Oh, No! More Wildstar!
Replies:
- #4291 Re: Oh, No! More Wildstar! by Traveller Mailing List Mail
Oh, No! More Wildstar! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hi, Everyone! I'm back from what seems like a catastropic misjump. Suffice it to say that I was in limbo for about a month, but now I have a new place to live and enough spare time to catch up on TML. By the way, anyone who wants to show up is invited to my housewarming on June 6th; I'm in the Rockville, MD (Washington DC Metropolitan) area. Send email to me for the time and the directions (mail to [email removed], and make sure the subject line starts out "Directions to Housewarming" or somethin like that. While I am thinking about it, how many TML-ers are planning on going to Atlanticon in College Park (July 3, 4, and 5; see the ad in Challenge 60)? Perhaps we can arrange a TML lunch, dinner, or other get-together during the convention! I can't get to Gencon/Origins this year, so Atlanticon will be my major gaming event this year. I am willing to co-ordinate and serve as a contact point, so send mail to me ([email removed]) with "Atlanticon" displayed prominently in the subject line. Anyway, on to my topic for today's rants and raves: Trade, Commerce, Taxation, and the Imperial Navy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ People who don't appreciate detailed numeric analyses of game mechanics should probably skip this article. Given the longevity of this thread, and the lack of complaints, I presume that there are very few people on TML that fall into this category. Recap for Those Who Came In Late ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I fed all of the sector data files (from the TML archive site) into the mainframe at work, and had it crunch the data for a while. I came up with the following interesting statistics (these represent the Third Imperium at its approximate peak). The Empire contained 10,497 main worlds with a population of about 16,731,817,153,000 sophonts. The annual Gross Imperial Product is 219,474,958,700,000,000 Imperial Standard Credits. The Imperium imposes a tax burden of about 1% of the GIP, producing Imperial revenues of about 2,194,749,587,000,000 Imperial Standard Credits per year. Using the TCS starship construction rules in combination with (hopefully reasonable) assumptions about the types of ships constructed, I further calculated that there are 11,813,221 starships registered in the Imperium; with an aggregate volume of 73,832,634,000 tons displacement. The original article, along with the supporting data tables to support my conclusions, should be available from one of the TML FTP sites. Recently, I have been looking at some of these figures more closely. Implications for Interstellar Commerce ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Assuming that these 73.83 billion tons of starships carry about 50% of their volume as cargo or freight, we have 36.92 billion tons to allocate between cargo and freight. Since speculation should be much more lucrative than shipping freight at 1,000 Cr/Ton, it seems reasonable to assume that more than half of this volume will be used for speculative trade (let's assume a figure of 75%). Some will be used for regular freight, and some will be empty, despite the best efforts of captain and crew (I will assume that 5% is empty, and 20% is used for freight). A quick glance at the MegaTraveller trade and speculation rules shows that profits of approximately 2,000 Cr/Ton are an acheivable goal, and that considerable higher profits are possible. Therefore, the cargo and freight contribution to the GIP are: Cargo --- 0.75 * 36,916,317,000 * 2,000 = 55,374,475,000,000 Cr Freight - 0.20 * 36,916,317,000 * 1,000 = 7,383,263,400,000 Cr Total = 62,757,738,400,000 Cr Passenger revenues are probably much smaller. We can estimate these with the assumption that 10% of the total starship volume is used for passengers. This results in 7.383 billion tons of passenger accomodations. We will further assume that 90% of these are staterooms and the rest are low passage berths; resulting in 1,661,234,265 staterooms and 738,326,340 low berths. A starship will fill as many staterooms with high passages as possible, and the rest will be middle passages (although some staterooms may be empty). A breakdown of 75% high, 20% middle, and 5% empty seems reasonable. A reasonable assumption about the low berths is that they will be 90% full during a voyage. Therefore we have: High --- 0.75 * 1,661,234,265 * 10,000 = 12,459,256,000,000 Cr Middle - 0.20 * 1,661,234,265 * 8,000 = 2,657,974,800,000 Cr Low ---- 0.90 * 738,326,340 * 2,000 = 1,328,987,400,000 Cr Total = 16,446,219,200,000 Cr This puts the grant total at 79,203,958,000,000 Cr per voyage. I assume that the average commercial starship makes one voyage every two weeks, except for the 4-week maintainance period, for a total of 24 trips per year. This means that in the course of a year, the