Prev: Re: Full Thrust Ship Registry Next: RE: GZG Mini and Dice collections?

Re: Some FT background stuff (guidelines for writers)

From: Jonathan white <jw4@b...>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 08:50:38 +0000
Subject: Re: Some FT background stuff (guidelines for writers)

>Why? We have a number of time schemes, which can be converted to GMT. 
>Why not just have another "Universal Biological Time" (UBT) based on 
>a 25 hour clock. Computers don't reckon in human time, and they 
>wouldn't reckon in this new human time either, but they could easily 
>convert to either. 
Hmm.. fair enough.
>capability to take Gs. (Humans can take about 9 in suits.... a 
>computer can probably take 40Gs .... that makes up for a lot of 
That's where the 'gravitic compensators' come in. If you can overcome
gravity I would presume you wouold have some system to reduce the effect
G-Forces on the human system.

>HOWEVER, that might not be interesting for our gaming purposes, and 
>we're here (or wherever) to have fun (I'd guess) and not to predict 
>the future and live it. 
I think (in game terms) the problem we have is that 'selection of the
fittest' works VERY fast. If drone fighters turned out to be demostrably
better than Human/Kravak flown fighters, you could bet within a couple
weeks the majority on this list woudl be flying drone fighters with
fleets. Having said that I have probably had more fun playing games
one side is significantly disadvantaged than with 'evens' battles. You
have to set your victory conditions appropriately.
>> PFFT. If you ask me, organic/nano 'cyberware' is much more likely to
>> around than silicon by the 24th century. Does raise a question about
>> weapons in general though. If your dreadnaught main 'core' is
actually a
>> whalloping great organic brain sort of thing, no reason for an EMP
pulse to
>> affect it.
>Can you say 'brain tumor'? Look at how low power they are trying to 
>make cell phones, CRTs, TVs, and radio and x-ray equipment. Why? 
>Humans and EM do not mix too well. Only in super vast quanity will EM 
>kill you outright, but a small amount can cause long term problems 
>like cancer and other diseases. 
One would presume that if your ship computing core was something
to an organic brain, you would ensure regular scans to detect such
anomolies. Afterall, your PC does basically the same thing every time
switch it on.
As to the effect of EM, a callous point to make might be that while a
dose of EMR would kill a human pilot it's unlikely to do so before
mission is over. With a drone craft any damage you do becomes evident
fairly immediately.

>> >Except that it still takes a good couple of years to create a
>> >jock, unless computers are augmenting their training.
>> Depends on yor story. Didn't train them for very long during WWI. And
>> WWII/ Battle fo Britain there were some VERY inexperienced people
>> for the RAF.
>And in the parts of the war where one side or the other did not have 
>technical superiority to such an extent that pilot Q was irrelevant, 
>the better pilots still won. And part of piloting is 'selection'. 
>Some people innately have flying skills, others not so. 
Not sure there was that much selection going on and technological
differences weren't apparent across the board, at least WWII. Presumably
they had some sort of aptitude test but it may only have been very
simplistic. 'Flying skills' are actually a large subset f skills, some
which are pretty hard to test for accuratley (in fact, I could go on
how innaccurate most aptitude tests are even today, but I can tell
all bored already).

> Deepnds how far your 'organic technology' goes. If current
>> theory of memorize things is true, nanomachines could actualyl
re-wire your
>> memeory to give you a new set of cognitive skills. Actually learning
>> physical processes involved though I don't think you could rush.
>Hmm. I can have machines operate my muscles. (I have had in physio), 
>so it seems you could build a 'muscle memory conditioner' to teach 
>(maybe while sleeping) the muscles the needed moves. 
THis is something that as of today we aren't sure about. We're fairly
memory is encoded chemically within brain neurons, but physical skills
arent' so sure about. When you get to the point where a function of  a
skill is unconcious - for example when playing a musical instrument you
don't have to /look/ where your hands are as you know when they /feel/
the right place - we aren't sure how (or indeed where) that's encoded.
you, 300 years on we might.

"Reality never lives up to all that it used to be.."
	Beth Orton 'Best bit'
BWFC Fans Page -
BWFC mailing list - send 'subscribe' to

Prev: Re: Full Thrust Ship Registry Next: RE: GZG Mini and Dice collections?