Hardware and Software separation

[Pendra]

Right now, we have types of modules with very cookie cutter fashion. Linear benefits with linear tons+power disadvantage attached to them. Heavier modules usually perform better etc. The weirdest example is the Docking computer, that takes up as much space as 2 tons of cargo in a ship that can do FTL travel without problem, you need a 2 tons extension card to perform the simple task of docking. I understand that it has to be a different module, but why a physical one? It is just a piece of code since I don't suppose you drive your ship using actual rudders rods and strings.

What I would propose is to separate the hardware from the software.

A new, mandatory, module type would come into play, called Computer core. It would work the same way as the Power plant. It has finite memory and processing capability. It consumes power from the plant.
Each hardware module would come with backup firmware, that could keep the module operational at 25% efficiency in case of a core failure.

Here comes the fun part. All hardware modules you buy would integrate into the core with a basic E rated software pack. That is free of charge (included in the hardware price). You would be able to switch those with tuned software packs. They would provide some increase to efficiency, like better response times, decreased heat signature, increased scan range, faster scanning, tighter tracking, increased damage, better reloads etc. Nothing massive, maybe 5-10% improvement max. They may work as module software updates or add-ons that would work over all compatible hardware. Say scanner software add-on would improve basic scanning, KWS or Discovery.

You may add as many software updates as you want, nothing like 3 big, 1 small etc. The limit is the Memory and the Processing power. Each module would have its own numbers. The memory would be a hard limit. You can't go over that. The processing is a soft limit, like power. However, going over that would decrease the efficiency of all the hardware systems over the board.
You can't sell, transfer or backup software updates. You buy them and if you want, you delete them if you need space or processing power for something else. Selling a hardware would erase its software from the core. Re-buying it would not give you the software back. It would be the basic E type again.

So the Docking computer would cease to exist as a hardware module, rather it would be a perfect software add-on.
This would provide a secondary specialization or fine tuning to the player's ship. This would fix the current, cookie cutter module lineup. The hardware may be few and bland, but with the software updates and add-ons, you could add a huge spin on the ship design.

 

[Thoris]

"Sorry, we don't have an app for that."

 

[Uueerdo]

I'd agree with this for the most part, but not necessarily about the buying/selling/etc.... details. The programs should reside on the ship computer not the module(s) they control, and I see no reason they couldn't be "stored on disk" when not executing. Programs could even be prioritized for execution like modules are for power; no sense in running that targeting assist program for railguns when you don't have them deployed or only have beam weapons fitted at the moment.

 

[DocLooshkin]

+1. The docking computer module does not make sense from any perspective at all, other than being the most convenient way for the devs to implement it at the time. A proper computer core module would make sense. I wonder what else we can put in it...?

 

[golan]

I don't want a separate computing core, your ship already has one. These upgrade should take up one module space, even if they won't have mass (if such a change is accepted and implemented) because the game revolves around balancing the limited amount of modules available. So a quick fix is either not enough or if they do quick fix it, then this should be considered.

Having played the X series myself, I was also kind of disappointed that software extensions require space. My beef is with the scanners for discovery. I have a 10t scanner on my ship and I need another 1.3t for the DS scanner and 2.0t for the AD scanner. It makes little sense. Surely the scanner module should support software extensions that will allow it to achieve more complex tasks. And this would justify getting bigger ships with larger scanner modules, they would be capable of supporting more extensions to your ships scanning capabilities (it would also give an incentive to upgrade the scanner module). As long as the discovery scanner is internal and not a utility mounted piece of equipment, it makes little sense for it to add mass to the ship, it should be a software extension of the scanners. So should cargo scanning, frame wake scanning. And the amount of slots should be limited. This is why I disagree that the upgrades should go on the computer core.

Now notice that the ships were balanced like this. If this is implemented, all of a sudden people get a lot more spaces available for their current ships... so proposing a quick fix like that has more ramifications here. I reckon that, without a total ship rethink/rebalance, these software upgrades should apply as an extension to a physical module but should take up a similar module space as they do now. It won't be pretty, but it would be similar to how the fuel scoop is right now - it adds no mass of it's own, even if it takes up the space of an entire 10t module.

