • Slow development of CDD systems; Legal restrictions on CDD drive speeds. CDD will be the main mode of FTL travel and can travel is curves, complex movement.
  • Hyperspace only travels in a straight line and is easily trackable by most military or science ships and should be only used for travel to known areas.
  • Wormhole-based tech and teleportation will be short range only.
 

1. The limitation of hyperspace to larger vessels "for the most part" seems fine, as long as it does remain available. I personally (And IC) do not support the full removal of hyperspace drive systems from smaller vessels.

2. I have no opinion on this matter at this current time. But the "legal" restriction seems like something that will be broken repeatedly. Much like the law against murder has been broken plenty of times.

3. I like this, but what about other methods of "hyperspace" travel that operate in a different method than Star Army drive systems?

4. This looks kind of iffy... especially considering the current plotline in the YSS.Sakura, long range wormhole/teleportation is essential to the current route that the plot is going, unless we were to scrap the last JP that was done and re-do the whole thing to involve a different series of technological developments and then have the attack run that was planned be altered to allow for a different approach (That will get the whole crew killed).
 
Ugh... just when I was starting to appreciate that Wes had made up his mind into making some compromise. DocTomoe, prepare to have your arguments chewed up by yours truly! XD

<center> * * * </center>

DocTomoe said:
1. The limitation of hyperspace to larger vessels "for the most part" seems fine, as long as it does remain available. I personally (And IC) do not support the full removal of hyperspace drive systems from smaller vessels.
Click to expand...

The Type-29 Fleet plan calls for a streamlining of the Star Army of Yamatai fleets in more aspects than just making the fleets smaller. The SA strives to have more efficient smaller ships in opposition to the larger behemoth vessels their cruiser/battleship classes boast. In the coming couple of years, production will probably start to favor a starship fleet that is smaller and more compact. The larger ships won't be phased out, of course, since larger ships with sizeable complement of mecha and ground troops will still be necessary; but as the Star Army's actual technological level can't really progress in the way of deadlier weapons, it goes more on the way of making smaller, more effective things.

Or so I gathered from my talks with Wes when I discussed with him about the Type-29 Nekovalkyrja Escort vessel I'm making. If the fleets are going to lean more toward quality over quantity, Star Army vessels are starting to favor quality over size too.

And that, if we assume the hyperspace fold generators are big (and they probably are), would allow the ships to be streamlined some and allow for different equipment, or simply slimmed down. Besides, for plain traveling at CDD speeds, I feel it's acceptable to forego crossing 10 light years in 17 minutes instead of 30 seconds (at Sakura-gunship speed).

Furthermore, slowing that speed down to some x quantity of minutes let's raiders the possibility of setting up a blockade for cargo ships if they have decent enough long range sensors too (cargo ships will hopefully not be as fast as the Sakura-gunships).

Additonally, It's quite likely that vessels whom were designed to have fold capability in the way of offering a unique feature will be kept that way: the Jilanth shuttle could be one example (for priority transport and such) and the Sakura gunship could too (Wes was categoric that the Sakura were interceptor/fast-reaction type vessels and that they would probably keep their hyperspace fold systems ~_~ ).

DocTomoe said:
2. I have no opinion on this matter at this current time. But the "legal" restriction seems like something that will be broken repeatedly. Much like the law against murder has been broken plenty of times.
Click to expand...

This might be more like a standard to meet when building the CDD/FTL systems in the first place. Shuttles, cargo vessels and larger ships of a civilian type would have certain limits to meet when being constructed. Likewise, it's likely that miliatry vessels will have loosened the restrictions on this level (the SAoY is supposed to make sure no other faction can pose a threat to the empire, and that involves civilians and organisations too).

Just like how police cars are deceptively fast compared to other cars. Of course, there will always be the guy whom has souped up his vehicle illegally... but that's life.

DocTomoe said:
3. I like this, but what about other methods of "hyperspace" travel that operate in a different method than Star Army drive systems?
Click to expand...

