Advice Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Morningstar Coalition]

Is there anywhere with an overview of the history of NS FT? Just to get some backstories on the Alliences and major players?

Far as I know, no-one has attempted a collective history of the NS-verse. I suspect many of the groups (those that still exist anyway) keep their own internal histories, but as for an overview? None that I'm aware of.

Anyone else have better news?

[Thrashia]

Is there anywhere with an overview of the history of NS FT? Just to get some backstories on the Alliences and major players?

Far as I know, no-one has attempted a collective history of the NS-verse. I suspect many of the groups (those that still exist anyway) keep their own internal histories, but as for an overview? None that I'm aware of.

Challenge accepted. [/Barney Stinson]

[Fiduses and Diuses]

I think this fits more in with advice than argument, anyway..

I've been away from the Nationstate International Incident scene for a year or so and my question is:
Are there any major active FT roleplayers that roleplay as a machine intelligence/AI empire/non organics? Or any major powers that oppose said AIs/MIs/etc? Who would they be and how would I go about contacting them?
Oh and would they even interact with 08 account(s) that has been only minimally active?

[Enzo Turga]

I know OMG hates robots . Cybie might want to RP with you, i'm pretty sure he's an AI nation.

[Solar Communes]

I think this fits more in with advice than argument, anyway..

I've been away from the Nationstate International Incident scene for a year or so and my question is:
Are there any major active FT roleplayers that roleplay as a machine intelligence/AI empire/non organics? Or any major powers that oppose said AIs/MIs/etc? Who would they be and how would I go about contacting them?
Oh and would they even interact with 08 account(s) that has been only minimally active?

Yes, their true forms are totally non organic but they like to pretend being human.

As for interacting with them, they have only one system in the NSUniverse so I guess it could be a little tricky unless something hitting a fan somehow reached their home system. As for the last question, same, considering this account also is, in a way, minimally active.

I know OMG hates robots

Solar Communes hates reactionary Tzarist scum.

[Hyperspatial Travel]

I think this fits more in with advice than argument, anyway..

I've been away from the Nationstate International Incident scene for a year or so and my question is:
Are there any major active FT roleplayers that roleplay as a machine intelligence/AI empire/non organics? Or any major powers that oppose said AIs/MIs/etc? Who would they be and how would I go about contacting them?
Oh and would they even interact with 08 account(s) that has been only minimally active?

Talyth was raeped by several AI multiple times. During both the Eternal War and the Fleetmind War I had my homeworld at the time fragged, and as a result AI are both illegal and generally subject to being killed in Talythian space, as well as persistent covert efforts to eliminate them outside Talythian space. And I totally interact with everyone, provided they can breakdance.

That being said, I have another thing people should consider.

FT recently went through a paradigm shift, from the population = power standard to the wank-power optimum, or the respect = power standard. People who are respected more can make larger claims. People who claim ~10,000 systems and ~infinity ships without having any writing experience tend to be ignored or their ships are seen as half-cardboard and half-more-cardboard. There's a reason that TCB was one of the only people who both claimed a massive extragalactic empire and had his claims accepted; he was really, really good. That being said, it means you don't have to sit and wait to become a power. Growing ICly as a power tends to correlate to your writing ability, the amount of RP you do, and your OOC relations with other players. Your 'power', so to speak, is roughly equivalent to the lowest of those three.

You have more options now. Use them. It's better to attempt to establish yourself as an independent power (ICly) as well as a decent writer (OOCly) in this time, because nobody has any idea if this is a permanent shift, or merely a temporary paradigm. Except telling major powers they can't invade you because it's not in your plotline won't get you ostracized right now. Regardless of whether that's a good or a bad thing for FT as a whole, it's incredibly useful for any younger players who need to spend some time establishing themselves. So go form organic alliances which are part OOC friendships. Spend time playing with specific players, and you make actual alliances.

One of the best examples of this in all of FT is the Xiscapian-Alversian alliance. It's been going on since... '07, I think, when the two allied in an NPC war I don't really remember, but they've been inseparable ever since. They don't have a formal, titled alliance (at least in the sense of IRON, ESUS, Legion or Syndicate), but there's really no doubt that by declaring war on one you declare war on the other.