total Imperial interstellar trade contribution to the GIP is 1,900,894,900,000,000 Cr. Therefore, interstellar trade contributes 0.8661% of the total GIP. This slightly less than the tax burden imposed by the Imperium, and is in fact a such a small fraction of the GIP that the complete cessation of interstellar trade should cause no more hardship than a recession. Reason for the End of the Imperium #542: It is more economically feasable for member worlds to cease all interstellar trade than it is for them to continue to pay Imperial taxes. The Vilani merchant class (having been duped by the magnitude of the numbers for 11,000 years) all commit Hari-Kiri with their pocket calculators, leaving all the interstellar markets a bloody mess. Worlds that depend on trade and commerce starve, but most of the former Imperium hardly notices the end of interstellar trade (a Gross Planetary Product drop of under 1% is simply a passing recession). On the average, 1 Imperial citizen in 442 takes an interstellar trip each year. Since there are quite a few that travel nearly every other week, this probably means that fewer 0.2% of the Imperial citizens ever make an interstellar voyage in any given year, and probably less than 15% have ever left their homeworld in their lives. Similarly, the trade volume works out to about 0.05 tons (0.70 cubic meter) of goods per year; given that this volume includes packing materials, this would be approximately one or two consumer items. Since this is an average, I believe it is safe to assume that more than half of the Imperial citizens own or use at least one thing that was imported from offworld. However, given the volume of trade, it is very likely that these things are novelties, data, or luxury goods of some kind. At 0.87% of the GIP, I can see no way that interstellar trade provides the economic foundation for more than a small fraction of the worlds of the Imperium. One of the more disturbing results above is that the Imperial tax burden is greater than the fraction of the GIP due to interstellar trade. There are some changes I can think of to bring these results back into line. Most desirable would be to redesign the entire ship design, trade, and commerce rules; this would be a non-trivial effort, but should result in a great improvement the whole game. Another option might be to increase the commerce volume by a factor of 10 (making it about 8.66% of the GIP). This option might not be unreasonable, and would have the Imperial tax burden at about 11.55% of the volume of interstellar trade. A better idea (at least in my mind) would be to take a different approach. Reducing the Imperial tax burden by a factor of 10 would also be reasonable. One approach to this would be to assume that the Imperium taxes worlds on the basis of their interstellar trade. This would place the burden of the cost of the Imperium directly on those worlds that benefit the most. It would also provide a reason why evasion of customs would be an Imperial crime. A reasonable tax rate would be 10.00% of the volume of trade. This would place Imperial tax revenues at 190,089,490,000,000 Imperial Standard Credits per year. A possible breakdown of these revenues into expenditure categories might be as follows (remember, I just made these numbers up; they also don't match the numbers I made up the last time I did this, so feel free to re-arrange them as you see fit). Category Percent Budget (Cr) - ----------------------------------------------- Naval Estimates 46.83 89,018,908,000,000 Army Estimates 13.71 26,061,269,000,000 Scout Service 22.04 41,895,723,000,000 Other Expenditures 17.42 33,113,589,000,000 - ----------------------------------------------- ALL 100.00 219,474,958,700,000 The Size of the Navy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Of interest to recent discussions is the size of the Navy, and the portion devoted to internal anti-piracy and similar duties. A possible breakdown of the Navy budget might be as follows: Naval Estimates Percent Budget (Cr) - ------------------------------------------------------ Personnel and Recruiting 8.21 7,308,452,400,000 Bases and Facilities 41.55 36,987,356,000,000 Warship Construction 14.74 13,121,387,000,000 Maintainance and Refit 6.44 5,732,817,700,000 Imperial Marines 19.01 16,922,494,000,000 Research and Development 3.21 2,857,507,000,000 Other Expenditures 6.84 6,088,893,300,000 - ------------------------------------------------------ ALL NAVY 100.00 89,018,908,000,000 Approximately 13.1 trillion credits are spent each year on new construction. It seems reasonable to assume that new ships will see at most 50 years of front-line service before being retired to reserve fleets, placed in storage, sold into civillian service, or broken up for scrap (depending on the condition of the vessel). These ships will need to be replaced by new construction. Therefore, the Imperial Navy contains a total of about 656,069,350,000,000 