Not much to debate here. Other races will likely have modes of FTL travel of their own as well as hyperspace travel... but that's really more something to be dealt then and there. No amount of suposition beforehand will help any ^_^;


It's not iffy at all! Assuming that the wormholes are allowed to be intra system (short range could be a couple of light years), the M2-2a Teleporting Mindy armors can be used everybit as efficiently as before since they were probably intended to make transits from one point to another within distance equal to the length and breath of a star system (probably smaller though >>; ) or the like. I'm doubtful that it was ever intended to go farther than an aether beam can be projected (even due to Yuuko's claim that range didn't matter. Just look up the RDD sensors).
 
Wes, the other reforms are alright, but I'm not really happy with the limitations on Wormholes.

For one thing it means that the Onslaught is now robbed of its central weapon. And that isn't good.

But seriously? Why would a Wormhole have a practical limit on its range? Currently I have it so it is dangerous to open a Wormhole to unexplored space due to it possible opening inside a sun or asteriod field. What's wrong with that system?
 
Can anyone offer reasons and examples why FTL systems are detrimental to their plotlines? These changes are for out of character reasons and I really don't think anyone should be complaining unless it affects some aspect of your game play.
 
Alright, Kotori, Round 2.


If this doctrine were adopted, the Star Army of Yamatai would be losing its greatest advantage, power through numbers. No Empire would ever want to favor smaller ships with super weapons over the use of larger vessels that could launch large quantities of small long range combatants (Powered armors). If the Star Army Of Yamatai were to do this, they would find themselves stretched too thin when the situation arises that calls for the usage of large numbers of powered armor to seize a planet, or counter a similar group of armors.

Additionally, the survivability of a vessel the size of the Sakura for instance, is questionable. Due to the smaller size of the vessel, it would require less damage to disable or destroy it. This is easily observed in the situation of the seized Mindy armor aboard the Sakura. One armor was able to devastate the Sakura's structure, and systems to the point of the Sakura being unable to resume normal operations until a support vessel came to repair the damage given to her. A larger vessel, such as a Kyoto Carrier, would be able to endure a large amount of punishment in contrast to a vessel such as the Sakura, which could get shot clear through all her six decks (25 meters) by a lone powered armor with a focused aether weapon.

Also, I do not see why a larger vessel is unable to maintain superiority. "Quality over sizeâ€
 
Oye. Okay then... Round 3!

Essentially, the smaller fleet doctrine was made because large fleet combat that revolved on which side fired anti-fleet weapons the most made combat extremely clinical and not all that fun. There's something lacking in having two fleets firing at each other until one side has taken enough losses to be considered beaten.

Think of the battles the French and the English had in Canada. Several rows of soldiers bearing pistols, all well lined up and falling like flies everytime the other side made a volley.

If you give the Mikomi a look, you'll see how it went for it in the battle of Tami. Personally, I felt there was a factor of helplessness involved, since the Mikomi's crew partly seemed to expect to be obliterated any second by some super-heavy weapon. All in all, when you have a ship able to fire and wiped out a cluster of ship, the concept of fleet combat becomes thrown out of the window when massing up ships together becomes a disadvantage.

Another important factor was the role plotships had in fleet operations. Before, you had fleets of thousands of ships, and a plotship somewhere inside there. What sort of significant impact can a plotship have for the empire when there are 3000 others around? Not much... you're just one of the many ants slaving around. However, the Type-29 fleets number around 150 vessels, which is, to my mind, a more realistic figure and... while fleets are big, a plotship can still stand out if it makes noteworthy enough achievements.

All in all, the reason for the Type-29 fleets is probably mostly OoC, to have the players of the plotship feel that they hold a slightly more pivotal role -- and I'd be inclined to agree that it was a good idea, even if it is OoC. Furthermore, the rest of the fleet's ships will probably be held back into storage for one such time when the Empire could be overwhelmed.