The best thing any new player can do is head straight for #NSLegion on esper.net. It bears repeating that you can do this by going here, entering #NSLegion in the channel name, and then using your nationname - or a shortened version of it - as your nick. It only requires a browser, so just about anyone can do it. It's a much better way to ask people questions and find out about FT-related stuff than any thread is, though the thread serves as a good repository of knowledge.

And a piece of advice to Kreal - I wouldn't worry too much about claiming specific territory. Nobody cares about extragalactic claims, with the possible (and minor) exception of the Star Wars Galaxy. Extragalactic empires tend to be seen as impotent except where they touch on the Milky Way. Nobody's ever going to care about the galaxies you claim outside of the Milky Way, so make them up if you want.

[Fiduses and Diuses]

..

Danke schön. The current rp environment does sound much better than when the forums first shifted from Jolt.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

We don't hate robots...we're fine with sentient machines. There's even a few in our government.

What we dislike is non-sentient automation of the military. It's considered cowardly and in violating of the spirit of war and all that jazz.

[Otagia]

We don't hate robots...we're fine with sentient machines. There's even a few in our government.

What we dislike is non-sentient automation of the military. It's considered cowardly and in violating of the spirit of war and all that jazz.

What about distributed sentient automation of the military?

Are there any major active FT roleplayers that roleplay as a machine intelligence/AI empire/non organics? Or any major powers that oppose said AIs/MIs/etc? Who would they be and how would I go about contacting them?

Otagia, while not entirely inorganic, has a large population of sentient AI (digisapes, to use the local term) who are largely in charge of the military and various administrative positions, along with the vast majority of scientific research. Organics, on the other hand, tend towards art or leisure activities as their primary occupation, although they're welcome to try their hand at other functions. Organics just aren't very well suited to them compared to the digisapes.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

We don't hate robots...we're fine with sentient machines. There's even a few in our government.

What we dislike is non-sentient automation of the military. It's considered cowardly and in violating of the spirit of war and all that jazz.

What about distributed sentient automation of the military?

Parts of it, perhaps, but it wouldn't be the RUSSIAN army if it was made up of robots

[Arthropoda Ingens]

I'm trying to get a few problems with my RP nation hammered out. Right now the biggest problem I have is the territory I claim. I used to have a large amount in the Milky Way, but I recently took it down to a half an arm. Specifically the one my nation originated in: the Crux half of the Scutum-Crux arm. Here's the territory I control ATM:

the Crux half(that's the outer half) of the Scutum-Crux arm of the Milky Way galaxy, the Pegasus Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxy, and most of the Andromeda galaxy.

I'm also working out how to do a good RP of most of the population that used to be in the Milky Way moving to the Triangulum Galaxy, which I'm going to rename the Nova Vita Galaxy. I was just wondering if that's way too big, or if that would be acceptable. Keep in mind that I am after an intergalactic empire here.

I know you're working on changing locales - but as far as I can tell, you don't plan to change in size, so...

The Milkyway (And Andromeda as well) are reckoned to have somewhere in the range of several hundred billion stars. Lets call it a round 200 billion for argument's sake. Approximately 25% of those (50 billion stars) have the potential for halfway usable planetary systems (Small enough that the star has the time to form one, large enough that the fuckers aren't tidally locked). A fair number of those are, admittedly, in less than usable locations (Too far from or too close to the galactic centre), but a decent count - (10- 20% maybe? 5- 10 billion stars?) should still be safely available. Discounting the ones that'll likely be devoid of planets in the habitable zone, it's probably safe to say that there's still a minimum of some two billion worthwhile star systems left to be controlled per galaxy. Of course, ou don't claim a complete one, but an almost complete one and several minor assets outside the main galaxy likely amount to about the same thing.

So, two billion stars or so.

Now, contrasting this with your factbook...

First of all, you've waaaaay too few planets. You state that you've settled millions of worlds and space stations - if you're controlling the territory you claim, you'd need to claim billions of worlds alone, nevermind space stations. Dozens of billions if you count every world in a system with an habitable planet, and not just the habitable planet in question.

You've ~ 2 quadrillion people. That's actually a fairly appropriate count for the number of worlds you claim, but of course, it's wholly inappropriate for a galactic, nevermind intergalactic power - it's enough to thoroughly settle about 0.1% of a sizable galaxy like the Milky Way or Andromeda. The entire thing? You'll want quintillions.

