From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Tue Feb 12 18:14:31 1991
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04579) Tue, 12 Feb 91 23:11:20 GMT
Received: from tektronix.tek.com by RELAY.CS.NET id aa24377; 12 Feb 91 17:02 EST
Received: by tektronix.TEK.COM (5.51/7.1)
	id AA11056; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:55:29 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA28620; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:53:36 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.0/7.1)
	id AA14458; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:53:29 PST
Message-Id: <9102122153.AA14458@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: Dan Corrin <dan%engrg.uwo.ca@RELAY.CS.NET>, jamesp@metolius.WR
Subject: TML Bundle #166: Msgs 2055-2069
Reply-To: TML Administrator <traveller-request%metolius.wr.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET>
Precedence: bulk
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:53:28 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp%metolius.wr.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET>
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue Feb 12 13:53:23 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #166: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
2055  10-Jan-91 al646@cleveland.F Re: (2050) Automating a starship? << From: Ma
2056  10-Jan-91 Lesley Grant      TML Vehicle Design Book << There was some tal
2057  10-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  One Man Band... << Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss
2058  10-Jan-91 Adrian Hurt       Re: Automating a starship << Mark F. Cook <ma
2059  10-Jan-91 True Friends Chan Automating a Starship << First off, I believe
2060  10-Jan-91 bonnevil@acc.stol Re: Automating a starship << In the campaigns
2061  10-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  Military Campaign << Well, I got two people w
2062  10-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  Thinking Ahead << I'd be interested in meetin
2063  10-Jan-91 f3w@mentor.cc.pur Automated Ships << You have crews because you
2064  10-Jan-91 woodsb@ecn.purdue Re: (2050) Automating a starship? << In messa
2065  10-Jan-91 George William He Re: Automated Vehicles << I have a character 
2066  11-Jan-91 Adrian Hurt       Practical Jokes in Traveller << d9bertil@dtek
2067  11-Jan-91 Arthur Green      Single-crew ships (big ones that is) << Hmmm 
2068  11-Jan-91 True Friends Chan automation << Someone suggested that today's 
2069  11-Jan-91 METLAY@vms.cis.pi Robots as crewmembers << I've only recently b

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2055
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 09:23:56 -0500
From: al646@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (T. L. Hayes)
Subject: Re: (2050) Automating a starship?



From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>

>We were talking about the campaign and he said (paraphrased) ,"As soon as
>I get some more cash, I'm going to have the ship's computer upgraded so
>that just one person can operate the whole thing."  This stopped me cold.
>This ship currently requires a minimum crew of three: pilot, navigator,
>and engineer.  The Ref. rules say that's the MINIMUM.  There are no
>additional rules for anything like what my player wants to do.  Now,
>I can wing it and allow him to do what he wants, but I'm concerned on
>two points.
>
>First, what would be the most logical/least-rule-bending way to do what
>he wants?  My initial reaction is have him buy two stationary robots
>(one for engineering and one for nav.) and require a live pilot at
>all times.  My reasoning is that a 'mere' computer could never be smart
>enough (within MT guidelines) to do the jobs, and it would require at
>least some synaptic processing, hence robots.  My robot design skills
>are pretty much non-existant, but I guess this is a good excuse to
>learn how, huh?
>

This is the way I would do it except you don't really need two stationary
robots, one stationary robot centrally located (perhaps tied into the main
computer) could run both positions assuming it possesed the correct skills.

>Second, assuming that I do allow him to succeed, what effect will it
>have on game balance?  I mean, I assume that GDW/DGP put those crew
>minimums in there for a reason.  Will allowing a single person with
>Pilot-1 to fly around the Imperium in a 200 ton Free Trader screw
>things up?  My initial reaction is "No", but I feel like I'm over-
>looking some points.
>

It shouldn't have any effect on game balance.  Traveller already allows
robots to be used in crew positions.  In my current campaign, the party
has one mech droid which they use as assistant engineer (the ship requires
two engineers and only one person on board has any skill).  In fact this
may be an economical way to operate a ship.  You need to consider the cost
of building and maintaining the robot plus the cost of any modification to
the ship to allow it to run automatically with the cost of hiring a crew
member to do the same job.  An engineer with skill level 1 and BRN of 1
get a salary of 500Cr/month (I think) plus lifesupport of Cr4000/month for
a total of Cr4500/month or Cr54,000 per year.  If the robot cost say
Cr200,000, it would pay for itself in only 4 years or 1/10 the life of the
ship's loan!  On the other hand a PC in that position (at least in my 
games) is cheaper because he works for no salary and your going to pay for
his life support anyway!  

I do think that the Imperium would require at least one living being on board
at all times however (ie no completely automated robot ships) because
their artificial intelligence technology is still pretty young and not
to be fully trusted.  Moreover, if *you* wanted, you could impose a -DM to
robots in the minimum crew positions during high stress situations such as
combat on the grounds that they are not truely intelligent and would not be
able to act on a hunch or knowingly exceed reccomended safty limits for the
device (ie engines) in question or such like.

