Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Radio Controlled]

This is a good idea.  It'll help to decide what we need to finalize.  I don't think it belongs on the Hephaestus page, but putting it on the wiki would probably be a good plan.

Made page, 'shipping manifest'. Needs work (I'm on a bit of a timer, and editing from phone is hell in a handbasket), has link on frontpage under misc.

Done, at least the part where we're building a hammer.

Thanks man, this'll ensure we don't completely forget about them.

As for Saint's stuff, I think it's just the Heavy robotic body, which is the lightened Battlesuit design.  It might be overkill to send three of them though.  I'll let Radio/PW/the council decide, when it's time.

Just say when. We already agreed on price, if I remember?

I'll probably do it if it needs to be done. 

Feel free but not obliged! I'm sure our newer peeps would like it, having some options to protect their soft bodies.

Currently, I'm figuring the sharkmist armor should replace the Civic defender's longcoat

Agreed, that was what it was meant to do (nice how the three new things fall in line with the 'light, medium, heavy' options I requested). Might want to check what happens though is such a suit touches flesh (eg after getting a hand shot of), or if the effect can be shut on and off.

hexsand should replace milnoplate (which should become a standard item)

Agree on making a standard version. Not entirely sure if one layer of hexsand is ideal. Maybe a small layer of sharkmist armor beneath it (so that, even when shattered, the pieces remain in position somewhat, meaning they can still protect against lasers), or two smaller layers with some padding in between (to prevent 1 shot breaking it all).

Battlesuits would get a layer of sharkmist, atop four layers of hexsand, possibly with variation of the hexsand's resistance like the normal BS.

We should check what pw meant when he said the third kind of armor (rock insect mixed with hex. Xenohex?) is 'nearly unbreakable'. Is that only versus kinetic, or also other types of damage?

If first, one option would be an outer layer of xenohex (protect against kinetic, maybe with some chemm-off sprayed on?) and an inner layer of hexsand (against lasers, and final level against kinetic) with a layer of sharkmist in between (to fill up any hole make in the former two). That way, they'll need to hit the same spot multiple times with different weapons to get through, and fast enough to prevent sharkmist filling the hole. But your idea might work as well, we'd need to check really.

ADD: Just had an idea. Could we perhaps mix up regular carbon nanofibers and alien sand (and maybe even miniscule hexes, if possible) to create upgraded armorcloth? I understand that so far the armor upgrades have been confined to rigid armor types.

I think sharkmist armor might be bendable, if thin enough?

Finalizing a MCP with the medical systems would be a good plan, but I dislike Pyro's idea of armoring it.  I used to think it was a good idea, but it's bad for people who might want medical systems for cheap, and for robots who would want the armor but not the medical stuff.  Just seperating the two seems best.

Yeah, I also think separating medical features from armor is better. A Mesk or Bishop or Xan, for example, are fleshy, but also have no need for any medical options whatsoever.

Note to self: look into those anti-spacemagic rods the sword has, see if they can be used to create a personal protective bubble to safeguard against ampers.

Also, very happy to see people go for the easy naming route. Plain, simple and practical!

[Nikitian]

I'm not sure about energy weapons, but given the source of that insect armor (the enormously heavy rock-eating "slugs" in the molten iron hot biome, IIRC?), they should be absurdly resistant to heat as well. I am not sure how well it would translate into laser resistance, but I take it would make the armor very resistant to the HEP derivatives.

On MCP-II armoring: I wanted to propose a counter-arguement, but I probably now agree. And anyway, at this point it is worth tinkering the MCP-II and 1-token chest armor first.

[syvarris]

I was thinking, for the sharksuit and infantry hexplate, it might be a good idea to have the armor be slightly expandable.  I mean, say, two tokens for the sharksuit chestplate, and another one or two to add short sleeves/greaves(skirt?) and a helmet. 

The point is, it allows the minimum price to be lower, which is very important for newbies, and also allows robots who just want to ensure they don't outright die can get the important bit- the torso armor.

