2300AD, thoughts and wishes

Before going into any types of comments, I must say that I applaud the effort of bringing this unique setting back to life. Hope it will work out this time, and seeing the feedback here I dare to dream.

One thing that strikes me is the method of information gathering oon the forum. Have there been any polls? There were two distinct modes of playing this universe; the gung ho GI/explorer or the cyberpunk space piratey thing. While I to some extent enjoyed GM:ing the GI-variant, my players seemed to prefer the other and as someone else posted here, we created a very bladerunneresqe millieux instead of the merrier original tone. I for one did not see any problem with combining the Alien (the movie...) space-ship environment with the cyberstuff. I'm sure that this have been covered in depth, but I would find it interesting to see what playmode the writers here prefered.

On the starmaps, I fully agree that this was something that attracted me as a GM. (What attracted players, though, were lasers, subdermacomps, and monofilament garotes.) I could probably go into all sorts of debates on the social construction of scientific knowledge here, but Kuhn aside, I find the trade route construct essential enough to the feel of the universe to warrant minor modifications. At the same time I would feel a whole lot more enthusiastic if I knew that there had been some sort of update to keep my suspension of disbelief hanging there. Have anyone thoroughly tried modiying the jump distance yet? I've seen other modifications mentioned here that seem plausible enough to complement this. Just try to keep the feeling. For instance, make sure that travel times and costs are enough to make you consider a journey between stars carefully.

On the politics, the French hegemony was always a source of much amusement to me and my players so this is a definite must keep. At the same time, there was a strange global integration feel to the game. When I look at 2300 AD, I (as do most I'd presume) think of Napoleon. This was at the time a refreshing break from the mostly american game environments which did not feel quite as intuitive for me. I suppose coming from a very small european country, a contemporary american setting would be enough of a leap of faith without the sci-fi stuff added to the mix. In this vein I hope that we can see a truly global approach to the game and not a market appeasing boost of certain national characteritics. I would like to see a more even coverage of the globe(s) this time around. After all, we have been globalized now so they say...

Skipping the extreme transhuman probably goes without saying, judging from the many posts on the subject, so I won´t go there.

Finally, I concur with an earlier speaker on the lack of texture to the descriptions of otherworldly phenomena, such as smells, colours and textures. This I hope will be dealt with in a more modern way. On the other hand, one thing that made the game what it was was the rather dry, upfront presentation of data. In more recent games I often get a feeling that such things are to be kept as vague and fuzzy as possible. That I do not like, so if you could manage to keep the sober presentation of data whilst adding more flavour, that would be great.

Oh, and I liked the walkers and the hovercraft, plausible or not.
 
Pentapod earplug said:
Have anyone thoroughly tried modiying the jump distance yet?
If you download the Warp2010 package mentioned upthread, load up the T2300 'sector' and play around with the jump distance setting you quickly understand why GDW picked 7.7 ly as the threshold for safe stutterwarp operation - if you tweak it down lower than 7.65 then you lose the French Arm and if you go any lower than 7.62 then you lose the American and Chinese Arms. Contrariwise if you push the stutterwarp limit much higher, then you start getting cross-links between the various arms and you fairly quickly get to the point that very few of the near stars remain inaccessible from Sol.

Of course this is based upon the old, Gliese-2 sourced, starlist. I haven't tried to repeat this using more up do date data to see how things have changed. My WAG is that the lower 'isolation' limit won't have changed much because the issue is tied to the distances from Sol to Nyotekundu and between Serurier and Broward (stars which are relatively 'local' to us and so our knowledge probably hasn't improved much*), but that the upper 'saturation' limit has probably shifted lower - possibly to the point where once humans are able to get beyond Nyotekundu and Serurier they could reach most of the systems in the near star list.

[EDIT]
* But what do I know? Since originally posting this I've fired up Celestia, from which I see that the latest estimate for Wolf 359's distance from Sol has gone up to 7.72 ly - so the French Arm is inaccessible with the canonical stutterwarp limit.
[/EDIT]

One possible approach Colin could take in order to make use of a more modern dataset, would be to lower the stutterwarp operational threshold until you get an acceptable level of saturation (with some interesting clusters of stars and so on) and then add in fictional brown dwarfs and/or stutterwarp tug setups in order to reinstate the canonical arms and other desired linkages (ie the 'Operation Back Door' solution). You could work in some of the key brown dwarf detections to the canonical timeline as a way of pacing the human expansion into space - my timeline-fu is very rusty however, so I don't know how feasible that would be to do.

Regards
Luke
 
Is that even doable for a complete newbie? My astronomy skills equate nil and nothing, but the challenge is intresting somehow. Are there tools that work to that effect that just need an updated data set to demonstrate the point or is there a need for a tricky manual data and programming job?