This does bring up a good question that maybe should be addressed namely
"What is the role of Artificial (or better Simulated) Intelligence in
Traveller?"  How does one handle adding synaptic units to the main computers
of a ship?  It should be possible.  The more I think about this the more
questions and situations pop into my mind.  I need to think about this some
more and post a list of thoughts on the topic after I've had some time to
organize them.

Later

TLH

- - --
T.L.Hayes                  |  General Mail : al646@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
MIT/Lincoln Laboratory     |  Personal Mail: hayes@ll.mit.edu
Lexington, MA              |  (Personal Mail Address is in Beta Test!!!)

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2056
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 14:01:17 GMT
From: Lesley Grant <lgrant@maths.tcd.ie>
Subject: TML Vehicle Design Book

	There was some talk a while back about doing a TML version of Fighting
Ships. I am not sure much effort went into organising it but nothing appears
to have happened. I wanted a nice, easily referable to compendium of vehicles
for my own campaign so adoption my usual approach I have gone ahead and done
the TML Vehicle Design Book.
	In the various mauling to the original text I no longer have any record
of the original authors. If you want designs credited to you please send which
of the following list are yours.
	I'm not too keen on distributing it electronically. It is very large.
Also since I did it for myself it is in TeX which not too many of you out there
have. Once I've credited those who want crediting and cleaned up some bits
I will intend to make it available at basically cost price. The damn thing runs
to 161 pages so far but even with air mail postage it is unlikely to cost much
more than the GDW version. If there is enough demand I will have it printed.
	If you have designs that have not appeared on TML you would like
included go ahead and send them to me. Please chop all 20th Century comments.