credits worth of front-line warships. The Imperium probably has an equal number in storage and reserve fleets. An possible breakdown of the ships into types is presented below, with an average cost per ship to help aid in estimating the size of the fleet. The per-ship costs are an estimated average from FSSI (I know, they are both wrong and inefficient - but FSSI is "official", so go figure). Battle Line refers to battleships, battlecruisers, battleriders, and battletenders. Screen refers to the screening forces for the above, namely cruisers in all shapes and sizes. Fleet escort refers to destroyers and fleet escorts designed to work with the above classes. Assault ships are the planetary assault vessels: carriers, troopships, and assault cruisers of various kinds. Support vessels are the tankers and auxiliaries to support the battle fleets. Anti-Piracy refers to ships designed and deployed specificly in the anti-pirate and anti-raider role. Ship Class Percent Budget (MCr) Cost (MCr) Ships - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Battle Line 53.50 344,436,641,000,000 1,500,000 230 (*) Screen 17.50 114,812,140,000,000 125,000 918 Fleet Escort 5.00 32,803,468,000,000 7,500 4,374 Assault 10.00 65,606,935,000,000 50,000 1,312 Support 5.00 32,803,468,000,000 75,000 437 Anti-Piracy 10.00 65,606,935,000,000 2,000 32,803 - ------------------------------------------------------------------ ALL 100.00 656,069,350,000,000 (*) Note: the cost of a "battleship" varies greatly, even amoung the designs presented in FSSI. The actual number of ships is probably much larger, especially if the bulk of the fleet are the more efficient designs. Of these, 7.69% will be in refit at any given time, and (assuming that the Navy personnel turn over an average of once every 12 years) about 8.33% will be in a training cycle. A ship will typically not be patrolling in the same system as its base. A reasonable assumption is that the bases are an average of two jumps from the patrol area, so a ship will spend about 4 weeks of non-refit, non-training time in jumpspace. Once on station, the ship will spend about 1 day in 30 refueling and about 7 days in 30 reprovisioning, laying over, or on shore leave for the crew (a total of about 26.67% of the time). This leaves about half of the force available at any one time (in wartime a lot of these layovers and shore leaves would be cancelled, and much training and preventative maintainance curtailed, resulting in a much higher availability). This compares favorable with similar figures for the Pre-WWII peacetime US Navy, which spent about 60% of its time docked at its bases. Anti-Piracy Forces ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What all of this boils down to is that about 16,402 ships will be dedicated to the anti-piracy role and actively patroling at any one time. This is more than one per world in the Imperium, but it is more likely that the forces will be concentrated. If it actually takes about 12 ships to completely secure a world against piracy, only about 12.74% of the worlds of the Imperium can be secured at any given time. It is likely that many worlds are constantly patrolled (those with naval bases, important lines of communication, and important trade centers), while some worlds never see a patrol ship. Most worlds will fall somewhere in between, being patrolled on a random basis, or as the need is felt. Many of the other worlds (those with class A or B ports) will construct their own defense forces. A quick and dirty game mechanic for determining the presence of a patrol force around a given world might be: 1) The world is HiPop, or a TL9+ class A or B port. 2) Contains a Navy or Scout facility. 3) Is on an X-Boat route. If any of these conditions are met, the world is automatically patrolled by a a force of the referee's choosing (one suggestion is 2d6 patrol vessels). If none of the above are met, the system is patrolled on a roll of 11+ DM +2 for starport class A or B DM +1 for starport class C DM -1 for starport class E Other DMs for special circumstances (such as recent outbreak of pirate activity) are at the referee's discretion, as is the size of the patrol force, although again a 2d6 roll is recommended). Starship Construction ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ One of the main obstacles to larger merchant ships is the economics of ship building. As detailed in Trillion Credit Squadron, a ship under construction uses shipyard space equal to its displacement for the entire time it is being constructed. This rule does not seem to have been changed in MegaTraveller. Because larger ships take longer to construct than smaller ones, this means that the "cost" (in terms of shipyard space) for a 10,000-ton ship is more than twice the cost of fifty 200-ton ships. Shipyard space represents capital; the owners of the yard will want to make the best return possible. Therefore, shipyards will want to build