Bertil writes,
> The reason for the strange number of HUDs is that it is that one HUD per
>panel is the most optimum combination to get a high number of CPs. I think
>it was Paul Dale that discovered this.
I don't think I should be awarded this honour(?). It is pretty obvious that
that is the best way to do things when the rules impose no restrictions.
>> Something needs to be done (at least
>> informally) to regulate the use of controls of various types. No more
>> than one HUD per workstation, or whatever.
> There were some ideas about putting a max number of HUDs at 1/bridge
>crew, 1/2command, 1/2engineers on the TML (or was it in a private email?
>I didn't save it, unfortunately)
I think it was via email. I didn't save it either but I added it to my
ship design program. Looking there, the allocation of active crew positions
was:
Bridge 100%
Gunners 100%
Command 85%
Engineers 50%
Maintenance 0%
Flight Crew 0%
Ship's Troops 0%
Stewards 0%
Frozen Watch 0% (surprising huh)
Medical 0%
What these figures represent, is the percentage of crew members from each
section who is considered to be actively using the ship's controls. It
is these who are allowed to use heads-up displays etc. This places a limit
upon the number of such control add ons that may be placed into a ship. I
don't consider it a hard limit in that a small excess won't hurt. Also
for large holotanks, I try to limit myself to 2 or 3 in a large ship (how
many could be effectively used?).
>> For that matter, why can't a
>> ship have large numbers of computers, so ships don't need to be limited
>> by Computer CP limits?
I've always assumed that no matter how many computers you have, only the 'best'
one gets used for control calculations. Remember TL=8 (?) is supposed to have
massively parallel computers (from book 8???). Thus providing more computers
in parallel shouldn't give any advantage. (because the parallelism is already
there)
Pauli
Paul Dale | Internet/CSnet: [email removed]
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet: [email removed]
Uni of Queensland | JANET: [email removed]
Australia, 4072 | EAN: [email removed]
| UUCP: [email removed]
f4e6g4Qh4++ | JUNET: [email removed]