				Jo Jaquinta
				lgrant@maths.tcd.ie

10 ton Fusion Rocket Module TL8
10,000 ton Rider TL15
20 ton Cargo Module TL8
200 ton Fast Courier TL15
200 ton Modular Spacecraft Frame TL8
2000 ton Rider TL15
40 ton Habitat Module TL8
40 ton Ion Drive Module TL8
40 ton Plasma Drive Module TL8
40 ton Spaceplane TL8
40 ton Spaceplane TL8
Admiral Bertil Modified Type M TL13
Aircraft Carrier TL8
Akerut Hercules Class Freighter (Type AH) TL15
Aki Exports Ranger LAV TL9
Akian Cossack APC TL9
Akian Dragoon APC TL9
Akian Hussar Light Tank TL9
Akian Ironfist SP Gun TL9
Akian Lancer Medium Tank TL9
Akian Longbow SP Gun TL9
Akian MkVII Truck TL9
Akian MkVIII Truck TL9
Akian Percheron Cargo Vehicle TL9
Akian Peregrine Hovertank TL9
Akian Shellback Armored Car TL9
Archer Light Gravtank TL10
Arrow Attack Speeder TL12
Atlantis Class Battleship TL 15
Attack Fighter
Attack Submarine TL8 "Alfa" Class
Attack Submarine TL8 "Los Angeles" Class
Ballistic Missile Sub TL8 "Typhoon" Class "Red October" subclass
Brumby Enclosed Air Raft TL11
Bumblebee Light Air Raft TL11
Catalina PBY-6A TL6 Amphibian Patrol Bomber
Chameleon Grav Tank TL10
Charger Armored Infantry Carrier TL10
Cheetah Light Tank TL8
Collace Destroyer TL13
Collace Missile Boat TL13
ConTech Mark I MiniLaunch TL15
ConTech Mark II MiniLaunch
ConTech MicroFighter TL15
Continental Defense Unit TL15
Cormorant Seaplane Fighter TL5
Courier Passenger Aircraft TL5
Curricle TL4
Darrian Fixed Wing Air/Raft TL13 "Saab" Class
Dart Combat Speeder TL10
Dependable Orbital Air Raft TL15
Destroyer TL6
Diesel Locomotive TL6
Draft Imperial 10000ton Fleet Escort TL13
Draft Imperial 10000ton Fleet Escort TL14
Draft Imperial 10000ton Fleet Escort TL15
Draft Imperial 20000ton Light Cruiser TL15
Dragonfly Light Grav Vehicle TL13
Dreadnaught TL 15, "Kokirrak" Class
Dreadnaught TL 15, "Plankwell" Class
Dreadnaught TL 15, "Tigress" Class
Dromedary Armored Recovery Vehicle TL10
Duke Boris class Mercenary Cruiser TL13
Eclipse Orbital Speeder TL13
Electric Runabout TL12
Endeavor Class Land Cruiser TL7
Expediter Long-Range Transporter TL10
Falchion Grav Tank TL12
Falchion-B Grav Tank TL12
Fast Cutter TL 15 "Sparrow" Class
Fleet Escort TL 15 "P.F. Sloan" Class
Flying Fortress B-17G TL6 Heavy Bomber
Focke-Wulf FW 190 TL6 Fighter
Folding Rotor Light Helicopter TL8
Folding Rotor Light Helicopter TL8
Folding Wing Light Aircraft
Folding Wing Light Aircraft TL8
Freedom Class Battlecruiser TL13
Freight Car TL6
Fuel Shuttle TL13
Glyptodon Walkter Tank TL13
Grav Bike TL13
Greyhound Tank TL5
Gunned Barge TL11 "Wolfchen" Class
H.B. Piper Class Attack Carrier TL15
Hammer Heavy Gravtank TL10
Heavy Attack Helicopter TL9
Heavy Attack Helicopter TL9
Heavy Cruiser TL 15 "Atlantic" Class
Heavy Fighter TL 15 "Talon" Class
Hoplite Grav Tank TL15
Hornet Light Tank TL8
Hornet VTOL Fighter/Attack TL9
Hornet VTOL Fighter/Attack TL9
Horosho M1002 Walker Tank TL10
Hummingbird Light Fighter TL7
Husky Ground Car
Ibis Medium Bomber TL6
IDP-9851 class Patrol Boat TL9
IDP-9851/L Lander TL9
Imperial Glisten Navy Reconaissance Drone TL15
Indianapolis (TL10) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis (TL11) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis (TL12) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis (TL13) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis (TL14) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis (TL15) Orbital Interceptor
Indianapolis TL11 Orbital Interceptor
Intercity Bus TL9
Intruder High Speed Recon Aircraft TL8
Javelin Class Light Fighter TL15
Ju-87 Stuka TL6 STOL Attack Aircraft
Kestrel Class Interface Fighter TL13
Kraken Carrier-based Fighter TL8
Lance Class Heavy Fighter TL15
Leviathan class Merchant Cruiser TL15
Light Intruder TL 15 "Fox" Class
Light Intruder TL 15 "Thunder" Class
Light Tanker TL11 "Cow" Class
Lightning Light Civilian Speeder TL15
Lightning VTOL Fighter TL9
Lockheed YF-22 (TL9) Fighter/Interceptor
Lord Adrian Class Light Cruiser TL13
M1A1 Abrams (TL8) Main Battle Tank
M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle (TL7) Armored Personel Carrier
M997 Combat Walker TL10
Manta STOL Medium Attack Aircraft TL 8
Manta STOL Medium Attack Aircraft TL8
Manzikert class Destroyer TL15
Medium Attack Helicopter TL8
Meson Destroyer
Meteor Grav Tank TL11
Metolius Class Fleet Escort TL13
MIG 21 Fishbed TL7 Interceptor
MIL-24 Hind TL8 Attack Helicopter
Minuteman Armored Truck TL5
Missile Fighter TL13 "Va" Class
Mitchell B-25 TL6 Medium Bomber
Model 27 Amphibious Light Tank TL8
Model 28 Amphibious APC TL8
Model 28B Air Defense Vehicle TL8
Model 31 Scout Car TL8
Modified IDP-9734 class Freighter TL9
Mosquito Class Light Escort TL 15
Mosquito TL6 Medium Bomber
Moth Trainer/Light Attack Aircraft TL7
Motor Home TL8
Motorcycle TL8
MultiPurpose Combat Vessel TL15
Nergal Class Battleship TL15
Nomad Light Range Truck TL8
Northrop YF-23 (TL9) Fighter/Interceptor
Oberlindes Lines Cargo Carrier Type CT TL15
Osprey Class Battleship TL15
Owl Medium Ground Attack Aircraft TL8
Packet TL13
Passenger Coach TL6
Passenger Combine TL6
Passenger Diner TL6
Passenger Sleeper TL6
Patrol Dirigible TL5
Patrol Dirigible TL5
Patrol Submarine TL6 "Gato" Class
Phobos (TL10) Mobile Artillery/Tank Destroyer
Phobos (TL10) Mobile Artillery/Tank Destroyer
Pioneer Grav Carrier TL10
Piranha Class Light Cruiser TL15
Planetary Defense Sled TL 15
Plowhorse Truck TL5
Poni All Terrain Vehicle TL10
Prospector's Track TL10
Quester Scout/Prospector Craft TL15
Raptor Combat Lander TL13
Reconnaissance Drone TL 15 "Lurker" Class
Reliable Light ATV TL13
Revenge Class Battlecruiser TL15
Roc Long Range Bomber TL8
Rocket Interceptor TL6
Rocket Interceptor TL6
Sarissa Fire Support Vehicle TL10
Scorpion Heavy Tank TL8
Sentinel Early Warning Aircraft TL8
Shambalator Class Escort TL 15
Shetland Light ATV TL13
SIE 800 ton Escort TL 15
SIE Behemoth TL15
SIE City of Fredriksport TL15
SIE Donald Stewart TL15
SIE Fiona Stewart TL15
SIE Hydra TL11
SIE Princess Lora TL10
SIE Princess Lora TL15
SIE Princess Margrethe TL15
Silver Star Class Passenger Liner TL15
Small Bulk Freighter TL15
Small Coastal Freighter TL6
Solar Burro TL10
Solar Mule TL15
Sparrow Interface Fighter TL10
Sprinter Cargo ACV TL8
Stinger Class Interface Fighter TL 15
Sun Tzu Class Heavy Cruiser Refit TL 15
Sun Tzu Class Heavy Cruiser TL 15
Swift Light Air Raft TL13
Sword Worlds Ariel class Pinnace TL11
Sword Worlds Majestic Class Heavy Cruiser TL11
Sword Worlds Nymph class Fighter TL11
Sword Worlds Sprite class Lander TL11
System Defence Drone TL 15 "Watcher" Class
T80 (TL8) Main Battle Tank
Tanker TL11 7-11 Series
Tiremese Mule TL11
Triumph Class Cruiser TL13
Tukera Freighter Type AT TL15
Tukera Long Liner Type RT TL15
Type 1107 Destroyer TL 15
Type 1112 Landing Boat TL15
Type A Free Trader TL9
Type A2 Far Trader TL12
Type K Gunboat TL15
Type M Merchant TL15
Type M Subsidized Liner TL9
Type S Scout/Courier
Type S Scout/Courier TL10
Type S Scout/Courier TL11
Type S Scout/Courier TL9
Typhoon Light Attack/Fighter Aircraft TL6
Urban Grav Bus TL10
Vanguard class Orbiter TL7
Wasp Class Heavy Fighter TL13
Whippet Ground Car TL10
Yak All Terrain Vehicle TL10
Yataghan Class Missile Boat TL 15