smaller ships (certainly under 10,000 tons, and the smaller the better). Small vessels (perhaps under 1,000 tons) can probably be produced on speculation, while larger ships will not be laid down without a firm contract in hand. This means several things to players and referees. First of all, it means that smaller ships would be more numerous than any other type. Small ships, both new and used, would also be readily available for purchase by corporations and anyone else who could raise the necessicary financing. Secondly, these ships would be built to standard, general-purpose plans; because the buyer and intended purpose would not be known beforehand. Finally, large ships are more likely to be custom-built, special-purpose things, and are likely to belong to the military or the larger corporations. Given the high cost and long delay in acquiring these ships, player characters are not likely to have them. I also feel that the price of a starship should be considered to be in local credits, as this (quite correctly) makes lower-tech ships cheaper than their high-tech successors. For those who don't have the relevant Classic Traveller materials, the following chart sums up what you need to know (the number in the body of the chart is the multiplier for the final price): Tech Port Port Level A B -------------------- 20 1.50 1.45 19 1.40 1.35 18 1.30 1.25 17 1.20 1.15 16 1.10 1.05 15 1.00 0.95 14 0.90 0.85 13 0.80 0.75 12 0.70 0.65 11 0.60 0.55 10 0.50 0.45 9 0.40 0.35 8 0.30 0.25 -------------------- Cheaper Merchant Ships ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To make larger merchant ships more prevalent, we need to improve the profitability of larger ships (at least as compared to small ones); this makes them more economically feasable and offsets the high economic cost of their construction. One way to do this would be to provide a special discount for merchant vessels (and to think of a reason that it should not apply to Navy and para-military ships). My suggestion is that ships built to "civilian" standards be eligible for a price break of 50% (yup, half; I haven't flipped my lid - keep reading). The price break represents a general lowering of standards in many of the ship's systems. As an example, because the ship is not intended to sail into harm's way, a $35 space-spec SCR can be substituted for the $75 mil-spec component, with no real loss of passenger or crew safety. To be eligible, the ship must meet all of the following criteria: 1) Maneuver rating of no more than 2g (and less than the TL limit). 2) Jump drive must be rated at less than the TL limit. In other words, to qualify a ship must be a TL10+, and Jump-1 at TL10 and TL11, Jump-1 or -2 at TL12, Jump-1, -2, or -3 at TL13, and so on. 3) Agility must be 0. 4) No more than 1 hardpoint per 1,000 tons displacement or fraction thereof. No bay or spinal weapons allowed. 5) No armor above the minimum required for a spaceworthy hull. Planetoid hulls are allowed, but buffered planetoids are not. 6) No screens allowed. 7) No launch facilities or launch tubes allowed. The primary game effect of such a design is that the yearly maintainance is a much more critical task. If for any reason the maintainance is skipped, the referee should accelerate the timetable (count one week past maintainance as two, and so on). If one of these "civilian" designs does get into combat, the referee should adjust the damage table results to reflect the much lower damage tolerance the civilian design has. As a general rule, increase the damage results to their maximum possible (for example, increase a "Maneuver-1" result to "Maneuver Drive Out", "Computer-1" to "Computer Out", or "Fuel-1" to "Fuel Tanks Shattered"). This should tend to keep these ships out of combat except as a last resort (if the lack of armament doesn't already do that). More Expensive Weapons ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Compared to a starship, weapon systems are small and cheap. One way to change this would be to modify the method of allocating hardpoints. My suggestion is to design a ship, and compute the number of hardpoints designated (whether or not they have weapons mounted on them when the ship is designed). Then divide the dispacement tonnage of the ship by the number of hardpoints, and consult the following table: ---- Hardpoint --- Tons/Hardpoint Cost Vol Mass 5,000 or more 0.005 0.010 0.020 2,000 - 4,999 0.010 0.050 0.100 1,000 - 1,999 0.050 0.100 0.200 900 - 999 0.100 0.500 1.000 800 - 899 0.250 1.000 2.000 700 - 799 0.500 1.500 3.000 600 - 699 0.750 3.375 6.750 500 - 599 1.000 3.375 6.750 400 - 499 2.000 6.750 13.500 300 - 399 3.000 6.750 13.500 200 - 299 4.000 6.750 13.500 100 - 199 5.000 13.500 27.000 50 - 99 6.000 13.500 27.000 10 - 49 8.000 13.500 27.000 1 - 9 10.000 13.500 27.000 Cost is in MCr; Volume is in cubic meters; Mass is in metric tons. This way, large and relatively unarmed ships cost almost exactly what they