RE: [ds2, sg2] robotic aliens... [x-post]

I am sure that some of this has been discussed previously, but it is
worth
bringing up again.

One way is to have a simple flow chart of list of priorities for each
unit.
Different units may have different Priorities assigned BEFORE the game
starts. In SG2 a unit's priorities may be changed by a successful
communications action from command. In DS2, it could be changed each
turn,
but marked at the start of the turn.

I would suggest a short list for each unit. A typical example of a
combat
unit would be 
Goal Priorities:  
  Primary: Secure location 42x76
  Secondary: Clear enemy units within 36mu of primary goal
  Tertiary: Hold road 398
Survival Priority: 2 

Survival Priority is rated 1-3 (1 high, 3 low).
It shifts the Quality Die Type when the unit makes Confidence
Checks or Reaction Tests. SP1 shifts the quality die up 1, 
SP2 shifts the quality die up 2, and SP3 shifts the die type
up 3. It also indicates if a unit will make use of surrounding 
cover (SP1 units do not unless under a suppression marker 
at the beginning of a turn). A SP3 unit will remove 1 
suppression counter at the END of its turn (it has a low survival 
priority, so is less concerned with taking casualties). SP1 and
2 units remove suppression markers as normal. In DS2, SP3 
infantry units do not receive 'under fire' markers unless an 
element of the unit is damaged (like vehicles) and do not
use the terrain for protection unless they start the turn with
an 'under fire' marker. SP3 units' confidence never falls 
below Shaken. 

In SG2, detached elements may have Priorities set at time of 
detachment. I.e. a communications detachment would be provided 
a different set of priorities than the main unit.

A sniper might have a Priority List of:
Goal Priorities:  
  Primary: Target unit X
  Secondary: Remain Undetected
  Tertiary: Return to unit Q if detected
Survival Priority: 1 

A command unit might have a Priority list of:
Goal Priorities:  
  Primary: Provide Priorities to units
  Secondary: Reactivate Units to accomplish task
  Tertiary: Coordinate Resources (artillery, etc.)
Survival Priority: 1 

Most robotic infantry units may be assumed to be 
Power Armor. Robotic Infantry Units that start at SP3 
are usually expendable, so are treated as normal 
units (rely on numbers rather than armor).

Robotic units usually start a battle at:
Confidence Level: CO
Motivation: High
Fatigue Level: Fresh
Although specific scenarios may provide for a different set
of levels. Example: A forward robotic unit is running low on
power, so it starts as Tired or Exhausted. The attack is a
feint, so motivation is Medium. The Dalaks know that 
Dr. Who is advising the other side, so Confidence is 
Steady.

Robotic units are usually not effected by terror attacks
(including biochem and nuclear). Robotic Units' 
confidence never falls below Broken (SP3 units'
confidence never falls below Shaken).

The quality of the robotic units may vary based on
what the unit was designed to do, experience (if the
units have learning capability), knowledge of the
opponent, etc. I would suggest that units that 
start at SP3, be no better than Regular (perhaps 
should be Green); these units are expendable, so
quality is not a high priority in design.

I would also suggest seeing Beth's Dalak rules at 
http://members.nbci.com/gzg_l/xeno/daleks.html

-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net	  
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: chubbybob [SMTP:bob@retemail.es]
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 1:16 AM
> To:	gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject:	robotic aliens...
> 
[snip]

>	  Yeap I guess it's what makes the difference between a new race
for
> super weapons or for play value..  However in order to get to where
you
> want
> to be it's worth stopping and reconsidering the relative value of not
> being
> alien.. Human elements lets call them soldiers for the sake of the
> argument
> take their strength from being just that..  Unique , different,
> individually
> thinking but born with an almost mind numbing need for companionship
and a
> huge capacity to work intellligently together.... True loners are few
and
> far between..   The difference between good and bad units is not just
> experience it's also and I believe principally, the ability to act
> cohesively with a natural knowledge of what is to be done what and
where
> and
> how your fellow members are going to be acting at any time..	Morale
> failure
> is the result of breaking down this instinctive confidence..	 Good
units
> also "know" when the shit has hit the fan and are prepared to reshape
the
> facts to suit the circumstances. The plan said do this... The plan is
a
> crock of crap and we are all going to die.. change the plan..
>	   So the basics of what makes a human soldier a good one are .
> Experience , morale/cohesion and ability for group/individual/
innovative
> thought.  How do we therefore make a robot army different,..	there
are
> two
> alternatives ..
> 1) give them a group mind..  ie instant communication and central
drive..
> .
> The problem with this is that first you need an unjammable
communication
> system. secondly and more importantly you have just made them human
> because
> the player would be the hub mind and play in a very human style..
> 2) preprogramme them..  ie a central plan is fed into the circuitry
prior
> to
> battle.. Your units then work with a basic standing orders .. ie if
fired
> on
> do this .. if circuitry is fried do that.. On broad plan however each
unit
> should have a preprogrammed and consecutive set of objectives.. and
follow
> them unfailingly and unhumanly to the point of extinction.. the only
> central
> influence being a change of objectives subject to succesful
> communication..
> Ttaking Beths Daleks , this rings a bell in the memory banks.. after
> spinning round screaming exterminate for a while , the screen daleks
would
> suddenly recoordinate and dash off with new found determination...  I
> suppose they passed a communications check...
>	  Looks fairly obvious from my comments that I favour the second
> route.. The clever bit is to produce a mechanism to achieve it..I
never
> claimed to be clerver but then again !!! Well, each unit would need a
> prescribed path of attack... No ifs.. Go that way my son!!   Allow no
> retreats only physical confusion can stop them.. "oops theres a wall
> there!!!". The unit may never be further from the objective than the
start
> of the current turn.. Ignore losses..Morale should not exist in human
> terms.. ie half the unit just died . "so what we still have 50% left
..
> onwards!!!.  The play mechanism should be directed to getting to the
> objective no matter what and the "morale" rules should be built around
> physical factors .. ie why can't we reach the objective.. How do we
change
> the route etc.. The presence of enemy troops should be a physical not
a
> mental proble.. ie treat them as just another wall..	The problem
being
> how
> to smash through the wall, not how do we stop the wall falling on
us...
>	 Well thats my initial reaction..  Rereading it I seem to have
> provided more questions than answers but hope there some sense in
there
> somewhere...
> 
>		      Bob deAngelis