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2057
Date:     Thu, 10 Jan 91 9:33:31 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  One Man Band...

Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM> writes:

> Subject: (2050) Automating a starship?

> Here's stumper that one of my MT campaign players just handed me the
> other day.

> We were talking about the campaign and he said (paraphrased) ,"As soon as
> I get some more cash, I'm going to have the ship's computer upgraded so
> that just one person can operate the whole thing."  This stopped me cold.
> This ship currently requires a minimum crew of three: pilot, navigator,
> and engineer.  The Ref. rules say that's the MINIMUM.  There are no
> additional rules for anything like what my player wants to do.  Now,
> I can wing it and allow him to do what he wants, but I'm concerned on
> two points.

> First, what would be the most logical/least-rule-bending way to do what
> he wants?  My initial reaction is have him buy two stationary robots
> (one for engineering and one for nav.) and require a live pilot at
> all times.  My reasoning is that a 'mere' computer could never be smart
> enough (within MT guidelines) to do the jobs, and it would require at
> least some synaptic processing, hence robots.  My robot design skills
> are pretty much non-existant, but I guess this is a good excuse to
> learn how, huh?

Try this on for size.  Put in the new computer (and don't forget that you
need three of them to be safe--Dow Rieder was the one who suggested that we
should allow you to have different models of computer on one ship, fighting
as the most proficient, but control as the least proficient) and calculate
the crew values.  I don't think the MT rules require you to have a navigator,
do they?  A navigator is part of the Bridge crew, and that appears to have
a minimum of one, because you round up fractions when calculating.  
Engineering also rounds up fractions.  So what I would do is calculate the
required crew retaining fractional values with the new computer.  If the total
of bridge and engineering is less than one, and if the character has pilot,
navigation, and engineering skill, I'd be inclined to let in run the ship
single-handedly.  What do you mean by "at all times"?  Are you presently
requiring three shifts worth of pilots?  If modern aircraft can fly on auto-
pilot for extended periods of time, I'd have no problem with allowing a TL9+
starship to operate on autopilot most of the time, with the human there to
override/make suggestions in an emergency.  The controls are all computer
driven anyway.  However, the robot idea isn't a bad one even if you allow a
single character to run the ship.  There will (Murphy's Law) inevitably be
simultaneous crises in engineering and navigation some day....Robots are 
pretty cheap compared to the computer upgrade.


> Second, assuming that I do allow him to succeed, what effect will it
> have on game balance?  I mean, I assume that GDW/DGP put those crew
> minimums in there for a reason.  Will allowing a single person with
> Pilot-1 to fly around the Imperium in a 200 ton Free Trader screw
> things up?  My initial reaction is "No", but I feel like I'm over-
> looking some points.

I can't see that it would be a problem.  There will remain disadvantages. 
There is no chance of doing any damage control during a battle, and if you
get tossed in jail on a high-law planet, no crewmembers around to bail you
out..."Bare is brotherless back".

> What do you folks think?

>         Mark F. Cook

That's what I think.

Rob Dean

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2058
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Automating a starship
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 9:51:30 GMT

Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM> writes:
> 
> We were talking about the campaign and he said (paraphrased) ,"As soon as
> I get some more cash, I'm going to have the ship's computer upgraded so
> that just one person can operate the whole thing."

Has this player been watching Star Trek III recently?  Remind him of what
happens if everything is automated, and the computer gets damaged.

Other possibilities:

. The pilot gets in trouble with Imperial authorities for violating safety
regulations (that minimum of 3 crew could be a legal, not physical,
requirement).

. He can't get his ship loaded, unloaded, or otherwise handled by starport
personnel.  The Navigators' and Engineers' Unions are upset with him for
making their members redundant, and the Starport Workers' Union is helping
them by boycotting his ship.

