Starship Automation

[Armitage]

I was recently reading a science fiction novel in which it was mentioned that a particular star nation's ships had a higher level of automation than another nation's ships, resulting in smaller crews and greater durability in combat. It makes sense, since a ship will be less hindered by a weapons bay being opened to vacuum or an engine room filling with toxic fumes if there are very few flesh-and-blood people in those areas.

 

I started thinking about how to do this in Hero System.

 

You could go the route of some other games and determine the exact number of crew members based on the systems installed on the ship. Then you could buy a basic computer with Extra Limbs and PS: Starship Crewmember (or whatever) and enough doublings to replace the appropriate number of crew.

The problem is that Hero System tends to be more abstract than that.

 

A ship with less crew would obviously buy less escape pods and could have less life support, or at least backup life support, since the crew would fit in a smaller area, but you'd be reducing point cost in order to gain an advantage.

 

Then it occurred to me: maybe I should consult the actual crew casualty rules in The Ultimate Vehicle. A vehicle suffers progressive penalties to all Skill Rolls as crew are lost, so Skill Levels with an appropriate Limitation might be the way to go.

 

Light Automation: +1 with all Non-Combat Skills (10 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 3 points.

Medium Automation: +2 with all Non-Combat Skills (20 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 7 points.

Heavy Automation: +4 with all Non-Combat Skills (40 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 13 points.

Full Automation: +8 with all Non-Combat Skills (80 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 27 points.

 

e.g. with Medium Automation, a ship could suffer 40% crew casualties without suffering any penalties and would only have a -2 penalty if 41%-80% of the crew had been killed because it doesn't actually have the "crew" in the first place.

 

The system is bought without Focus since it's made up of diffuse systems spread throughout the ship.

[Major Tom 2009]

Re: Starship Automation

 

That would be the Royal Manticoran Navy (of the former Star Kingdom of Manticore, which has since

become the Star Empire of Manticore) of the Honor Harrington series of novels by David Weber.

 

While it does make sense from a certain standpoint to have fewer people aboard a warship (less crew

to be lost to weapons fire or explosive decompression), there is a definite downside to it; as several

of the main characters in the novels have observed (since the higher levels of automation have been

adopted), the lower numbers of personnel mean that they lack sufficient people to put prize crews

aboard ships that have been captured following a battle. Marine detachments have likewise been

reduced as well.

 

 

Major Tom 2009

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Starship Automation

 

I may have to add "Must spread rep" to my signature.

[Tasha]

Re: Starship Automation

 

I was recently reading a science fiction novel in which it was mentioned that a particular star nation's ships had a higher level of automation than another nation's ships, resulting in smaller crews and greater durability in combat. It makes sense, since a ship will be less hindered by a weapons bay being opened to vacuum or an engine room filling with toxic fumes if there are very few flesh-and-blood people in those areas.

 

I started thinking about how to do this in Hero System.

 

You could go the route of some other games and determine the exact number of crew members based on the systems installed on the ship. Then you could buy a basic computer with Extra Limbs and PS: Starship Crewmember (or whatever) and enough doublings to replace the appropriate number of crew.

The problem is that Hero System tends to be more abstract than that.

 

A ship with less crew would obviously buy less escape pods and could have less life support, or at least backup life support, since the crew would fit in a smaller area, but you'd be reducing point cost in order to gain an advantage.

 

Then it occurred to me: maybe I should consult the actual crew casualty rules in The Ultimate Vehicle. A vehicle suffers progressive penalties to all Skill Rolls as crew are lost, so Skill Levels with an appropriate Limitation might be the way to go.

 

Light Automation: +1 with all Non-Combat Skills (10 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 3 points.

Medium Automation: +2 with all Non-Combat Skills (20 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 7 points.

Heavy Automation: +4 with all Non-Combat Skills (40 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 13 points.

Full Automation: +8 with all Non-Combat Skills (80 Active Points); Only To Counteract Crew Casualty Penalties (-2). Total cost: 27 points.

