This idea was supposed to be discussed in the council meeting this morning, but (According to certain "sources"... AKA Loonie... ) because I was absent it wasn't. So here I go, before I miss another freakin' meeting. :hmmm: (Damn you daylight savings.)

 

I've been thinking of this for a while. And the way the Engineering of weapons and items seems to rely a bit too much on assumption and guessing on what would be the more likely/realistic way to go about. So what I'm proposing is a separate section akin to the Current Research section that's based on the construction of advance items and junk.

 

The design would be the same as the research section, in that a list of projects would be listed detailing work-in-progress and a cue of which work can be done. The objects listed would be advanced researched tech, (At least beyond the standard items, which would be manufactured easily and for free.) like the HWP, laser/fusion/plasma personal weapons, ferronium armor, additions to the Avenger like the LAG, and maybe even another Avenger altogether. The manufactured tech would be voted on whenever there's space left in the Engineering "work-in-progress" just like how the research section works.

 

Also in this section would be a list of all the advanced items the platoon are currently in possession of that can be manufactured, like the amount of available laser rifles and such. This way, item availability is no longer as restricted, as over time enough laser rifles could be made available for the whole squad to use. However, certain sim events could always lower the amount of armaments available, like dropping a fusion pistol in a retreat or maybe a fire started in the armory. This is to ensure some balance over things.

 

Voting works the same way as research, people vote three things they want to have available in a short while. Example, let's say in one sim, a Laser Rifle, Tank/Cannon, and a LAG is voted to be manufactured. Obviously the order they'd be constructed would be 1. Laser Rifle 2. LAG and 3. Tank/Cannon. Probably taking a total of 2/2/4 weeks to finish each. Upon completion of each, one extra laser rifle, LAG and Tank would be available for the sim missions. Now, to ensure that in the event that all the weapons in the armory are taken out, standard weapons, like slug pistols/rifles, basic suits, and knives, would be manufactured automatically before each sim. Since they're easy and can possibly even be constructed without the aid of gigantic engineering machines.

 

Of course, the drawback is that engineering relies entirely on the resources available. I'm guessing since the platoon is stationed aboard the Patton at the moment and not much is readily available, only small engineering could be done under those circumstances. Like maybe compact weapons and such. And it also should probably take longer for difficult projects than it would for research projects equal in difficulty.

 

I wrote this in a bit of a rush, so please ask if I'm unclear or left something out, and I'd appreciate any comments as to this idea. Personally I think it would make things a bit more realistic and would stop a few random arguments as to the construction of advanced tech and such, if it's accepted of course. So... Anybody?

It is indeed a worthy idea which I would indeed support.

 

However...I have a feeling it will fail in this sim. I'm not saying it's a bad idea Bob and to be frank it is indeed something worth trying out, but unfortunately I have some *cringes* bad experience when trying to implement such detailed realism into XCAS. So I'd sooner say it won't hold...

 

...but what the heck. I would be willing to give it a try. For old times' sake and I'll help you with implementing it. DH however does have the final say in this so...it's up to him I believe.

I support this idea!

 

However, since im presently GMing, i cant really be left in charge. However, i would like to request we not get into this immediately, since we obviously lack the supplies to do anything right now

Well though it bear an odd resemblance to the method of manufacturing weapons in UFO:AM...

 

I like it, and you've got my backing on this issue, but let's flesh it out, figure out how it will work and how to implement it while we're out on the Patton and when we get back to the NAO let's give it a trial run.

Well though it bear an odd resemblance to the method of manufacturing weapons in UFO:AM...

 

Heh, I've yet to play Aftermath so I couldn't tell you. Personally I was aiming more for the style of UFO Defense combined with our current take on Research.

 

However...I have a feeling it will fail in this sim. I'm not saying it's a bad idea Bob and to be frank it is indeed something worth trying out, but unfortunately I have some *cringes* bad experience when trying to implement such detailed realism into XCAS. So I'd sooner say it won't hold...

 

Yeah, I'm aware that a lot of plans like this haven't panned out well for XCAS in the past. But some have, so it's worth a shot.

 

I like it, and you've got my backing on this issue, but let's flesh it out, figure out how it will work and how to implement it while we're out on the Patton and when we get back to the NAO let's give it a trial run.

 

That's my intention. Obviously there'd probably be a few kinks to work out before implementation... That's why I'm posting it here in the forum now, so if anyone has any suggestions to make this idea better, anyone can air it.

Okay, I've designed the Engineering section already. But since I have no access to Tactical Command's space, I put it here.

 

As you can probably see, my HTML sucks horribly so I copied the Research section and modified it accordingly. I also made wild guesses as to the current inventory for the squad but everything can be modified later I guess...