On the other hand, there is a precedent for this, and it doesn't require
the computer to be upgraded.  It requires the pilot to be upgraded.  One
person can do more than one job, provided that the person is skilled for
all the jobs.  For each additional job, the character's effective skill
is reduced by one.  So, if the pilot wants to navigate as well, he needs
Pilot-2 and Navigation-2; if he does both, he does so at Pilot-1 and
Navigation-1.  If he has Pilot-3, Navigation-3, Engineering-3, and the
ability to run quickly from the engine room to the bridge, then he can
fly the ship by himself, with all three skills effectively at level 1.

- - -- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2059
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 10:47:30 EST
From: True Friends Change Your Life <baranski@mcdonl.enet.dec.COM>
Subject: Automating a Starship

First off, I believe that there are things that a human can do that robots just
can't do.  I would think that on any ship, minimum I would want a pilot and an
engineer.  What is the pliot going to do when the engineering robot comes up
against something it can't handle in a tight situation? go back and eyeball the
situation?  you may not have the leasure to do that in some situations.

automating a gunner, or navigator would be more possible, but again, I don't
think that any but the most expensive robot could act as anything more then
skill level 1 or 0.  They don't have the same kind of intuition or aquisition
of experience.  I know that there are pubilcations out there which disagree
with me, but that's my stance.

I think of the robots in Silent Running.  They were programmed for particular
basic tasks, but they often came up against things that they couldn't handle,
and had to be programmed or instructed.

You would have more success using robots to suplement existing personel on a
larger ship, having an engineer and 2 robots instead of 2 engineer.  Say you
have a gunner on a ship with multiple turrets mostly run by 'robots'; the
gunner could program new tactics into the robots as he comes up with them from
his experience, like what to do when two targets scissor, etc...

There's now way in hell, I'd want to be on a ship run by a pilot 1 and robots.
at the very least, the pilot *has* to have all the skills needed to run the
ship, like Eng, Nav, even if the ship is automated.  What will you do if the
jump drive won't work, and the robot can't figure it out?  Kick it?  With some
skill, at least you can do *something*!

It might be possible to get along without a Navigator if the pilot has
navigation skill, but it will take him longer to do the work required then it
would for two people, and that might be critical in some situations.

Jim Baranski

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2060
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 12:58:44 -0600
From: bonnevil@acc.stolaf.edu
Subject: Re:  Automating a starship


In the campaigns that I run, I usually allow players to automate their
ships using robots if they wish.  I feel that most positions on a ship
can be handled by a high tech robot -- it preserves the "far future"
feel of the game.  However, this doesn't mean that this is as good as
having a real live sophont in the position, especially in jobs which
require creative and innovative thought.

For instance, a player may put a pilot bot into their ship.  This would
be good in a nobles unstreamlined staryacht, perhaps, since it never
reenters or fights in combat (hopefully), but could be a disaster if
a dangerous situation arises.  Gunnery robots would be terrific in a
merchant -- why pay for gunners you never use, especially in exposed 
turrets, when you can use their staterooms for paying passengers.   In
an emergency, a robot gunner could hold its own, perhaps.  But on a 
battleship, highly trained gunners would be preferable.

Furthermore, robots are expensive to purchase and maintain.  They can
break down at inopportune moments -- the EMP that knocked out your 
jump drive also can get your engineering robot.  Now how do you fix
everything?  Of course, having one engineer robot and several sophonts
can be handy in a situation where you don't want to send something
alive into danger -- corrosive gas or hard radiation, perhaps.  If 
whatever goes in will die, why not send an automaton?  Robots can be
replaced; players hate to roll up new characters.

Medical robots are great -- but like Larry Niven says in his Known
Space books, it's almost frightening how many things could go wrong
with a damaged autodoc.  This means that you'd better make sure you
buy a medical robot from a reputable dealer, and it better be _very_
sturdy!

So go ahead and build some robots!  Just remember, robots have their
limitations, just like living crew, and have some fun.

- - --Steve

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2061
Date:     Thu, 10 Jan 91 14:35:44 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Military Campaign

Well, I got two people who expressed an interest in a PBEM Traveller 
military campaign.  I think I could handle up to about five.  Any other
volunteers?

Rob Dean


------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2062
Date:     Thu, 10 Jan 91 14:37:30 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Thinking Ahead

I'd be interested in meeting any of you, if circumstances permit.  How many
people are planning on attending either Origins in Blatimore this summer,
or the World Science Fiction Convention in Chicago over Labor Day?  If we
knew it would be worthwhile now, we might get a meeting room set aside for
either of those cons.

Rob Dean


------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2063
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 14:49:30 -0500
From: f3w@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Mark Gellis)
Subject: Automated Ships


You have crews because you need a certain amount of labor to run/maintain
things.  Robots can easily manage things at the nominal levels (most new
airliners today--late Tech 7?--can pretty much fly and land themselves; the
human crews, if they wanted, could let the jets fly themselves and stay on
only as an emergency redundant system; as for repairs, a CD rom disc 
probably has enough room for "The 10,001 Things Most Likely to Go Wrong
on Your Spacecraft, and How to Fix Them" files, so your maintenance crews
are probably not a problem, either).  This is the easiest thing to do;
if your player wants a fully automated spacecraft, a robotic brain would
cost five times (and double mass) for what regular controls cost (and
double this cost if you are tearing out existing controls instead of
simply building a new ship--this covers the additional labor costs, etc.)
At least, that is how I have it set up.  Mind you, this does not include
any additional costs for special maintenance facilities that you might
want on an automated ship (or any ship) making very long voyages.