Although, it might be impractical because it adds complexity, and therefore cost.  If the full sharksuit costs three tokens with one system, and four with the other, you should just use the former.


@Radio

Most of your suggestions are good points, and I'll start experimenting with them again after this turn.  Saint evidently has ADD- he can't focus on any one project, or even any one discipline.

As for the battlesuit, I was leery of using the xenoplate armor because it sounded too expensive, and the heaviness could really hurt battlesuits.  Combination layered sharkplate/hexsand seems like a better idea, if the hexsand really is so brittle that gauss rounds could break it.  But, it needs testing before we make any decision, so thanks for pointing it out.  It might be cheaper and lighter than I was imagining.

Anyway, now I think a better method would be:
--a layer of sharkplate on top (Easily repaired, absorbs small arms fire)
--a layer of hexsand (To block lasers, which are probably pretty good against hexbug.  Better to have the kinetic vulnerable on top, since lasers are easier to make wide angle.)
--Another layer of sharkplate (As a backplate for the hexsand.)
--The layer of hexbug (To block the kinetics strong enough to get here, like the PSL.)


Then again, maybe it would be better to cut the last three layers in half, and copy them underneath.  That would make alternating kinetics/energy weapons less effective, but it would also result in seven layers total.

[Sean Mirrsen]

2.You guys should state how you want to handle it. Remember the new stuff has weaknesses as well as strengths. If you want to standardize the use of a new material, you have to say which one and how you want it used.

I guess this warrants some discussion here. I believe at the least we can issue new tactical shields made of the new materials, without delving into deeper uses and applications. Everything else probably needs some thought and experimentation.
edit: ninja'd on that front.

3. In most cases, space combat involves to ships at extremely long ranges firing lasers at each other. Kinetic projectiles tend to be for stationary targets or things too close to be able to dodge.

I guess this means that we're better off with anti-laser armor for the ships first and foremost.

Also, I think we should look into FELling up our ships' laser cannons.

The beam, uncompressed, travels a good distance, judging by the damage, however, as it continues on, it seems to becomes less consolidated, as though the wall of energy is breaking up into separate pieces and traveling out at different angles. These pieces travel for quite a while before the last traces of them on the ground and landscape end.

Compressing the beam by half has the effect of effectively quadrupling the range before the beam starts to break up.

Okay, so... at absolute worst? This is a range and damage booster for the HEP. Quadruple range is ridiculously good, that's basically putting the HEP on par with the cutting laser for effective range. Does that mean 3/4ths would get 16 times the range? We'll need a better prototype, and better testbed, to find out.

(also, that means that in order for the device to be space-combat usable, it'll need its compression factor upped significantly. Somewhere in the 31/32 ratio should get a distance usable for shorter-range ship-to-ship engagements, as that'll be 1024 times the original range. Assuming the "medium" range bracket is at most a few hundred meters, maybe even some 200 meters, that gives us 200km of range with enough power to cut through spaceship hulls with relative ease. It's going to need a cruiser-sized heatsink to cool down though. )

[Nikitian]

@syvarris Well, why add complexity/configurability at the cost of tokens, when we can just choose to produce two separate armors (and not suffer from these drawbacks)? Let's say, a sharkvest and a full sharksuit. The latter could be three or something, depending on how much protection we stuff in, and how big a mass-producing price cut we can get. The former, however, should be by all means possible cramped into one-token territory, even if we have to decrease the coverage and thickness - because one token is small enough to be considered throwaway, even by newbie standards.


ADD: On the Gilgamesh mindfucking paintjob: should we perhaps study it when the mission is over? Even if we can't divulge anything of interest out of it (though I suspect it might be of similar nature to the mindfuck gun), we could at least use it, say, for informational warfare on the hard-to-crack UWM worlds, in a similar role to previously discussed biological psychoweapons. And it might be better than the Eldritch Painting at that - while undoubtedly weaker, it appears to have no pronounced side effects (subject for extensive study, of course).

