Pioneer dev forum

Here's a post I wrote some time ago, probably +1 year, (looking at #3200) but apparently never posted, I noticed when trying to find it in relation to joonicks' latest PR #3474, so it might be worth thinking about how/where to go with this:

I realised that it was quite simple to have the recent system info view trade/economy comparison depend on some "trade analyser" being installed on the ship, as a computer module I thought, giving it 0t of mass.

This could be made more general:

Each ship has a computer, with a fix number of slots taking "modules" each of zero volume or mass (or mass=10g, volume=10cm3, if we want to be very picky).

So these computer modules we could fit to the ship to improve data handling would be:

• - Autopilot (its mostly software, and some hardware accelerated calculations)
  - Trade analyser (some proprietary software/hardware with trade info)

One could argue that all ships have full sets of sensors, but to process what it measures it needs some more modules, such as:

• - Radar mapper
  - hypercloud analyser

There could be computers with different slot capacities, the best have more than you could fill, the worst forces you to decide on which module to fit. The names of the different computers could be something like:

• - Galivac
  - MAL 9000
  - Shallow thought
  - Or wiki/List_of_fictional_computers

Am thinking about this, not ignoring it :)

I tend to view these more as just programs/apps for a computer, software, providing information from sensors and fitted equipment.

I'm not opposed to the idea in terms of gameplay it just, feels a little strange given the ease with which I can add an app to my phone, or download a program to do all these things and more on my PC.

Instead of computers and slots, how about having a greater range of equipment for the ship? The more equipment/sensors the more features you enable or unlock in what the computer can do?
The programs can only work with the data available too it for example. The radar mapper is a good example but we could go further with an Advanced Radar Mapper with better range, or cargo scanning etc.

That feels, to me, like a more believable interaction between the physical ship and the computer.

Another one is the autopilot actually, when we went across the Atlantic a few years ago we had an Autopilot. As we set off (day 1) it malfunctioned, we thought it would be ok, we'd fix it on route.
it's made up of separate components, a small computer - it's a generic connection to one, and the physical driver for moving the rudder and the wind direction/speed sensors.

In this case our computer was knackered and there was nothing we could do about it until we hit land 28 days later illustrating the nice interplay between susceptible systems.

Or maybe that's an argument against myself, in this case it was a separate small computer :)
The AIS was another one, GPS had a redundant backup too (and our phones+map if it came too it), the VHS we had two of, one hand-held for ship-to-ship and another with a mast based antenna for greater range.

Anyway I'll stop as this was mostly just a brain dump :D

Thanks for reply. Yes, my post was also just a "brain dump", and not something I plan on working on, but rather inspire others, and it was made relevant by the recent #3473.

when we went across the Atlantic a few years ago we had an Autopilot. As we set off (day 1) it malfunctioned, ... nothing we could do about it until we hit land 28 days later

I assume this was a boat, and not a plane, or that was one long flight. :)
(blimp?)

impaktor wrote:I assume this was a boat, and not a plane, or that was one long flight. :)
(blimp?)

Yeah a boat (photos), the autopilot wasn't the only thing to break, we nearly lost the mast too :D