did before, but the 200-ton ship with two triple turrets costs significantly more than before - an extra 10 MCr. The cost, volume, and mass are for special attachments and fittings for mounting the weapon. The main structural member and pressure vessel in a MegaTraveller ship is its hull. Piercing the hull significantly weakens the structure, and concentrates stresses; therefore additional structural members are required at each point. Design Sequence Modifications ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Another idea is to require crew workstations in addition to normal accomodations for vessels with extended accomodations; I personally don't feel that enough space is available in the control panels and living quarters to make a decent bridge for a starship. Ships with extended accomodations would require the installation of a workstation as well as accomodations for bridge crew, gunners, engineers, and carried craft support crew. In the first two cases, the workstation provides seating, working room, and a place to mount the required control panels. In the second two cases, the workstation is not actually a control installation, but consists of working space and areas to store tools and spare parts. Combat Information Centers ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Fighting ships (or vessels expecting a lot of combat activity) should have a combat information center (CIC, also called by various other names, like fire direction center or battle bridge). The CIC is usually located in a well-protected area of this ship, and contains computers, controls, and workstations for a combat commander, sensor analysts, and battery co-ordinators, communications operators and fighter controllers. While you can assume that the MegaTraveller rules include the CIC in the bridge, I would rather not. Use the following rules to compute the size of the CIC; right after figuring the bridge would be about the right time. A workstation for the commander is required; it must have a control panel and a control panel add-on (for additional data display). If no add-on can be installed (due to TL or other limitations), a manual situation display must be installed (1 cubic meter, 0.001 Mcr, 0.250 tons) and a crewmember provided to update it (one workstation and control panel of any type); this provides in effect, a manual Heads-Up Display. Every target to be simultaneously engaged requires 10 control points (CP) from a sensor analyst. Incoming missiles engaged by active defenses do apply to this total; count 1 "target" (10 CP) for each enemy ship which fired missiles. Each analyst can have no more than 10 control panels and one panel add-on; the effect may be multiplied by whatever computer has been installed in the CIC. Note that low-tech designs may require more than one sensor analyst per target. At least one sensor analyst is required for all designs. If the vessel has any battery (spinal, bay, or turret) weapons, 10 CP are required from a battery co-ordinator for each one. Each co-ordinator can have no more than 10 control panels and one panel add-on; however, each co-ordinator can control at least one battery, no matter how few CP are output by the position. At least one battery co-ordinator is required for each class of weaponry installed (the designer of the vessel designates the weapons classes in any reasonable manner, depending on the intended use of the vessel; possible configurations include spinal/bay/turret, laser/missile/pa-gun, anti-ship/anti-surface/anti-missile, and others). If the vessel has any carried craft (fighters, riders, gunboats, or whatever), 10 CP are required from a fighter controller for each one. Fighters operated in flights count as one "craft" for these purposes. Each controller can have no more than 10 control panels and one panel add-on; however, one controller can control at least one fighter or flight, no matter how few CP are ouptut by the position. At least one fighter controller is required if any carried craft are to be operated in combat. Also, at least one controller is required per launching facility or launch tube installed. Open frame hull configurations count as one launching facility (no matter how many craft can be launched at once) for the purposes of this rule. Communications operators are optional in the CIC. If the vessel is to operate as the flagship (command ship) of a group of ships, at least one communications operator must be present. Each other ship in the group requires 10 CP from a communications operator (do not count fighters or other craft included in the total for fighter controllers above). Each operator can have no more than 10 control panels and one panel add-on; however, one operator can handle at least one other vessel, no matter how few CP are output by the position. Without a CIC installed, ships are limited in two major ways; both simulated in MegaTraveller by the tactics point pool. First of all, if the