[syvarris]

@Unholy in the Heph thread

First, could you please use the Hephaestus OOC threads for questions?  Or alternatively, the Tinker thread if those are meant to be actions?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the hexplate doesn't actually have much to do with hexes.  It's just that we originally found the material in hexes on the anomalous planetoid, so we've just always called it hex material.

As for the sharkmist, it's nanotech, so I don't see why not.  Although, I'm not sure what the purpose would be, seeing as silk would probably require more than carbon to repair.


You shouldn't take my word though- I encourage you to ask PW in the Tinker thread.  Assumptions are always bad, and he's usually fine with people asking minor questions like those.


@Nikitian, because apparently I missed your post

The primary reason I don't want to have multiple separate items is armory clutter.  We would have an entry for a chestplate, and then right below that, a chestplate with sleeves and greaves.

Secondarily, I don't that would be quite allowed if the 'optional sleeves' isn't allowed.  If one single item doesn't work, creating two items which together operate exactly the same seems like... something the council wouldn't allow.

[Nikitian]

Well, it's not like we don't have multiple armors already (half-hidden as 'on demand' items), is it? And the primary difference between the two could as well be 'thickness' of the armor, for example - or even material composition (the chestplate doesn't even have to be cutting-edge sharkarmor, it could be something less advanced).
Also, isn't it up to GM in the end as to what is acceptable and what is not? I'm just slowly growing weary of the remarks on the council's all-encompassing judgement. As Piecewise would be the one to do the initial pricing, we'd see from the start whether such approach would be deemed acceptable or not. Worst come to worst, we might have to make the second armor slightly more complex (say, add helmet protection or additional layer or something) and slightly more expensive in order to make the difference between the two more clear.

Moreover, as I just understood, unless we manage to fit the whole (single-item) armor into two-token price range, the Civic Defender's longcoat will still be a viable competitor. On the other hand, however, if we do, it would be more acceptable to have no 1-token armor.

[syvarris]

Sorry if this post seems somewhat incoherent or confused.  I'm not feeling great right now.

Well, it's not like we don't have multiple armors already (half-hidden as 'on demand' items), is it?

Not really, since the real armory page that's actually used is the wiki page, and it lists everything.  Even the stuff nobody buys, and nobody is likely to ever buy.

And the primary difference between the two could as well be 'thickness' of the armor, for example - or even material composition (the chestplate doesn't even have to be cutting-edge sharkarmor, it could be something less advanced).

Uh, yes, this is all true, why does it matter?  I also fail to see why we'd use something else aside from sharkplate, considering it was deliberately developed to be cheaper and more effective than older light armors.

Also, isn't it up to GM in the end as to what is acceptable and what is not? I'm just slowly growing weary of the remarks on the council's all-encompassing judgement.

Sorry.  It doesn't seem like something PW would intentionally allow either, but he's much more likely to simply miss it.  That's supposed to be the purpose of the council, as I understand it- watching stuff to make sure PW isn't tricked.

Although, come to think of it, I guess they do more than that now.  At this point, they are the ones who price and stat things.

As Piecewise would be the one to do the initial pricing, we'd see from the start whether such approach would be deemed acceptable or not.

Okay, I just don't see the logic in what you're saying.  You're suggesting we manufacture two entirely seperate types of armor, which are mutually exclusive.  A chestplate, and a full suit

I'm suggesting we just manufacture one type only, the full suit, but which you can buy just the chestplate for.

Why would one be viable but the other wouldn't be?  Mechanically, they're the same thing.  At most, I could see an argument that for my idea, the whole suit can't be one piece.  Is that really such a big thing that it would cost more?

Worst come to worst, we might have to make the second armor slightly more complex (say, add helmet protection or additional layer or something) and slightly more expensive in order to make the difference between the two more clear.

...I'm sorry if I'm confused, but are you suggesting we make the basic suit of armor more complex and expensive, just to justify having a weaker version?  At this point, shouldn't the basic armor be downgraded, so that it is actually the basic armor?

Moreover, as I just understood, unless we manage to fit the whole (single-item) armor into two-token price range, the Civic Defender's longcoat will still be a viable competitor. On the other hand, however, if we do, it would be more acceptable to have no 1-token armor.