I have a feeling that the reason why the rules are set up include the
following:

     1) People have not thought through the potential for robotics,
        especially for jobs that are mostly tedium, but sometimes require
        real creative problem-solving (ship crews, etc.)

     2) If you can have everything done by robots, it limits what player
        characters can do.  It's hard to start off an adventure by shipping
        out on a free trader with a motley crew if the credit-strapped
        captain knows that robots will work harder and longer and complain
        less.  (They will cost more at first, but any good businessman
        with the initial credit for a spacecraft could get the additional
        5% he would need to buy an entire robotic crew, knowing in the 
        long run it would be far more profitable--you don't have to pay
        robots once you own them.)  The easy out is to assume that there
        is a limit to how good one can build a portable mechanical brain;
        if there are obvious limits, then robots can only be so smart,
        and certain jobs will always remain the territory of humans.

        (I have a feeling that our real future with robots will end up
        with different classes being built--most robots will be about as
        intelligent as mice, or not even that smart, so they can handle
        jobs that are dangerous or tedious, but will have the basic
        creative problem-solving abilities that will let them deal with
        unusual situations pretty well--an industrial accident that
        doesn't kill anyone because all the workers are robots is a
        good thing, but if the robots are too stupid to get out of the
        burning factory, and you lose 500 million credits worth of 
        robots, it is a very bad thing.  Other robots may be true AIs,
        as smart as we are, and they will be given rights, etc.  The
        other option, for a Traveller-like civilization, one that has
        had time to go through the growing pains of robotic influences
        on society, might be to outlaw the creation of robots that can
        totally replace humans, as this is a technology that creates
        some pretty serious strains on society.  By the time of
        Traveller, people would have developed robots that are very
        smart, smarter than people even, if it is possible to do it,
        and we would have learned what having a new race of sophont
        beings does to our society.  We might also end up as a race
        of "gods"--human beings would control enormous armies of
        robots, which can be programmed for loyalty no matter how
        smart they are (and "police" robots can take care of any
        robots with bad programming) who would do all the things
        that people do now.  Or the robots will just kill us off
        as part of the "natural evolution from carbon-water life
        to silicon life.")


Enjoy.


------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2064
From: woodsb@ecn.purdue.edu (Brent L. Woods)
Subject: Re: (2050) Automating a starship?
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 6:23:09 EST


 In message 2050, markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com (Mark F. Cook) writes:
 >
 >Here's stumper that one of my MT campaign players just handed me the
 >other day.
 >
 >We were talking about the campaign and he said (paraphrased) ,"As soon
 >as I get some more cash, I'm going to have the ship's computer
 >upgraded so that just one person can operate the whole thing."  This
 >stopped me cold.  This ship currently requires a minimum crew of
 >three: pilot, navigator, and engineer.  The Ref. rules say that's the
 >MINIMUM.  There are no additional rules for anything like what my
 >player wants to do.  Now, I can wing it and allow him to do what he
 >wants, but I'm concerned on two points.

     Mark, tell me something.  Just how is it that you accidentally
stumble over the gimmick that I was planning to use in the upcoming
adventure that I'll be running?  No, never mind, it's not that
important...spooky, though.  ;-)

 >First, what would be the most logical/least-rule-bending way to do
 >what he wants?  My initial reaction is have him buy two stationary
 >robots (one for engineering and one for nav.) and require a live pilot
 >at all times.

     Good instincts.  Since I was planning to use this little tidbit,
I've done a lot of thinking about the subject.  Actually, I'm doing it
a little bit different--in my upcoming session, the idea is to have a
ship that requires *no* organo-sentient (I like this word :-) ) crew at
all.  This includes a ship that has no provision for life support (hey,
it's a *prototype*, okay? :-) ).  I don't have to tell you why various
factions in the traveller universe would find this little gem desirable,
do I?  No, I didn't think so.  ;-)

 >My reasoning is that a 'mere' computer could never be smart enough
 >(within MT guidelines) to do the jobs,

     Define "mere."  I'm doing it by mixing some technologies--robot
brains and standard computers.  High tech level, of course, but that's
a gimmie.  However, the whole point (at least, in my case) is that it's
*not* off-the-shelf equipment--experimental, and it doesn't work all too
well yet (and will continue so, at least for another tech level).
However, your players and their characters don't necessarily know this--
situation fodder.  Heck, there are lots of things in the real world like
this--it works, sort of, but in a not-especially-practical way; look at
OS/2.  ;-)

 >and it would require at least some synaptic processing, hence robots.