 

e.g. with Medium Automation, a ship could suffer 40% crew casualties without suffering any penalties and would only have a -2 penalty if 41%-80% of the crew had been killed because it doesn't actually have the "crew" in the first place.

 

The system is bought without Focus since it's made up of diffuse systems spread throughout the ship.

 

Instead of Extra Limbs that would make the ship have to take a ruinous amount of OCV penalty to hit when it fires all of the weapons on a ship. Perhaps the computer should take enough Duplication to fire all of the weapons positions?

[Beast]

Re: Starship Automation

 

depends on the story needs

with the HH novels the manpower needs out weighed taking prizes and using prize crews

besides Manty ships are the best out there

the rest are only worthy to be recycled for basic materials

[dmjalund]

Re: Starship Automation

 

+5 points per x2 computers on ship

[Armitage]

Re: Starship Automation

 

+5 points per x2 computers on ship

 

That was what I meant by "...enough doublings to replace the appropriate number of crew."

 

I was looking for something a little more abstract than "1587 8-point electronic crewmen. 63 Real Points." and that wouldn't require calculating exactly how many crew a ship carries.

[dmjalund]

Re: Starship Automation

 

That was what I meant by "...enough doublings to replace the appropriate number of crew."

 

I was looking for something a little more abstract than "1587 8-point electronic crewmen. 63 Real Points." and that wouldn't require calculating exactly how many crew a ship carries.

in this case, 1 for pilot and 1 per weapon. just enough to avoid penalties. Any more would require the vehicle to have an "extra crew" limitation - which in this case would be redundant

[csyphrett]

Re: Starship Automation

 

Some Federation ships are designed to be run by one person using voice command but if they get in trouble, damage control would be a nightmare.

CES

[Tasha]

Re: Starship Automation

 

Some Federation ships are designed to be run by one person using voice command but if they get in trouble, damage control would be a nightmare.

CES

 

As long as the Hard light holoemitters are up they would do just fine. It's actually how ships are run in the Star Trek MMO. There's a minimal crew Captain + Bridge crew and the rest of them being Holo Crew members.

[csyphrett]

Re: Starship Automation

 

As long as the Hard light holoemitters are up they would do just fine. It's actually how ships are run in the Star Trek MMO. There's a minimal crew Captain + Bridge crew and the rest of them being Holo Crew members.

 

I didn't know that. I was thinking about the Delta Flyer and how Paris had it rigged to voicecommand over his communicator. I do remember the Doctor taking over Voyager a couple of times.

CES

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Re: Starship Automation

 

Actually, I'd build this as an advantage/disadvantage upon the points spent for the ship itself. Come up with a set-up that defines how much is 'Standard (+0)', then the people can take either an Advantage - Moderately (+1/4), Notably (+1/2), or Highly Automated (+1) - or a Disadvantage - Lightly (-1/4), Barely (-1/2), or Unautomated (-1) - that helps define how thoroughly automated they are. Perhaps the now-standard RMN ship is Notably Automated (+1/2), with its cutting-edge ships being Highly Automated (+1). The Havenite ships, lagging on the tech curve, are standard automated (+0), but the Solarian League junk-heaps are Barely Automated (-1/2).

 

The real issue comes with defining what that means. Perhaps, along with points for the ship, you have to pay points for your crew - so in addition to building a 300-point ship, you're building 125-point crew members - and for your class of ship, you need 1026 of them for Standard Automation. Perhaps each level of automation means you can cut down a x2 multiplier - so that same ship, cutting-edge Highly Automated, only needs a minimum of 128 crew members. Or, if you get MORE crew members than what your automation needs are, the ship can operate at the same level despite greater losses (whether in battle or losses from prize crews) without combat or high-level-travel penalties. For that class of ship, though, the mothballed Solarian ships require x32 more - 4,100 crew members for the same 'level' of ship that you can run with 130.