...I was figuring we'd aim for three tokens for the full suit, and just not use the civic defender's longcoat ever.  The whole point of the armor project was to replace our previous armor.  If there's a reason to use the old stuff (which isn't even military armor!) instead, the project was a failure.


Also, I have to question your insistence on having the armor cost one token.  It's a valid desire, but your argument seems to revolve around it being 'throwaway'.  Are you saying that it needs to be cheap so that we can actually convince newbies to use armor?

A better argument, in my opinion, would be that it fits into a five token equipment 'set' better.  I.E. a medic could buy a hand laser along with an emergency kit and armor.  A con user could buy a Testament, and still have a little armor.  On the other hand, if it cost two tokens, that's slightly better protection for a space magic user, who really doesn't care about any one-token items to any great degree.

[Nikitian]

Nah, that's probably me being incoherent.
Let's see where it all started.

• It would be nice to have minimal in-built torso protection as well as head (current). However, if 'free' barest torso/chest armor is not possible to produce (included in the new suits line), it might be acceptable if the same 1-token barest armor was available separately, as a standalone 'upgrade' to the suits in question.
• Currently, we have sharksuit armor developed as the new cheapest tier of armor. Thus it might be logical to use it for the aforementioned barest 1-token armor. However, if we have both full-coverage armor and chest-only, maybe one should be designed as an optional upgrade to the other - though this might lead to extra token costs.
• Keeping the two armor designs separate might address the issue of increased cost, but it might be difficult to justify such separation. One way to do so could be by differentiating the armors further, through design, composition, protection level, etc.
• Unless the most basic/cheapest version comes as two or less tokens, there might still remain demand for the old ballistic-cloth longcoat armor.

All in all, my arguements mostly stem from the desire to keep the price creep to minimum. Frankly, I don't quite consider the one-token version real armor, and more like some sort of life-saving insurance or something. 'Throwaway' might not be the best term here, maybe 'dirt cheap' or something like that could fit better. It's just like Mk II: by no means it is going to get you through the mission by itself, but there might be a variety of cases where having one will be greatly beneficial to the user - so it might be worth in the long run to spend a few spare tokens on it. By making this barest 'armor' as cheap as possible (as well as the new Mk+ II replacement suits) we're gambling against the players' greediness, ensuring slightly better average survival chances.
So yes - mostly I would like to avoid increasing price of regular armor because protection upgrade for MCP-II was decided to be sold separately.

Sure, there is merit in discussion of how well new proper armor would fit into the starting amount of five tokens. (At three tokens it would be fine for a Con specialist with a lasrifle/gaussrfile, maybe a grenade/handlaser user, but unfortunately no one else - unlike two-token CD longcoat - though not that all 'roles'/professions would really need it.) But that's a bit out of my interest at the moment, and I trust your and the council's judgement on that. It's the proper design and pricing strategy on MCP-II and its complementary armor upgrade that interest me the most here.

Sorry if I got incoherently rambling once again.

[Radio Controlled]

Right now, I think that a 1 token chestplate/helmet (depending on what you are, you'd get either of these, it's basically 'brain protection') and a 3 token regular suit (incorporating the previous two) might be easier. Since resale value is rounded up, if one wants to upgrade to the full suit you can still resell the 1-token minimal version. So two separate items really, might be easiest?

Saint evidently has ADD- he can't focus on any one project, or even any one discipline.

The most productive of mental disorders (that sounds so wrong, it's gotta be right).

As for the battlesuit, I was leery of using the xenoplate armor because it sounded too expensive, and the heaviness could really hurt battlesuits.  Combination layered sharkplate/hexsand seems like a better idea, if the hexsand really is so brittle that gauss rounds could break it.  But, it needs testing before we make any decision, so thanks for pointing it out.  It might be cheaper and lighter than I was imagining.
Anyway, now I think a better method would be:
--a layer of sharkplate on top (Easily repaired, absorbs small arms fire)
--a layer of hexsand (To block lasers, which are probably pretty good against hexbug.  Better to have the kinetic vulnerable on top, since lasers are easier to make wide angle.)
--Another layer of sharkplate (As a backplate for the hexsand.)
--The layer of hexbug (To block the kinetics strong enough to get here, like the PSL.)
Then again, maybe it would be better to cut the last three layers in half, and copy them underneath.  That would make alternating kinetics/energy weapons less effective, but it would also result in seven layers total.

