Re: [VV] Vectorverse FTL

Hi folks,

Ok, attempt number 2 at a followup to my previous post.  I was most of
the
way through my message when my computer froze and I lost the whole
damned
thing.	I hate that.

Anyway, good post John.  (I received yours and mine in the same digest
version - hence any duplication of ideas - or at least intent)

Further thoughts, assuming my version of FTL (discussed in previous
post).

1.  Performance and Cost Issues

Three "tech levels" (related, possibly, to Laserlight's different
"Tiers"
of nations), each with different capabilities and respective costs.  The
lowest-cost form of travel is between warp points (which are fixed
routes
between specific systems), BUT you need at least mid-tech level warp
drives
to make use of them.  They are naturally occurring (decided upon by the
needs of the nation designer…), and cover great distances.  The transit
time is minimal-to-nothing.  Outside the fixed warp-routes, FTL is
possible
at all levels of tech (well, all "interstellar" levels of tech -
obviously
there would be tech levels below that which supports interstellar
travel,
though they aren't relevant here…), but traveling further and faster
costs
significantly more.

Something like this:

Interstellar Low-Tech

Jump-1 = x distance, y time, no warp point use, cost c
Jump-2 = x*2 distance, y*3 time, no warp, cost c*3

Lot-tech doesn't enable more than jump-2, and can't use the fixed warp
routes.

Interstellar Mid-Tech

Jump-1 = x distance, y time, warp point usage, cost c
Jump-2 = x*2 distance, y*2 time, warp, cost 2*c
Jump-3 = x*3 distance, y*4 time, warp, cost 4*c
Jump-4 = x*4 distance, y*6 time, warp, cost 8*c

Mid-tech doesn't go higher than Jump-4, but does enable warp-route use.
The lowest-cost for bulk transport would be based around mid-tech,
jump-1,
along fixed warp routes (which don't get faster with higher-tech jump
engines - warp route speed is fixed).  
 
Interstellar High-Tech

Jump-1 = x distance, y*0.25 time, warp point usage, cost c
Jump-2 = x*2 distance, y*0.5 time, warp, cost 1.5*c
Jump-3 = x*3 distance, y time, warp, cost 2*c
Jump-4 = x*4 distance, y*1.5 time, warp, cost 4*c
Jump-5 = x*5 distance, y*2 time, warp, cost 8*c
Jump-6 = x*6 distance, y*2.5 time, warp, cost 10*c
Jump-7 = x*7 distance, y*3 time, warp, cost 13*c
Jump-8 = x*8 distance, y*3.5 time, warp, cost 16*c

X is some measure of distance, whether it be "travel from one star to
another nearby star" or "a certain number of light-years" or whatever. 
Y
is the time it takes a jump-1, low-tech ship to travel distance X. 
There
is no "formal" cost-benefit analysis behind my other numbers - I picked
the
numbers to illustrate the general idea; the specifics can be
debated/discussed further.

So what you get is a high-tech power can build expeditionary ships that
travel 8x distance faster than a mid-tech power's ship can travel 4x
distance, but you pay a LOT for it.  The higher-tech powers get better
performance from their slower ships at a lower cost.

This has some interesting implications when it comes to fleet design. 
If
you're a player who likes a NSL-style "slow but tough" tactical
doctrine,
then you could build jump-1 ships with mid-tech jump engines (lowest
cost
for you to use your warp network), designed for defensive purposes,
moving
around within your warp network to reinforce where needed.  You could
also
build jump-8 ships with high-tech engines (highest cost, but greatest
"expeditionary" value) to go beat up on the other guy.	These are your
strategic choices.  

In game terms, the type of FTL doesn't really matter - once it reaches
the
tabletop, your FTL isn't relevant.  Either you're at the fight or you're
not, and whether you got there by jump-8 or jump-1 (and you can leave
again
if needed), it doesn't matter.	But it would seem to follow that there
should be some game effect on the different choices of FTL drive
(higher-performance = causes some cost increase in
mass/points/whatever).
While the type of jump drive (and associated costs) is much more
relevant
to a campaign style of play, including it will encourage players (and
nation designers) to think about both their nation's strategic doctrine
AND
tactical doctrines - and that is much more interesting.  I can choose to
design (from a tactical view) NSL-style ships, but how does my national
identity (and views on conflict, expansionism, etc) and economic,
astrographic, and political situation (vis-à-vis other nations) dictate
my
strategic choices?  What is the balance between defensive and
expeditionary
shipbuilding, if any.  And in game terms, am I fighting a battle with my
defensive or my expeditionary ships?  Do I even bother separating the
two
types in the first place…  This sort of framework offers a great deal
of
interesting story potential.  How exactly to implement this in
rules-terms
I'm not sure…

2.  The nature of Tier 1 vs Tier 3 nations

Tier 1 nations might be something along the lines of a "cluster" of
systems, interlinked with warp-route networks.	They are able to support
specialized planetary economies; so you might have agri-worlds with
little
industry (high-tech agriculture, low population, massive food exports),
and
industrial worlds (high-tech industry, much larger populations,
incapable
of sustaining population with local food production).  Bulk transport of
low-value/mass items like food and raw materials is possible using
inexpensive large jump-1 vessels that ply the warp routes.  Depending on
national inclinations and economic/astrographic requirements, military
forces could range from defensive only (worlds are linked by
warp-routes,
so high-jump rates ships are not necessary;  consequently they don't
bother
with anything more than jump-2, and might not bother with high-tech
drives
even if capable of building them, except for courier/exploration vessels
and that sort of thing) to a mix of defensive and expeditionary (some
low-jump ships to form mobile defensive reserve within the nation, and
high-jump ships for travel outside the jump-routes and/or to enable more
flexible options in attacking outside the nation - though the high cost
of
ships with the higher jump rating engines suggests that the
expeditionary
part of the fleet would be smaller - though again that would be dictated
also by the strategic situation).  Alternatively, a Tier-1 nation might
choose to build only mixed-capability ships;  perhaps jump-4 to jump-6
across the fleet.  They are capable of expeditionary actions using much
more of the fleet, but slightly less flexible in terms of offensive
potential (they can't go as far or as fast).

Tier-3 nations might be a single-planet with limited/no warp-route
access
(maybe located near a warp-route connected system, maybe off in the
"wilds"
someplace).  They would be self-sufficient in food production, and have
much more limited industry - perhaps capable of supporting "low-tech"
FTL
only.  Military forces would probably be more focused on local defense,
suppression of piracy in the surrounding region, etc.  Expeditionary
capability would be limited (though certainly possible) - they would not
be
off conquering grand galaxy-spanning empires…

We might include further tiers.  Tier-4 could be low-population,
low-tech
worlds without industry capable of supporting FTL;  these could be
high-population worlds also with the same tech issue (similar to Earth
right now).  Tier-5 might be true frontier worlds - the kinds of places
you
saw Serenity visiting in Firefly (occasional visitors from other
systems,
mostly agricultural economic base, etc.)

Ok, enough for the time being.	

-Adrian

***************************************

Adrian Johnson
adrian@stargrunt.ca
http://www.stargrunt.ca

***************************************