 

So...

 

Questions? Comments? Suggestions? Complaints?

Well, for nitpickings sake, you listed 'project space three' as 'project space thirty'. But thats a minor problem

 

Asides from that, i like it!

 

I'll make the assumption that the avenger is repaired by now, so engineering may commence immediately. Of course, its under the same 'no extremes' rule that science is under while on the patton.

I believe that during the meeting it was decided that we would give this a shot, so that's not a problem. I'm not sure how to change the flash bar at the top of the UFOpedia though, so on the weekend we will link Bob's test page to the Current Research Projects page itself, instead of to the menu bar.

Well, the page I made is only to point out how it works. For one thing I wasn't sure how I should judge the difficulties on certain projects, I would have decided on my own but I'd rather get input from someone more into the Engineering game than me.

 

Also, how in god's name do I make those dot thingies to indicate difficulty? I've resorted to using the copy/paste function and it makes me feel dumb to use that.

Why is Engineering in the UFOpaedia?

Because Engineering is also part of research in a way? But then more the practical application of researched materials.

Well there would quite likely have to be a seperate engineering section still needing development but until it does get done the thing might as well be under the UFOpaedia.

I'd do it myself. But I have no idea how to make those accursed animated graphics on the XCAS site frame.

Neither do I. I also want to emphasize the fact that there has to be some correlation between research and production of equipment - there is only so much time to go around.

Why? I'd expect Engineering and the Lab to be completely independant on terms of research and production. Unless an Engineer is also a Scientist I don't see how time can be a problem. All a scientist has to do to show an Engineer how to build something is to show the blueprints.

Do people like to do it this way? If that's the will of the community, then we can do this.

Well I was thinking of Bob's way, that is to say two independant things, however if you have some ideas as to why it could be better if they weren't independent you can tell them DH.

I've spoken to DH outside the forum. And we discussed that it's probably a better idea to unite the two depending on the project. For example, things like the buckshot shotgun research would be done in the Engineering section while research on things like the Lifeform studies or autopsies are done by the Laboratory. But certain things will require a slot in both Research and Engineering, like the Nephilim suit for example... (Example extended by DH ) It would realistically require not only skilled scientists working on the project but also engineers to reverse-engineer and duplicate the tech. Thus, reverse-engineer projects and such will take up a slot in both Research and Engineering, leaving only two others to fill in. (This would work for all captured alien equipment, probably even for Fusion weapons.)

 

Would everyone agree with this?

Yes, that'd be cool. Bob! But why do we need both Engineering and Laboratory to research the Nephilim Suit and only Engineering for developing the shotgun? Unless we're trying to make the shotgun from scratch, nothing new to the Terran selection of weapons.

We would be making shotguns from scratch, as we didn't carry any with us originally If we had any to reverse engineer, it would probably not even require research to build it either, as it is a known weapon, and it's details would already be in the UFOpaedia. (the UFOpaedia on the website is not *all* the info we have in the UFOpaedia, just the info relevant to us at this point)

Reverse engineering would depend on the application. Let's say we encounter a weapon that projects... Pez. We have no idea how it works, nor the principles behind it. It's precision machinery, we're not sure of the tolerances, maybe they are important. An engineer can do this, sure, but always nice to have a scientist to know WHY they are doing it. Without the principles behind the design, without some background, you're assuming that what you are reverse engineering will be correct, but by no means does it have to be. With so many parts to keep track of, it will at the very least be difficult to keep them in order, if you have no idea what they actually do.

 

However, when it comes down to it, the likelyhood of obtaining a tech that revolutionary is unlikely, but I just wanted to point out that reverse engineering is only successful when someone knows at least the concept of how it works and what each part does in some qualitative fashion.

Reverse engineering would depend on the application.  Let's say we encounter a weapon that projects...  Pez.  We have no idea how it works, nor the principles behind it.  It's precision machinery, we're not sure of the tolerances, maybe they are important.  An engineer can do this, sure, but always nice to have a scientist to know WHY they are doing it.  Without the principles behind the design, without some background, you're assuming that what you are reverse engineering will be correct, but by no means does it have to be.  With so many parts to keep track of, it will at the very least be difficult to keep them in order, if you have no idea what they actually do.

 

However, when it comes down to it, the likelyhood of obtaining a tech that revolutionary is unlikely, but I just wanted to point out that reverse engineering is only successful when someone knows at least the concept of how it works and what each part does in some qualitative fashion.

And that would be why we need some projects to be done by both research and engineering. Somebody needs to look at a tech's attributes before an engineer can reverse the tech to proper understanding. Which is why something as incredibly complex as a Nephilim suit would require the efforts of both branches to figure out.