Next one. Fleet. You've... 3000 frigates, 2000 destroyers, 1500 cruisers, 1000 battlecruisers, 750 battleships, 2000 carriers and 1000 supercarriers.

Your factbook makes a point explaining why your navy is 'So Huge', but in fact, it's the opposite. It's tiny. Compared to your territorial claims, it's practically non-existant. It's supposed to defend, at the very minimum, several million worlds. Realistically - assuming you try to hold an entire galaxy -, it's more like several billion worlds. To do this, you employ (Judging by your standard fleet composition) somewhere between a hundred and four-hundred fleets.

Sure, your spaceboats are fast, but 'Being there in a few minutes' isn't the same as 'Already there'. It tends to be 'A few minutes too late. Whoops'.

Yeah, I know. 'Blanket-FTLi against everyone but us'. Covering a sphere with a radius of 26 bn kilometres, or a volume of 7.36e31 km^3 with a single ship. If you can do it with a single ship, so can everyone else, on the edge of the interdiction volume (Well, starting at the edge, it obviously requires more than one ship. A minimum of six. Not that much of a difference), and thus deny you entry, too. Still a few minutes too late.

Anyway. To adequately defend yourself (As in, protect your planets from being blown up in the first place, rather than just hunting down the fuckers who did it after the fact), you'd probably want an average of one fleet per significantly inhabited system. Going with the population/ settled worlds claims you made, this requires some, oh, I don't know... Maybe sixty million frigates, forty million destroyers, thirty million cruisers, twenty million battlecruisers, fifteen million battleships, forty million carriers and twenty million supercarriers.

To adequately defend yourself if you're trying to actually control/ own the entire galaxy, as opposed to a piddly few million planets, you'll of course want more. Something like sixty billion frigates, forty billion destroyers, thirty billion cruisers, twenty billion battlecruisers, forty billion carriers and twenty billion supercarriers.

tl;dr: Galaxies. They're kinda like Russia. Bigger than you think.

Much bigger.

[Morningstar Coalition]

One of the best examples of this in all of FT is the Xiscapian-Alversian alliance. It's been going on since... '07, I think, when the two allied in an NPC war I don't really remember, but they've been inseparable ever since. They don't have a formal, titled alliance (at least in the sense of IRON, ESUS, Legion or Syndicate), but there's really no doubt that by declaring war on one you declare war on the other.

Ahh yes, this is a subject I'm familiar with, since I'm one of those involved.
Of course like you, I don't know the details of the beginning of the war, only the general summary. I do know that most of the action actually takes place in a dwarf galaxy in the local cluster, not the MWG. That's quickly changing though.

A species called the Danaversians (Alversia controls them as NPCs, and described them as "Battletoads on steroids, with an attitude of a Klingon") attacked the Alversian worlds in hopes of a quick conquest. Very quickly, Alversia and Xiscapia (who I gather had a decent amount of history already) allied together to fight back the Danaversians. The "Dans" conquered the Zillar, and for a time the Grealii, to form the Ternion Alliance.

I don't know the details from this point, but what originally started as a desperate alliance between Xiscapia and Alversia that was just barely holding it's own, has now turned into a massive conflict. Alversia, Xiscapia, Setulan, Alumina (Possibly NPC?), Greal (Possibly out of the fight), Pokos (O Boyce's IC nation), the Sen (Sennai), Phenia (Greater Phenia), Berrax (Another NPC?), Morningstar, and Telros. The fighting was originally contained in the dwarf galaxy, until the Ternion assaulted Phenia, in hopes of killing their potential involvement with Xiscapia. Now the fighting is spreading out to the Delta quadrant as well.

Most of the nations listed here all have extensive treaties with each other (Morningstar has standing treaties of mutual defense and alliance with Telros and Xiscapia), so yes declaring war on one generally is tantamount to declaring war on all of them.
As Babylon 5 once said, "Only a fool fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of fools fights a war on eleven!"

[Kreanoltha]

I'm trying to get a few problems with my RP nation hammered out. Right now the biggest problem I have is the territory I claim. I used to have a large amount in the Milky Way, but I recently took it down to a half an arm. Specifically the one my nation originated in: the Crux half of the Scutum-Crux arm. Here's the territory I control ATM:

I'm also working out how to do a good RP of most of the population that used to be in the Milky Way moving to the Triangulum Galaxy, which I'm going to rename the Nova Vita Galaxy. I was just wondering if that's way too big, or if that would be acceptable. Keep in mind that I am after an intergalactic empire here.

