ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Home of discussions about Ultra Starfire (5th edition) and its predecessor Galactic Starfire (4th edition).

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Taluron on Mon 23 May 2011 07:06

Cralis wrote:
Taluron wrote:Ultra_4_2009_Part2.zip
_ApxAA_Tech.pdf

Jc - Anti-Matter Drive Tree

The generational codes all start with {h}
example: {h} Jca

The opening SL 22 also has this {h}.

Should those be in the SL column as h making each level a Hazardous project?

Otherwise I can find no explantion for the {h} in the SL 22 entry and personally find them extraneous in the Code field.

Or am I missing something? Are you marking on the control sheet the drives as hazardous?


What this means is that both the SL project AND the tech project are hazardous projects. Since Jc is anti-matter technology, there is a hazard in both the scientific breakthrough to each SL, and to the actual development of the technology.


Kinda what I thought but shouldn't the {h} be in the SL box and not the Code box?
Is the DAC code for Anti-matter engines is intended to be:
({h} Jca)x5
User avatar
Taluron
Lieutenant SG
Lieutenant SG
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue 05 Oct 2010 08:26

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Cralis on Mon 23 May 2011 10:08

Taluron wrote:
Cralis wrote:What this means is that both the SL project AND the tech project are hazardous projects. Since Jc is anti-matter technology, there is a hazard in both the scientific breakthrough to each SL, and to the actual development of the technology.


Kinda what I thought but shouldn't the {h} be in the SL box and not the Code box?
Is the DAC code for Anti-matter engines is intended to be:
({h} Jca)x5


No. Any modifier in the SL box affects ONLY the SL. The modifier has to be in the tech item box to affect the tech item.

Thus the {h}SL means the SL research is hazardous, and the {h}Jca means that the Jca tech item development is ALSO hazardous. If they were both in the SL box than only the SL research would be hazardous.

Not sure what you mean by the "DAC code"
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Taluron on Mon 23 May 2011 11:07

Cralis wrote:
Taluron wrote:
Cralis wrote:What this means is that both the SL project AND the tech project are hazardous projects. Since Jc is anti-matter technology, there is a hazard in both the scientific breakthrough to each SL, and to the actual development of the technology.


Kinda what I thought but shouldn't the {h} be in the SL box and not the Code box?
Is the DAC code for Anti-matter engines is intended to be:
({h} Jca)x5


No. Any modifier in the SL box affects ONLY the SL. The modifier has to be in the tech item box to affect the tech item.

Thus the {h}SL means the SL research is hazardous, and the {h}Jca means that the Jca tech item development is ALSO hazardous. If they were both in the SL box than only the SL research would be hazardous.

Not sure what you mean by the "DAC code"


DAC Code - sorry SFB on the brain - the Control Sheet Code for tracking damage to the ships systems.
I hadn't realized when reading through the R&D section that the {h} could go there.
User avatar
Taluron
Lieutenant SG
Lieutenant SG
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue 05 Oct 2010 08:26

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Omegalodon on Sat 12 May 2012 02:33

Compared to the other questions here, this seems overly nit-picky, but the answer will determine how I title my next new topic.

Is the printed spelling for 'Gravametric' intended, or was it supposed to be 'Gravimetric'? Google disagrees with the printed spelling.
Omegalodon
Midshipman 1st Class
Midshipman 1st Class
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun 22 Apr 2012 19:44

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby procyon on Sat 12 May 2012 02:57

Omegalodon wrote: the printed spelling for 'Gravametric' intended, or was it supposed to be 'Gravimetric'?


I can't say what was intended. I just don't know.

But as a former physicist (but not english major), the proper term is generally considered to be gravimetric if it has to do with any determination made by weight of an object - or when applied to instuments used to determine gravatic acceleration at a given point or location.

It has been applied to study of gravity fields, but is not always considered proper terminology for those areas of study or research.

EDIT

At least when I was involved. Which is getting to be on towards 20 years ago.... :|
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Cralis on Sat 12 May 2012 11:11

Omegalodon wrote:Compared to the other questions here, this seems overly nit-picky, but the answer will determine how I title my next new topic.

Is the printed spelling for 'Gravametric' intended, or was it supposed to be 'Gravimetric'? Google disagrees with the printed spelling.


The proper term, as you've noted, it Gravimetric. However, I haven't gotten to that drive yet on my roll through the technologies by SL and it may change because that doesn't seem named very well. We are moving the drive to around SL18-20 anyway.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Omegalodon on Sat 12 May 2012 13:26

The proper term, as you've noted, it Gravimetric. However, I haven't gotten to that drive yet on my roll through the technologies by SL and it may change because that doesn't seem named very well. We are moving the drive to around SL18-20 anyway.


Many thanks. I agree, if this drive type functions the way as described, the SL seems low, from my Ultra-inexperienced standpoint. One can do much more with gravity manipulation than just move ships. . .

Speaking of which, I'm working on some concepts directly related to the Gt drive, and was wondering where to post them, if/when I finish.
Omegalodon
Midshipman 1st Class
Midshipman 1st Class
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun 22 Apr 2012 19:44

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Cralis on Sat 12 May 2012 15:16

Omegalodon wrote:
The proper term, as you've noted, it Gravimetric. However, I haven't gotten to that drive yet on my roll through the technologies by SL and it may change because that doesn't seem named very well. We are moving the drive to around SL18-20 anyway.


Many thanks. I agree, if this drive type functions the way as described, the SL seems low, from my Ultra-inexperienced standpoint. One can do much more with gravity manipulation than just move ships. . .

Speaking of which, I'm working on some concepts directly related to the Gt drive, and was wondering where to post them, if/when I finish.


If you want to post suggestions feel free to start a topic. If you want to suggest them privately, you can private message one of us. But I've found that unless you have some uber-cool thing you want kept in secret, posting it as a topic lets you get ideas and input from the players...many of whom make some pretty awesome suggestions :)
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby Omegalodon on Sat 12 May 2012 15:54

If you want to post suggestions feel free to start a topic. If you want to suggest them privately, you can private message one of us. But I've found that unless you have some uber-cool thing you want kept in secret, posting it as a topic lets you get ideas and input from the players...many of whom make some pretty awesome suggestions :)


Excellent. I would love opinions and the viability assessments/potential improvements they would bring. I was just wary of starting topics already started.
Omegalodon
Midshipman 1st Class
Midshipman 1st Class
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun 22 Apr 2012 19:44

Re: ULTRA Rules Typo Reporting

Postby TerryTigre on Thu 31 May 2012 15:51

In rule W5.05.5 on page 172 a note is added at the end of the section.

A race that has not previously detect a WP in a cluster

Detect would probably be better as detected.

The term cluster is not used in the preceding rule, so at first i was thinking the note was misplaced, and belonged in the clustered warp points section W8.06.

However it did not quite fit there either.

So perhaps it would be clearer if instead of cluster shroud was used (which is present in W5.05.5) or at least a cluster of astroids is used.

Possibly shroud was used in W5.05.5 to avoid confusion with W8.06 and the note still uses the old terminology?
Status: 26 types of tech system. Working on fleet tactics. Added b generation weapons, including G, Gb. Possible to give Ships Movement Orders. Working on SysGenV2
TerryTigre
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed 23 May 2012 01:11

PreviousNext

Return to Ultra Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest