Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Substelny

I think Thom's canonical vision is that the fighters are remote piloted drones. Perhaps we can get him to discuss it at Armada. The remote drone idea simplifies some things, though it makes others more complicated. If the game later adds shuttles to carry passengers, are the passengers actually in the shuttle while the pilot is a telepresence? If you are held prisoner on an enemy ship, can you steal a fighter to escape?

This is getting a little off topic, but it would be a shame if some really cool fighter bay artwork didn't make sense in light of whatever canon is eventually developed.


Well, that depends a lot on the canon about the Arvonians, I think. Do the Arvonians consider remote piloted vehicles the same way they view drones? Are the Arvonian fighters piloted by actual pilots on the fighters? If so, I would assume they have developed some sort of ejection technology, simply because they don't have a complete disregard for their pilots' lives.

Plus, I think when you ask most people about fighters in space, the first thing they jump to is Battlestar Galactica, which had pilots in the fighters. Considering that remote control drones brings up the possibly of electronic countermeasures, and most players would probably want to see themselves as inside the fighter, I personally wouldn't be too clear about the matter.

You can make it so fighters can be either be piloted remotely or from the cockpit, and in the case of the pilot appearing back on board, it's assumed it was piloted remotely. Later Thom can add landing and ejection sequences if the players want to actually "go out". Shuttles, though, I think it makes sense that the pilot would be on board just like the passengers. Shuttles aren't intended to go into combat, after all.

techbear

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 142
Reply with quote  #17 


I've incorporated Lightwave_Gecko's excellent art into the 2.5.1 build, which is now released.  Thank you!
Mike Substelny

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 2,404
Reply with quote  #18 
That's wonderful, Thom. Thank you!
__________________
"The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists offered four; and we finally compromised on eight."
- Winston Churchill
Mike Substelny

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 2,404
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryleyra


Well, that depends a lot on the canon about the Arvonians, I think. Do the Arvonians consider remote piloted vehicles the same way they view drones? Are the Arvonian fighters piloted by actual pilots on the fighters? If so, I would assume they have developed some sort of ejection technology, simply because they don't have a complete disregard for their pilots' lives.


I think Arvonian fighters are piloted vehicles. I think you can communicate with Arvonian fighters, can't you? I'd like to confirm that Arvonian fighters can still never surrender. That was true at first but I am not sure it is true in the latest release, based on an offline conversation I had recently. If Arvonian fighters can surrender then the pilot must be aboard.

__________________
"The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists offered four; and we finally compromised on eight."
- Winston Churchill
MarkBell

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 1,955
Reply with quote  #20 
Plus, Arvonians wouldn't be too keen on sending those poor AI's into battle, right?
__________________
Note - this is in no way intended to be an official position of Thom or Artemis, as I am not an official representative of the creator or game.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #21 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell
Plus, Arvonians wouldn't be too keen on sending those poor AI's into battle, right?


It depends on if the pilot's telepresence system counts as an AI, I think. If the connection is just a "dumb" control that translates the pilot's movements to the control systems of the fighter, then no. But if the system in any way compensates for the limitations of the control system or simplifies it, then yes.

Actually, a backup "autopilot" in a remote controlled fighter would be a good idea in case of signal jamming. If the signal gets cut off, the autopilot can take over and keep the fighter in the battle until the pilot can re-establish connection. But then, the AI itself would be vulnerable to EMP.

And I will definitely have to check out the new version of Artemis. [biggrin] I'm wondering what OTHER changes are in the new version...


bau.movement

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 96
Reply with quote  #22 

A few weeks ago we ran our first game with a fully crewed bridge and full compliment of fighter pilots, which was really well received by everyone... including the 11 and 9 year olds that crewed our Weapons and Comms respectively!

We played the carrier from our normal bridge in the office of my frame shop and setup a fighter bay in the main showroom where we have big tables with consoles going all the way around. The fighter bay is also where we set up our galley and intergalactic DJ station, because it's awesome.

I can't wait for my guys to see the new holding screen on the fighter bays, I think those are going to go over really big!

For canon, we've been playing that the fighters can be manned or flown remotely. Whenever we play short staffed, we run remote terminals as second terminals off primary ships functions, generally just leaving Helm to keep distance.

2016-11-13 16.12.08.jpg 



__________________
Cincinnati Shipyards ~
There are no problems you can't fix with a large enough hammer.

--EYES ONLY: TSN Bergeron refit--
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.