I know you're working on changing locales - but as far as I can tell, you don't plan to change in size, so...

The Milkyway (And Andromeda as well) are reckoned to have somewhere in the range of several hundred billion stars. Lets call it a round 200 billion for argument's sake. Approximately 25% of those (50 billion stars) have the potential for halfway usable planetary systems (Small enough that the star has the time to form one, large enough that the fuckers aren't tidally locked). A fair number of those are, admittedly, in less than usable locations (Too far from or too close to the galactic centre), but a decent count - (10- 20% maybe? 5- 10 billion stars?) should still be safely available. Discounting the ones that'll likely be devoid of planets in the habitable zone, it's probably safe to say that there's still a minimum of some two billion worthwhile star systems left to be controlled per galaxy. Of course, ou don't claim a complete one, but an almost complete one and several minor assets outside the main galaxy likely amount to about the same thing.

So, two billion stars or so.

Now, contrasting this with your factbook...

First of all, you've waaaaay too few planets. You state that you've settled millions of worlds and space stations - if you're controlling the territory you claim, you'd need to claim billions of worlds alone, nevermind space stations. Dozens of billions if you count every world in a system with an habitable planet, and not just the habitable planet in question.

You've ~ 2 quadrillion people. That's actually a fairly appropriate count for the number of worlds you claim, but of course, it's wholly inappropriate for a galactic, nevermind intergalactic power - it's enough to thoroughly settle about 0.1% of a sizable galaxy like the Milky Way or Andromeda. The entire thing? You'll want quintillions.

Next one. Fleet. You've... 3000 frigates, 2000 destroyers, 1500 cruisers, 1000 battlecruisers, 750 battleships, 2000 carriers and 1000 supercarriers.

Your factbook makes a point explaining why your navy is 'So Huge', but in fact, it's the opposite. It's tiny. Compared to your territorial claims, it's practically non-existant. It's supposed to defend, at the very minimum, several million worlds. Realistically - assuming you try to hold an entire galaxy -, it's more like several billion worlds. To do this, you employ (Judging by your standard fleet composition) somewhere between a hundred and four-hundred fleets.

Sure, your spaceboats are fast, but 'Being there in a few minutes' isn't the same as 'Already there'. It tends to be 'A few minutes too late. Whoops'.

Yeah, I know. 'Blanket-FTLi against everyone but us'. Covering a sphere with a radius of 26 bn kilometres, or a volume of 7.36e31 km^3 with a single ship. If you can do it with a single ship, so can everyone else, on the edge of the interdiction volume (Well, starting at the edge, it obviously requires more than one ship. A minimum of six. Not that much of a difference), and thus deny you entry, too. Still a few minutes too late.

Anyway. To adequately defend yourself (As in, protect your planets from being blown up in the first place, rather than just hunting down the fuckers who did it after the fact), you'd probably want an average of one fleet per significantly inhabited system. Going with the population/ settled worlds claims you made, this requires some, oh, I don't know... Maybe sixty million frigates, forty million destroyers, thirty million cruisers, twenty million battlecruisers, fifteen million battleships, forty million carriers and twenty million supercarriers.

To adequately defend yourself if you're trying to actually control/ own the entire galaxy, as opposed to a piddly few million planets, you'll of course want more. Something like sixty billion frigates, forty billion destroyers, thirty billion cruisers, twenty billion battlecruisers, forty billion carriers and twenty billion supercarriers.

tl;dr: Galaxies. They're kinda like Russia. Bigger than you think.

Much bigger.

Thanks. I think I'll just go to one galaxy and a satellite dwarf galaxy and increase everything appropriately. Also the interdictors are one twelve to twenty orbital battlestations, not the starships, although some do have them. I'm also going to go with lowering my amount of settled world(relative to how many are in the galaxy of course, and have more cityships (think Atlantis from Stargate about ten times bigger) to offset how many warships I'll need.

[Mohawk Clans]

Just a question here,

Railguns, what are they exactly?
Also, MACs, are lasers better?

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Just a question here,

Railguns, what are they exactly?
Also, MACs, are lasers better?