 

[Hell Razor5543]

I have, in the past, suggested that you could buy what is, in effect, a server rack, that when fitted would take up an internal slot (say, one that is for 8T capacity), and would link to (but not remove) the sensors system and a utility slot (this would have a powerful multi-functional aerial fitted). This rack would be heavily shielded (from random interference) and would have a clean UPS and well shielded cabling (so it has weight of its' own). Once fitted, it would (initially) be no different to the systems as they currently are. However, if you fitted an advanced discovery scanner it would be mounted into this rack (so no extra slots are taken), but if you wanted to add a detailed surface scanner afterwards you would only need the software (as the ADS would provide all the specialised scanning hardware), so no weight increase there. Because all the equipment is close together, and connected with specialised cabling, the equipment would be able to respond more quickly, so a KWS might only take 5 seconds to complete. It may also be that all the kit fitted works together to produce more clear and detailed results. If you had a power issue (if the PP had taken hits) the server rack UPS would take up the load, not unlike the way the life support system does when your canopy blows.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I have, in the past, suggested that you could buy what is, in effect, a server rack, that when fitted would take up an internal slot (say, one that is for 8T capacity), and would link to (but not remove) the sensors system and a utility slot (this would have a powerful multi-functional aerial fitted).

I really like this version of implementation. The 'server rack' module essentially would operate like a cargo bay or refinery for computer related modules, such as docking computer and whatever other computer related modules they come out with.

The scanners are scanners made to scan things that aren't ships, such as planetary bodies and USSs. I see no reason why this shouldn't take an internal slot.

 

[Pendra]

I would imagine these updates as the chip tuning you can get for your car.
You bring your car to a repair guy and get one. You are happy with the results.
After a while a new tuning comes out. You bring your car to the repair guy again. He does the update. After weeks of testing, you come to the conclusion that the previous version worked better for you.
Now, if you bring the car back to the repair guy, he will not put the previous version back free of charge, because you had it before. Going back to the old version means the same amount of work for him, as going to a new version, so he will charge the same. Practically, you lost the previous version when you installed a new one. You may have the code, but you lack the facilities and the knowledge to install it yourself, thus you pay.

There are differences between Sensors. To begin with, the main sensors seems to be thermal ones. I'm sure you would not be able to determine the content of a closed crate with a thermometer placed next to it. KWS scanners may have extra comms tools to get the bounties out of thin air. So they all need some additional physical components.

Computer cores are part of the ship for sure even now. So are thrusters, power plants etc. Like all mandatory modules. I don't see a reason why it should not be represented as such. Adding a new optional module (server rack) to improve it is good to have, but the central core should be upgradeable to begin with.

Processing capacity prioritization would be nice to have, the same way as you prioritize power consumption.

A destroyed Computer core would effectively destroy your ship. We don't want that. The power core is enough. To counter this, each module should be able to operate with the core at 0%. Only at a greatly reduced efficiency and without any perk the core provided before.

The idea is to make this as easy to integrate as possible. If the devs decided to implement this, they could just alter the sensor package slightly.
Divide the weight and the price of it by 2. That would be new weight and price of both the sensor pack and the computer core. Then give every player a computer core witch matches the sensor installed on the ship. No value change, no weight change. Finally, add everyone all E type software for their modules and nothing on the world would change. Every ship would have the same weight, same value, same damage, same ranges etc. The ships would behave exactly the same.
The freed up docking computer slot would be a minor improvement for some. The docking computer would be replaced by a 2 tons cargo hold and they would receive the software pack.

 

[golan]

Sensors might be of multiple types, but at 20t for a sensor module it better be able to do all sorts of stuff. Alas, I don't see them any different than how I would like to see the hardware/software separation. Bigger size sensors would have more upgrades slots available and thus you could increase their scope by upgrading the upgrade slots for them. So size 3 can only do thermal scanning - fine. Those sensors can't be upgraded to scan mineral contents and various cargo types, however, larger size sensors what's their purpose if they don't add anything better? They should have more functionality.

Anyway - don't want to hijack the thread, I thought of this example merely as an example of how I would handle the software issue (don't get lost in the details of how sensors should actually work, but how could you extend such a module by adding software capabilities): there would be software upgrades that are installed per module, but stuff like auto-landing, kill warrant querying should be functions of the computer core which would have a limited number of upgrades possible, depending on the ships size - just like individual module's size should impact how many extensions can you operate at a single time.

Processing prioritisation capacity would be nice, but there's nothing yet to process. Even if you add such functions now, how could ships that can fly through wormholes not be able to handle the processing requirements of the landing procedure and a few other trivial tasks that are currently handled by individual module.

You still don't deal with the rebalancing of the individual ships. Many ships would have many extra spaces - which might be nice for us, but it's not how the developers designed the upgrading process to work, currently you have to give up cargo capacities if you want extra functionality, you have to decide to upgrade a certain module over a different one because you don't have enough upgrade slots. It's all part of the game.