*Sorry, just read the earlier posts describing this.
 
Uncle Mojo said:
wide use of hovercrafts (I know they're a trademark of the game and I really like them too, but for a hard SF game, I think they're a bit, ehm, iffy -- I think we'd have seen wide use of hovercraft by now if it were viable). Just my 2 cents. YMMV.

The impression of hovercraft I use (which I picked up from users on another board, I can't remember which one anymore) is that the military hovertanks in 2300 aren't the hovercraft we're familiar with today. They're more like VTOL jets that fly close to the ground. They lose the wings because they're clumsy with ground clutter, but can take advantage of "pushing" against the ground. Most notably, their engines are a lot more powerful than modern hovercraft. I think the easiest way to describe them would be use a VTOL jet, pile on a lot of armor and systems so that it can only fly using some "afterburner" mode. As an aircraft this would be inefficient and unworkable. So you make it fly low enough so that the thrust can actually "push" at the ground to keep it up (sort of like an Ekranoplan). To make it more efficient you contain that thrust in a flexible "hovercraft skirt" that remains in contact with the ground for the most part. But the afterburner is still there if you need it.

Of course, the German APC from 2300 presents a small problem. It states that troops can get run over by hovercraft without suffering injury, something that isn't going to happen with jet exhaust! So I've always imagined that 2300 hovertanks use those high-efficiency "spinner" ducted fans that scientists believe are theoretically possible right now though it involves a certain "bending" of physical laws to make the exhaust cool enough for brief periods of being under it. Keep the afterburner for "hops" (as it's pointed out that troops run over by hovercraft are doomed if it turns on jump jet mode). The fans would be mounted on gimbals allowing them to be rotated to aid in station-keeping (a necessity to keep the hovercraft from "hockey-pucking" when firing weapons with recoil).
 
Epicenter said:
Of course, the German APC from 2300 presents a small problem. It states that troops can get run over by hovercraft without suffering injury, something that isn't going to happen with jet exhaust!

That really depends now, having been knocked down by jet exhaust once or twice it really depends on the jet engine and what it's throttle is set on and whether or not it's moving.

So I can see operationally that yes indeed a vtol APC could overfly ground troops with no injury to them. Considering the exhaust will be cool enough to operate close to the ground without setting all the local vegetation on fire. (And before you say the military wouldn't care about that, think of the implication of a troop carrier that creates a brush fire every time it delivers troops, or is preforming MedEvac etc....)
 
Venting jet exhaust close to the ground also brings up the problem of hot gas ingestion, where the still hot exhaust gasses are ingested back into the engine, causing it to overheat or flame out. I seem to recall that the x-32 had this problem in the JSF fly-offs.

G.
 
silburnl said:
Pentapod earplug said:
Have anyone thoroughly tried modiying the jump distance yet?
If you download the Warp2010 package mentioned upthread, load up the T2300 'sector'

For those interested, you can find the stars in a box of 200 ly (100 ly each way) around earth at:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...wB0QVfqWBfpG5bTuw&sig2=nxG-zfu_f8fxaRWThm_Pxw

I pruned the data to only those stars in a box 100 ly (50 ly each way) around the earth and uploaded it here:

http://www.whenimaginationfails.org/stardata/50LY3MOD.STR
 
Forgive my advocating for a bit more hard SF purism, but you could make space travel dangerous. This may sound blasphemous, but consider getting rid of stutterwarp for sublight travel. Conventional reaction drives introduce great opportunities for dangerous high-G maneuvers, aerobraking for dropship deployments, etc.
 
Daneel Olivaw said:
Forgive my advocating for a bit more hard SF purism, but you could make space travel dangerous. This may sound blasphemous, but consider getting rid of stutterwarp for sublight travel. Conventional reaction drives introduce great opportunities for dangerous high-G maneuvers, aerobraking for dropship deployments, etc.

The unique flavour of 2300AD starship combat depends on sublight stutterwarp, so that's not going away. As for the rest, interface operations are dangerous, and that will be reflected in the rules.
 
GJD said:
Venting jet exhaust close to the ground also brings up the problem of hot gas ingestion, where the still hot exhaust gasses are ingested back into the engine, causing it to overheat or flame out. I seem to recall that the x-32 had this problem in the JSF fly-offs.

G.

Indeed. It's not a jet normally, however. The point is that you'd have the typical hot and nearly oxygen-free jet exhaust only if you're in afterburner mode. Normally the hovercraft uses "spinner" fans which run a lot less hot - basically an enormous, powerful fan enclosed in a nacelle - perhaps somewhat hotter due to being used to bleed off heat from the normal operation of the vehicle's engines and so on.