Railguns use powerful magnets (or magnetic fields) to accelerate a projectile to high speeds. Basically, the projectile is 'pulled' along the barrel and thrown at the target, rather than being pushed by expanding gas as with conventional firearms.

In NSFT, kinetic and energy weapons are more or less equal, variations being based on nation. However, in my personal opinion, kinetic-based weapons would be more useful at short range since they're slower than lasers (unless you've got some sort of FTL drive on all of your projectiles or are otherwise cheating). Since lasers, being made of light, travel at the speed of light and all that. Of course, they also become weaker with range since, even in the relative emptiness of space, there's going to be some stuff in the way when you shoot at a target a billion miles away. Even if it's just a molecule of hydrogen every mile, it's going to weaken the beam by some tiny amount...and those tiny amounts add up.

Of course, everybody knows that the best weapons are ship-mounted bayonets. They're just not willing to admit it.

[Mohawk Clans]

Alright, and second question, what is the difference between a MAC and a railgun?

[Kreanoltha]

Alright, and second question, what is the difference between a MAC and a railgun?

If I'm not mistaken MACs are much larger. A railgun is for point defense while a MAC is a capital weapon.

[Rethan]

Alright, and second question, what is the difference between a MAC and a railgun?

If I'm not mistaken MACs are much larger. A railgun is for point defense while a MAC is a capital weapon.

Really there's no difference at all. A MAC is just a fancy name for a Railgun. Railguns can be any size at all.

[Vandenburg AFB]

I'm new to both nationstates and to FT, so, could someone walk me through a few guidelines for starships, etc. ?

[Morningstar Coalition]

Alright, and second question, what is the difference between a MAC and a railgun?

MAC = Magnetic Accelerator Cannon
In simple terms, a MAC is a railgun. Or more accurately, I believe the MAC's used in Halo-tech are actually coilguns.

A railgun doesn't technically use magnetic fields to propel it's payload. The payload (slug) is wedged between two metal 'rails', then a very high electric current is passed between the rails, which passes through the slug. The force of the electric current "pushes" the slug down the rails and out the end. The scientific term for this effect is Lorentz force.

A coilgun on the other hand, uses a series of electromagnetic coils. These are similar to the electromagnets used on those magnetic cranes you might see in a scrapyard. As long as electricity is flowing through the device, it generates a magnetic field. A coilgun operates by cycling the magnets on and off, simultaneously pulling, then pushing the slug down the barrel.

So, a MAC as seen in Halo is simply a super-sized coilgun weapon. As for what's better, laser or MAC... Well that's gonna depend on a lot of other factors. But really, either weapon is capable of the same maximum damage potential, as long as you have the right technology.

[Dante Peak]

What is the difference, if any, between a the above and the KEW's used on Battlestars

I only ask cause that is my tech

[Vandenburg AFB]

I'm new to both nationstates and to FT, so, could someone walk me through a few guidelines for starships, etc. ?

[United Districts of 1]

Just a question here,

Railguns, what are they exactly?
Also, MACs, are lasers better?

Railguns are actually something that would be mounted on a lighter craft such as dropship, gunship etc etc... What you would find on a capitol ship would probably be considered a Rail Cannon. As it fires at much higher speeds and a much larger slug. As for lasers they seem as though they would be rather in affective against heavy armor unless used in massive amounts.

[Dead Snow]

I'm new to both nationstates and to FT, so, could someone walk me through a few guidelines for starships, etc. ?

check out NS Extranet

EDIT: More specifically, this thread

Hey Feaz, i can has cookie for promos?

[Sennai]

On the subject of the Danversian war (Take thirteen canonwise far as im aware) Alversia and xiscapia are on very good terms with each other, as such plenty of RP is going on there including getting my Sen System Alliance thrown into the mix for a bit of a wider RP reach than what i have currently. (which involves trying to RP with people who on and off most of the time..)

Currently the SSA has a Alliance with xiscapia, and its the whole shabang, Immigration, trade, political and now millatry. anyway my point is that for the purposes of the Danversian war the large number of nations mentioned come under the name 2the coalition" but thats just in reference to the war VS the danversians, i know of no other name for it in any other context.

As for Solid shots VS lasers. Depends on your tech. while the Sen are fully capeable of feilding laser's they prefer missiles and solid shells as they have used these in warfare since...Ever really