This was debated elsewhere though and shouldn't be brought up and argued over again, so, moving on.

The issue of smaller ships I could talk over with you too... but in a way, large crewed vessels filled with NPCs makes some of the actions the PCs do look trivial in comparison, just like one ship seemed to be in a fleet of thousands. Some GMs manage things well with portraying thousands of crewmembers and troops being juggled around, some not (or so I'd guess - nobody take offense on this >_< ).

In any case, I wouldn't take the example of the Sakura and the rogue Mindy armor as something that was related to the ships suffering from it's small size. That's not it at all : plotships have invaded enemy ships with a token force and done very well for themselves, so, this can just as easily applied to the enemy ships too (I mean, send a NIWS or a NH-18 and poof, problem solved).

The problem the Sakura had was it's slow response to the threat, not it's small size. Normally, a Sakura-class Gunship should have two dozen more people standing by inh the bunkrooms to board power armors... but in Wes' plotship, things are not so and we are working with a skeleton crew.

Also, the Mindy only breached the computer room's armored door, was smashed through the deck by the NIWS unit and down into engineering... and then a mishandled aether rifle and repeated collateral damage from the NIWS aether gatling rifles was what finally breached the Sakura's lower outer hull. That was hardly through six decks and more like surgical damage.

* * *

Haven't seen any info on the fold systems. What I do know is that the Mindy armors had an optional fold system attachment that they could place to fill both it's attachment points.

Now, let's assume that the size a fold system for a Mindy armor would need to be backpack-sized. If we assume the size is proportional for larger units... then yes, fold systems ought to take a rather large bite out of a ship's interior space.

* * *

I'm not qualified to answer questions over wormholes... but I don't see the practicallity in sending power armors too far out of their effective operational range. Besides, since the Mindy is smaller, wouldn't it's jumps be smaller too?

I mean, take a 3' tall human and a 5' tall human and ask them, both to jump. The 5' tall dude should be able to clear more distance.

* * *

Lastly... Yes, Uso, there are a great many reasons. Please read back a bit and it should be rather plainly stated.
 
No, those were all hypotetical examples but no real examples of how it negitively effected gameplay. It is merely another case of people not wanting to RP in a setting with evloving technology. All the people being angsty about how there is a lack of strategy involved in ship encounters isn't really proving their point when you can look up the ship battles ICly and find out that FTL speeds aren't hindering gameplay.

For the people complaining that a single ship can't make a difference in a big fight, again you haven't read any of the old battle transcripts that involve things like experomental or special ships as well as main character ships that are controling the fleets or preforming special operations. People are just being angsty because they can't find a way to be special.

I'm actually disapointed that Wes hasn't stuck with his 'it isn't broke so I'm not changing anything' policy from way back and started to change things just because a few people start complaining about them. GMs have clearly show their ability time and time again to work within the current system to make fun and enjoyable experiances within the technology setting with only one or two exceptions.
 
So what if it is? Are you actually saying that the viewpoint of some of the newer people should be ignored simply because it worked for the older members in the past? Is this what this is really about?

Look. My personnal issue with this is that there is little meaning to deep-space exploration if you can back home under 5 minutes. It lacks the epic, romantic allure projected to pioneers and explorers going off to seek out far away places. Sure, you could qualify going down to unknown planets and trudging through them exploration... but to some it might be like half of what the setting could really offer.

My stake in this is establishing that suspension of disbelief is upheld. After reading around a lot, my impression is that there are a couple of things here and there that could use a tweak or two to make the experience more enjoyable for everyone. After exchanging opinions with a few people, it went further than from a selfish desire and into an intention that could perhaps improve the enjoyment of some without really crimping on the other older members. So, this conversation came up.

As for your disappointment in Wes, I feel it is misplaced. There is no shame in having the person in charge listen to some of the newer members and try to compromise so that everyone could arrive to a certain level of satisfaction. Right now, this seems to have been achieved, except for the wormholes... and I suppose that could be fixed too.
 