command vessel of a group of ships does not have a CIC, the total size of the tactics point pool is halved, rounding up (to simulate the burden placed on the commander by the lack of combat information support). Secondly, a ship which has no CIC halves its tactics points, rounding up, to compute the tactical DM. A few of examples should make things clear, see below. Convoy Example: A warship (CIC, Tac=3) is convoying several merchantmen (No CIC, No Tactics). The warship is in overall command, and the tactical pool has 3 points in it. Tactical point usage by the warship is normal, but tactical points used by the merchants are halved; so that 1 tactical point creates a DM of +1 (half of one, rounded up), but all 3 are required to create a DM of +2. Convoy Example: A group of armed merchant vessels (No CIC, Tac=2,1,1,1,0) operate as a convoy. The captain with the best tactical skill is placed in overall command. The tactical pool would be 5, but is halved to 3 due to the lack of a CIC in the command ship. Tactical points used by any ship are halved, so that 1 point creates a DM of +1, and 3 are required for +2. Pirate Example: A pirate squadron consists of two armed merchant ships (No CIC, Tac=1,0), a scoutship (No CIC, Tac=1), and two captured patrol vessels (CIC, Tac=3,2). The player characters (Tac=3 in one of the patrol ships) are in overall command. The tactical pool is 7. Tactical points used by the merchants or the scout would be haved as in the above examples. If a CIC was installed but does not meet the minimum requirements for the current situation (due to battle damage, or a change in mission), subtract 1 from the tactics points instead of halving, but do not reduce the total below 1. Example: A large group of merchant vessels (No CIC, Tac=0) is being escorted by an obsolesent destroyer (CIC, Tac=2). However, the destroyer was designed for fleet operations, and does not have the CIC facilities to act as a flagship for a large squadron. The warship is in overall command, and the tactical pool has 2 points in it. Tactical point usage by the warship is normal, but tactical points used by the merchants are reduced by 1, so that 1 or 2 tactical points creates a DM of +1. Computer Viruses and Other Sillyness ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Just to get some background information on the proposed computer virus for NeoTraveller, I asked some computer scientists and some published science fiction authors. The answers were consistent enough to be worth mentioning. With no exceptions, the computer scientists thought that the whole idea was silly; no doubt about it. One did mention that if all of the computers were standardized (as might be the case for a government or military) then such a virus might be a possability. Almost all speculated that a society that dependent on computers would have some kinds of safeguards in place to prevent just such an occurrence. Of the science fiction writers, both thought that the idea sounded a little far-fetched, but admitted that they might use it in a story anyway. On the other hand, I finally found out where GDW swiped the idea from; does the following description sound more than a little bit familliar? The Plague - Central to the action of all three scenarios is the electronic plague that struck the world on February 14, 2035. The original nanovirus was introduced into a Mexican power supply factory on February 1st. Power supplies carrying the virus in time release capsules were shipped to other factories where they were built into millions of devices that were then shipped all over the world. On the appointed day, the capsules broke open and the virus was released, spreading into the equipment it was built into, and then on into the Net. The virus went after anything with a high copper content (wires, microchips, batteries, magnets, etc. feeding at the molecular level. In the beginning, a device that went bad could be repaired, but by nightfall on the 14th the virus had spread into the repair equipment as well. In a few more days random spread had affected some types of industrial equipment, but other than that, few mechanical items were directly involved. To me, it sounds almost identical to the computer eating virus that we have been told to expect in the background of TNE (Traveller - The New Era). The above was taken from page 2 of "Supertanker of Death", which is copyright 1990 and 1991 by Eric Baker, and was published by BTRC in September 1991 as an adevnture suppliment for their "Timelords" SF/TimeTravel RPG. The above quote is verbatum, and probably falls in the jurisdiction of fair use. While the computer eating virus idea still sounds more than a little silly to me, I can somehow accept it better knowing that it came from the same people who published "Macho Women with Guns" ;-) 'NUFF SAID! ~~~~~~~~~~~ WILDSTAR - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Science-Fiction Adventure in the Far Future