Yeah, we'll have to ask pw what our options are, and what works best. Maybe even ask him outright what he thinks would be the best combo for different price ranges.

Oh, and if weight is a problem, remember we have a library full of exoskeletons, we might get away with making battlesuit 2.0 heavier while getting the same mobility.

Also, isn't it up to GM in the end as to what is acceptable and what is not? I'm just slowly growing weary of the remarks on the council's all-encompassing judgement.

Do I need to explain again how that thing works? We do not, ever, really 'decide' things, we advise pw. Up till now, he's mostly followed our advise, but rest assured we cannot 'decide' anything that pw doesn't agree with. He has end executive power.

Secondly, if anyone says 'I don't think the council would allow it' that doesn't even mean we won't, just that the person in question suspects we won't based on how he views our previous actions.

Although, come to think of it, I guess they do more than that now.  At this point, they are the ones who price and stat things.

We just tell him 'after deliberation, we think X should be priced like Y with Z restrictions'. He is fully engaged in the proceedings, meaning he also gets any pm send on the topic, so there is a full paper trail, and he can read our rationale behind every decision.

If there's a reason to use the old stuff (which isn't even military armor!) instead, the project was a failure.

Yeaeeah, it took pretty darn long for my project to complete, it'd be a bit sad if we now went "oh well, better to just keep using this ancient tech literally predating the Altered".

[Nikitian]

Well, that's reassuring.

On topic of new armor (and making old designs obsolete): Are we going to replace/upgrade the Protectorate suit? IIRC it's probably the heaviest personal armor available (aside from some very exotic and expensive choices like the High Guard armor of the Arbites of Peace, and so on), and by virtue of mass-production it shares the price category with full Milnoplate (replacement for which is obviously going to cost much less than it currently does). And it's like a mini-battlesuit in terms of protection, I think, and probably still fits in-doors.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I think we would do well to completely replace all standard UWM armors and suits.

For one, it's nonstandard equipment, to prevent potential situations a-la "Sods with sticks versus Battlesuit".
It also sets us apart from UWM visually - may be important if we're going for improving our image.
And an overall upgrade would just be good in principle, I think. No need to add new functions, just a new line of hardware in the same general class as the gear it's replacing, but better.

[Toaster]

Moving the emergency release switch (or even making the hatch open backwards- these are Sods we're talking about) and putting some sort of chainmail over the joints would do wonders for that without requiring a total rebuild of all our battlesuits.  I can't imagine the refit for that costing much.

[syvarris]

3. Keeping the two armor designs separate might address the issue of increased cost, but it might be difficult to justify such separation. One way to do so could be by differentiating the armors further, through design, composition, protection level, etc.

I do believe this is where we disconnect.  I just don't think doing the same thing by a slightly different method will actually result in it being cheaper.  The designing them to be very different, just to justify the strategy seems... dishonest?  Cheaty?  Inefficient, because we're hampering the original design?

Things like this can work, when the IC reasoning for it makes sense- I.E. THIS item operates the exact same way, but is cheaper, because it uses a more efficient material/design/production process.  I just don't think manufacturing extra chestplates, rather than just designing them to be relatively detachable from the sleeves, would make them any cheaper IC.

we're gambling against the players' greediness, ensuring slightly better average survival chances.

I'm sorry, but I just find this statement funny.  The purpose of this cheap armor, and somehow the five-token MCP.II, is to... trick people into not dying?

Not that this isn't a valid reason- indeed, if your goal is to minimize deaths, then it's a good plan.  I'm just more of the opinion that, if someone decides to forgo armor so that they can buy a nuke or something, do we really need them to survive?