I've found the concept works pretty well in games - you don't jump-jet that much with hovercraft because it's fuel-inefficient, but because it also produces a massive signature spike. The writers of 2300 talk about dust clouds already, but another problem would be the massive thermal bloom when afterburners are used.
 
Just FYI: Hovercraft are always fun (re: Serenity) - the RW offers up some really interesting stuff - check out the Russian Ekranoplans and LCACs... and this on GEVs.
 
Epicenter said:
GJD said:
Venting jet exhaust close to the ground also brings up the problem of hot gas ingestion, where the still hot exhaust gasses are ingested back into the engine, causing it to overheat or flame out. I seem to recall that the x-32 had this problem in the JSF fly-offs.

G.

Indeed. It's not a jet normally, however. The point is that you'd have the typical hot and nearly oxygen-free jet exhaust only if you're in afterburner mode. Normally the hovercraft uses "spinner" fans which run a lot less hot - basically an enormous, powerful fan enclosed in a nacelle - perhaps somewhat hotter due to being used to bleed off heat from the normal operation of the vehicle's engines and so on.

I've found the concept works pretty well in games - you don't jump-jet that much with hovercraft because it's fuel-inefficient, but because it also produces a massive signature spike. The writers of 2300 talk about dust clouds already, but another problem would be the massive thermal bloom when afterburners are used.

The problem with turbo fans, or high velocity ducted tilt-rotors or any non-combustion "spinners" is that you can't get the same thrust you can with a combustion product. The fluids just won't flow fast enough through the engine to give the same ammount of push. When using a non combustion engine, you have to suck in as much air at the front as you push out, and you have to move it damm fast to get the thrust. That's why hovercraft have a plenum chamber, to contain and concentrate that thrust into an air cusion.

That's the advantage of using a combustion product, you get more thrust out than you suck air in - the air is used as an oxygenator for the combustable, and its the expansion of that combustion product that gives you your thrust, not the influx of air - that's just to fuel the combustion.

G.
 
One of my favorites (for viewing the stars online) is

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/index.html

I can not tell you how accurate it is but it is a cool way to look :)

Dave Chase
 
GJD said:
Epicenter said:
GJD said:
Venting jet exhaust close to the ground also brings up the problem of hot gas ingestion, where the still hot exhaust gasses are ingested back into the engine, causing it to overheat or flame out. I seem to recall that the x-32 had this problem in the JSF fly-offs.

G.

Indeed. It's not a jet normally, however. The point is that you'd have the typical hot and nearly oxygen-free jet exhaust only if you're in afterburner mode. Normally the hovercraft uses "spinner" fans which run a lot less hot - basically an enormous, powerful fan enclosed in a nacelle - perhaps somewhat hotter due to being used to bleed off heat from the normal operation of the vehicle's engines and so on.

I've found the concept works pretty well in games - you don't jump-jet that much with hovercraft because it's fuel-inefficient, but because it also produces a massive signature spike. The writers of 2300 talk about dust clouds already, but another problem would be the massive thermal bloom when afterburners are used.

The problem with turbo fans, or high velocity ducted tilt-rotors or any non-combustion "spinners" is that you can't get the same thrust you can with a combustion product. The fluids just won't flow fast enough through the engine to give the same ammount of push. When using a non combustion engine, you have to suck in as much air at the front as you push out, and you have to move it damm fast to get the thrust. That's why hovercraft have a plenum chamber, to contain and concentrate that thrust into an air cusion.

That's the advantage of using a combustion product, you get more thrust out than you suck air in - the air is used as an oxygenator for the combustable, and its the expansion of that combustion product that gives you your thrust, not the influx of air - that's just to fuel the combustion.

G.

Hover craft in normal mode use ducted fans in conjunction with a plenum chamber. Jump jet mode is never really explained, but I've always taken it to mean a sort of afterburner added onto the normal ducted fan. Not all hovercraft can use jump jet mode, typically only military ones, and speed is halved, while fuel consumption is quadrupled.
 
On this Warp 2010; Brilliant application! If I understood you correctly, these lists contain old values? If so, I wonder if there is any way to play around with the latest sets talked about here?
 
Pentapod earplug said:
On this Warp 2010; Brilliant application! If I understood you correctly, these lists contain old values? If so, I wonder if there is any way to play around with the latest sets talked about here?

The application uses .str files for data. Three are included, including the standard 2300AD, a 50ly one using more modern daa, and a 100 ly one using more modern data. I don't know how accurate, or how recent, the data is. Earlier in this thread someone had a link to a new .str file. I haven't looked at it yet, and so I have no idea (again) how recent of accurate it is.
 
Augmented reality. It's part of 2320, and will likely be touched on in 2300AD as well, though more of a "why the Core is weird" sort of thing. Augmented reality is also part of military HUD technology in 2300AD. Target identification, false-colour IR, target assistance...
 
Back
Top