     Bingo.  Give the man a cheroot.  The idea I came up with was
installing a computer *much* larger than the ship needs (say, a Model
5 or 6 on a 200 ton Far Trader hull), and adding a snynaptic processing
module to it, thus making it a robot brain, of a sort.  All the control
lines go into it, and, where it needs independent manipulators, small
maintenance drones are linked to it in a master/slave relationship.
This all works fairly well, since we haven't wandered too far afield
from the published rules.  What I've just done is make a big starship-
shaped robot.  A little extrapolation is needed, but that's all.

     For your purposes, you can go a little simpler--a big computer,
with add-on synaptics and only a rudimentary decision-making
capability (since you expect to have at least one organo-sentient
present at all times).

     Remember one thing about this, though.  Synaptic processors have
to be *taught*.  At the very beginning, your fancy new ship's brain
will be little more than a standard computer with a lot of potential.
It will make mistakes if the crew lets it have too much initiative.
It also runs the risk of developing a personality--there's a lot of
unused potential there.  I'm not necessarily saying that it'll be
truly sentient, but it may act like it.  As I recall, there's a
planetful of sentient robots (the Sabmiqys--Challenge 28, page 31, and
the article is written by Joe Fugate) at TL17.  So our little efforts,
built at more normal (and more available) Imperial tech levels, can
be considered non-sentient, even if they exhibit wilful and irrational
behavior.  :-)  After all, that's not necessarily an attribute of
sentience; my car acts that way all the time, and *it's* not sentient.
I think.  ;-)

 >My robot design skills are pretty much non-existant, but I guess this
 >is a good excuse to learn how, huh?

     Yup.  It's not that difficult.  About like designing vehicles.

 >Second, assuming that I do allow him to succeed, what effect will it
 >have on game balance?  I mean, I assume that GDW/DGP put those crew
 >minimums in there for a reason.  Will allowing a single person with
 >Pilot-1 to fly around the Imperium in a 200 ton Free Trader screw
 >things up?  My initial reaction is "No", but I feel like I'm over-
 >looking some points.

     My considered opinion (considered for several weeks, in fact) is
that it won't have much effect on game balance.  Just limit it.  For
instance, if a very oversized computer is needed as the base platform,
this rules out doing this to really large ships, since they need
computers that big just to operate--there won't be enough spare
capacity available.  Also, it's not a mature technology yet--there're
bound to be some teething problems.  Not to mention having to deal
with training the synaptic processor.

     Actually, now that I think about it, there's no need to get that
elaborate.  Your PCs can just buy a couple of robots with the
appropriate skills in software.  The robot would count as a crewember,
if not especially skilled or disposed to intiative.  There would still
have to be a human in charge.

     Also, I just thought of something else.  Consider attitudes toward
robots.  Vilani, especially, since they're a touch technophobic.  There
has been some anti-robot agitation out Solomani Rim way, too.

 >What do you folks think?

     Should they be allowed to have an (even partially) automated ship?
Sure.  Why not?  Provided, of course, that they're prepared to deal
with (and endure) all the possible negative aspects of the situation.
They may decide that it's not worth the expense and effort.  Or, it may
save their tails in a tight spot.  "You never can tell."  ;-)


- - --
     Brent

INTERNET:  woodsb@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
USNAIL:  2818 S. Sunrise Dr.  /  New Palestine, IN  46163
PHONE:  +1 (317) 861-4844 (voice)


------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2065
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 91 23:54:57 -0800
From: George William Herbert <gwh@soda.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Re: Automated Vehicles


I have a character that through long convoluted devious channels (treachery)
earned herself a custom built starship.  She wanted something good enough
to withstand any normal-ship (escorts and down) attack, and extreme endurance
(she wanted to jump out into deep space and stay there for a while for personal
survival reasons...).  It also had to be single-crew operable...

The solution was a heavily redundant 600 ton 'Special Lab Ship' [neat cover name
with addl. background that she's a scientist helping...].  It had 3 model
6/fib computers (note the intrinsic redundancy in each system...) and ECP
and such...and each of the main computers was paired with a Best-At-TL15
robot brain, with Pilot, Nav, Engineering, etc. out the ears.  My justification
was that the robots were going to be smart enough to handle the piloting tasks,
and each robot had enough talent to handle it all alone...

But this has it's problems.  First, if something breaks that the maintenance bot
can't replace, you've only got one person to help with it.  If the robots
encounter a totally out-of-ordinary situation, at TL15 they're not really
creative enough to solve it well.  Etc.  One of the more lethal near-accidents
(lesson 1- if you run for the hills, stay there...) occured when a biological
agent that ate computer components got loose on another PC ship... had the GM
been particularly evil, and my char. unlucky, she would have been sitting dead
in space with an unmanagable pile of junk.  

Summarizing:
Use Robots tied to computers as replacement for crew.  It makes some sense in
most situations.
Be prepared to have difficulty handling out-of-the-ordinary situations if you 
do.  Robots aren't really bright at TL15.