(At three tokens it would be fine for a Con specialist with a lasrifle/gaussrfile, maybe a grenade/handlaser user, but unfortunately no one else - unlike two-token CD longcoat - though not that all 'roles'/professions would really need it.)

Oh, I think I realized something you're missing.  The Civic Defender's Longcoat costs three tokens.  That's actually where I got the three token baseline idea, because it works well for CON users.  It's also a reason I was supporting the cheaper version, because SM users currently can't get any armor without  losing their SM device.  Same for medics and medical equipment, although it matters less for them.

Right now, I think that a 1 token chestplate/helmet (depending on what you are, you'd get either of these, it's basically 'brain protection') and a 3 token regular suit (incorporating the previous two) might be easier. Since resale value is rounded up, if one wants to upgrade to the full suit you can still resell the 1-token minimal version. So two separate items really, might be easiest?

I like the idea of allowing people to buy either a chestplate or helmet, but why exactly must it be two items?  Can't we have just the armor, and a line in the entry mentioning that you can buy either the chestplate or helmet alone, for a discount of two tokens?

Oh, and if weight is a problem, remember we have a library full of exoskeletons, we might get away with making battlesuit 2.0 heavier while getting the same mobility.

Battlesuits don't use exoskeletons, so that won't work.  I mean, maybe you could build one that the battlesuit can wear, but that seems like a vulnerability.

We just tell him 'after deliberation, we think X should be priced like Y with Z restrictions'. He is fully engaged in the proceedings, meaning he also gets any pm send on the topic, so there is a full paper trail, and he can read our rationale behind every decision.

Yeah?  I wasn't saying that you guys didn't communicate with PW- he's mentioned how your discussions go enough for that to not be the case.  It just seems that he relies on you guys to stat stuff without him a lot.  I made that observation from how often he tells people to wait for the council's decisions.

I don't see the actual discussions of course, so maybe he participates, but from my end it looks like he just lets you guys decide and goes with it.

On topic of new armor (and making old designs obsolete): Are we going to replace/upgrade the Protectorate suit? IIRC it's probably the heaviest personal armor available (aside from some very exotic and expensive choices like the High Guard armor of the Arbites of Peace, and so on), and by virtue of mass-production it shares the price category with full Milnoplate (replacement for which is obviously going to cost much less than it currently does). And it's like a mini-battlesuit in terms of protection, I think, and probably still fits in-doors.

I wasn't planning to replace it, because we never use it and don't really know much of anything about it.

I'd daresay it's impossible for it to be more protective than a heavy robobody (This is what you meant by a mini battlesuit, right?).  The HRB was explicitly designed to be as large as possible while still fitting through a door, and is practically solid battlesuit plate all the way through.  If the protectorate suit is more protective, then it would need vastly more effective armor, which means it's vastly more expensive.

[Radio Controlled]

I'm just more of the opinion that, if someone decides to forgo armor so that they can buy a nuke or something, do we really need them to survive?

Social darwinism at its finest.

I like the idea of allowing people to buy either a chestplate or helmet, but why exactly must it be two items?  Can't we have just the armor, and a line in the entry mentioning that you can buy either the chestplate or helmet alone, for a discount of two tokens?

Good for me.

Battlesuits don't use exoskeletons, so that won't work.  I mean, maybe you could build one that the battlesuit can wear, but that seems like a vulnerability.

The library ought to also include endoskeletons for bigger suits; I typo'd. Though now that I think about it, from the point of the pilot, the battlesuit is also a big exoskeleton, but with stuff bolted to it.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=138720.msg5585994#msg5585994

Yeah?  I wasn't saying that you guys didn't communicate with PW- he's mentioned how your discussions go enough for that to not be the case.  It just seems that he relies on you guys to stat stuff without him a lot.  I made that observation from how often he tells people to wait for the council's decisions.
I don't see the actual discussions of course, so maybe he participates, but from my end it looks like he just lets you guys decide and goes with it.

I guess I just see a non-trivial difference between deciding things, or proposing things and havingn our advice followed most of the time. But yes, he sometimes partakes in the discussion a bit.