I'm saying that this has no real basis other than people feeling one way or another. No one can go back to past RP and say, "well, I wish we could have done this with the plot but FTL traviel wouldn't allow it" or anytihng along those lines. FTL and quality of RP don't seem to be related.
 
Who ever said that the past would be altered? Sure, a retcon might have been suggested, but Wes already explained the possible tweaks that could be done and I, for one, find the first three of them satisfactory. None of them include "changing the past".

As any any perceived reduction... this is just one of the elements that's being revised and 'trimmed down'... it is very similar to the trimming the nekovalkyrjas are going through with the NH-29 out.
 
I didn't even say the past was being altered, I'm pointed out that no one has been negitively affected by FTL in the past.
 
So, you think that Wes putting some effort to define what FTL/hyperspace/wormhole technology is in the SARP is wrong?

The SARP's been partly joined with other universes (other forums) and of course, the technology levels from those universes have made some impact. However, I'm not sure if you've noticed, but efforts have begun to be made to have the Star Army Roleplay stand on its own since the others were (from what I heard) growing inactive.

After hearing a mention that Wes was only keeping things like Hyperspace around just because he other forum has it, it seems like the right thing to do to bring up the question of how FTL/hyperspace travel should be portrayed according to Wes' vision. This is his thing, after all.

Sure, we can suggest all we want, but this whole debate wouldn't have had even begun if Wes hadnt hinted that he might like to have things be a little differently. That should pretty much sum it up.

Edit : Oh, just in case you steer past the point, yes, I've been inconvenienced by the current FTL. I wish my character could have a good night's sleep while the ship she's on travels between one edge of the Empire to the other.
 
Don't get me wrong, I support the use of smaller vessels, but I also have strong feelings regarding sticking to IC reasons behind choices. It just seems strange to get rid of your perfectly functional large combatants.

Also... Nearly every vessel in the Star Army is able to dispense anti-fleet scale damage. Even if the large combatants were removed, it would be a simple matter of every vessel shooting off their "antifleet" weapons in rapid succession to decimate the oposing force's fleet. What needs to be done is a full scale rollback of technology. And that would require a whole different approach.

This kind of situation is what happens when your technology expands beyond your needs and wants, then approaches the realm of excess and gluttony.
 
Heh. I suppose that's why the Type 29 Escort I'm making is being equipped with a single-target aether shock cannon on Wes' instructions. It's still a ship killing cannon, but more in the sense that's it's a very large aether projected beam instead of a big wave of... whammo.

Anyhow, let's get back to discussing ship movement. Please ^_^
 
I think that the most significant point is Wormholes.

I don't think any limit to them should be established, actually Zack and I did establish an intresting limit on Wormholes, by establishing the speed between the opening of the two mouths of a wormhole. I'm sure he's remembered, or I'll look them up.

On the general point, I have never found that FTL has limited RP experiance, and agree wholeheartadly with Thad when he says that people can JP with others without the GM. There are long social events given over to RP, some so long that players can complain about that! If you wanted to research during then, that would be great!

But before any reforms, I do think we need examples of FTL limiting RP. There is a saying, which says that:

"The burden of proof must be on those that wants change, not on the defenders."

I think we should keep to that.
 
This whole thing started because two people started the FTL angst. Even though wes has been considering changing FTL speeds for some time but haddent mainly because there was no need to.

Full scale technology roleback isn't possible and isn't needed. I'm perfectly fine with watching people who can't adapt strategies being blown away like so many redcoats in the forest.

If wes wanted this all to go according to his vision it would be a book, not a role play, plain and simple. There is a difference between wanting something to go all your way and allowing other people to come in with their own ideas of how to do things. It is the difference between writing a book and role playing.
 
And because I like giving others a say, that's why we're tweaking the FTL system.
 
But does it really need to be beaten into the ground with debate after the choice has been made for a slight tweaking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…