- - -george william herbert
gwh@ocf.berkeley.edu

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2066
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Practical Jokes in Traveller
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 91 9:55:47 GMT

d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se writes:
> 
>   I can see it: Kids running around waving plastic FGMP-15's and playing Zho's
> and Marines (or Lucan and Dulinor:)

This reminds me of an incident I arranged a long time ago while I was referee.
The PC's ship was boarded by some people wearing impressive uniforms, and
carrying impressive ID cards and FGMP's.  The leader claimed to be from the
local navy, and was checking their ship over to make sure it complied with
safety regulations.  The boarders then proceeded to do their checks, failing
the ship on a whole lot of counts such as the wrong sort of paint in the
cargo hold, a minor scratch in the paintwork of a fuel line, and the ship's
hull being made of the wrong alloy.  (It wasn't; at least, the PC's didn't
know it was, nor did the boarders, and nor did the referee.)  After the
safety inspectors had succeeded in annoying the PC's, one of the PC's started
to seem to be leading towards threatening remarks, at which point the leading
inspector warned the PC's not to try anything, there was a nuon gun on the
planet targetted on this ship.  ("What's a nuon gun?"  "Like a meson gun,
but better.")

The leading boarder eventually revealed that there was nothing wrong with
the ship, as far as he knew.  Mind you, he didn't know a lot, because the
PC's were the victim of a local holovision practical joke show (a bit like
Candid Camera).  The FGMP's were models made from kits, with the cameras
fitted inside them.  There was indeed no such thing as a nuon gun.  And by
way of compensation, the PC's were given a free lunch by the holonet company.

Actually, it was quite a good lunch.


- - -- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2067
Date:         Fri, 11 Jan 91 11:00:24 GMT
From: Arthur Green <AJGREEN%IRLEARN@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject:      Single-crew ships (big ones that is)

Hmmm .... putting robots in the crew instead of humans. OK, here's a
situation: Captain Jamison replaces his crew and all those freeloading
working passage type with robots and sets off down the Spinward Main
in splendid isolation. He then gets a nasty case of Enopian toe flu (or
gets jump sickness if you prefer). His trusty robot medic doesn't know
about Enopian toe flu ... RIP Captain Jamison. Let's hope this happens
before his appearance in Twilight's Peak :-) The point of all this
waffle is that robots as I understand they work at Imperial tech levels
aren't flexible enough to trust on their own.  Give me a human crew any
day.

 - Arthur Green
   University College Dublin Computing Services -- AJGREEN@IRLEARN.BITNET
                                                   AJGREEN@IRLEARN.UCD.IE
   "Time dilation is relativity's way of telling you to slow down"

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2068
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 91 10:56:33 EST
From: True Friends Change Your Life  11-Jan-1991 1045 <baranski@meridn.enet.dec.COM>
Subject: automation

Someone suggested that today's airplanes can pretty much fly themselves.  That
may be so, but can they land and take off by themselves?  And would you want to
fly on an automated plane?  Not me!

No, *some* crew must be aboard to take care of emergencies.  I expect traveller
starships will be very similiar.

The other question I've had for a long time is that there seems to be an
assumption in general that on traveller ships that there is always someone on
watch 24 hours a day on the bridge and engineering.  Yet the crew on board is
no where near anything what would be required?

Are 24 hour watches really required?  I'd have a hard time sleeping, knowing
that their is nobody at the wheel, though.  I figure that at the least,
*someone* of even the most minimal skill has to be on the bridge at all times,
and they summon someone if anything anything bad or unfamiliar happens.  On the
other hand, on scouts, perhaps they simply set all the computer alarms, and
take a snooze, and possibly get a hell of a wake up!

Jim Baranski

------------------------------

Archive-Message-Number: 2069
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 91 12:28 EDT
From: METLAY@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Subject: Robots as crewmembers


I've only recently begun running parties with robots in the crew; my
first exposure has been very good. The party I'm running (and about which
you read here occasionally in the fiction pieces drawn from the game) has
one robot at the moment, a medical/steward 'bot with a fair degree of skill.
This frees up having to have a party member be a Medical type, either for
shootemup safety or meeting SPA/ASTC regs for ship crews> And then there
was Hector, but, well, you'll find out more about him in upcoming stories.|->

As for utterly automated ships, this gives rise to all sorts of fascinating
scenaria, most of which I think would work better in a game like Space Opera
than in MT, but that's a personal bias.....

"What about that Denoba-class over there in the back?"
"Oh! Uh, well, uh, um, I *guess* it's for sale, but frankly I don't think
you gentlebeings would be very interested in it...."
"Not interested?! The Denoba's one of the best rimrunners ever to upship!
Why the hell wouldn't we be interested?"
"Er, yes, the Denoba as a CLASS are excellent craft, and that one back there
would fetch a high price, assuming...."
"Assuming WHAT?"
"Assuming that the people who bought it could average more than three hops 
before they got killed."
"HUH?"
"Yeah, see, that's the problem. The computer's gotten kind of antisocial;
it keeps spacing its crews. We can't get to it to disconnect it, either.
You see the problem?"
"Indeed I do. <chuckle> Fortunately I have a robopsychologist with me...."

|->

metlay

------------------------------

End of TML Bundle
*****************

