Your thoughts on "automatons", please.

[Geudens]

Rules & gamewise it shouldn't be too difficult to write some rules on how steam armoured suits and the like would behave on the battlefield, but what about "automatons" (or "steam robots" if you like)?

As far as propulsion & movement are concerned, that's easy enough, but what about "brains & command"?  I think it would be wrong in VSF to give these machines a true artificial intelligence as is common in SF.

My basic idea is to group them in to units equal in numerical strength to MG units or artillery for taking casualties, controlled by a human figure (perhaps wire control or similar), but I would like to learn your thoughts on the matter.

Thank you,

Rudi

[Westfalia Chris]

Ah yes, Automatons! Loved them ever since I got a pack of the Deadlands GWR Automatons.

I fully agree that you cannot have them act as "humans" or "modern robot thingies". I wrote some rules based on Legends of the Old West some time in 2006 or so, and the basic points were:

• No initiative, i.e. the automatons ALWAYS act last
• Specific "battle programme", i.e. you have got melee automatons (with buzzsaws, blades, etc.) and ranged combat automatons (with gatlings, usually)
• Indiscriminate in targeting, i.e. they shoot at anything that moves within their front 90° vision arc, friend or foe
• Prone to malfunction, especially in regard to the Gatling. Re-loading and repairs can only be performed by Heroes with the Mechanic skill and require one of LotOW´s "1/2-5/6" tests

That´s it pretty much. If you would like me to go into detail, please feel free to ask.

[Poliorketes]

I'd say give them an order at the start of the game that you can't change - hold an objective or advance on another one. No psychology tests of any kind for them for obvious reasons. If you're really nuts make them shoot at everything in range matching a predetermined description (human sized or vehicles only), as I don't think they should have IFF.

[Plynkes]

Do you remember the flowchart programming for robots in Rogue Trader that was published in White Dwarf? I always liked that idea, though I must confess I can't remember the details. Might be worth digging up and adapting to VSF, if anyone has a secret stash of 80s WDs in the attic.

[earthdog]

I remember flowcharts like that (God, that makes me feel so old ). I’ll try looking them up tonight, I will post them tomorrow if I can find them.

[steders]

Do you remember the flowchart programming for robots in Rogue Trader that was published in White Dwarf? I always liked that idea, though I must confess I can't remember the details. Might be worth digging up and adapting to VSF, if anyone has a secret stash of 80s WDs in the attic.

HA! Exactly what I was thinking! I don't remember ever using them though, could be interesting

[Plynkes]

I'm thinking that Victorian robots would be too small to accommodate any kind of even rudimentary computer system. A cool idea would be to have a steam-powered battlefield "Difference Engine" that sits at the rear running the software (punch cards or something), and the advancing automatons all trail India rubber cables back to it to receive their instructions.

I imagine it like a kind big static wheeled thingy, like an armoured threshing machine in outward appearance, with a separate traction engine providing the steam to power it. That would look fantastic on the table top.

This way would provide extra game play. The user would have to protect the Difference Engine, and the enemy could try and sever the cables, too. You'd have to decide if robots that lose their connection simply shut down, or instead go berserk and attack at random like a Dalek who's had his eye stalk chopped off.

I think sometimes we just make our VSF like regular SF but with steampunk stylings. I think including more problematic things like this would give games much more of a Victorian feel.

[revford]

Do you remember the flowchart programming for robots in Rogue Trader that was published in White Dwarf? I always liked that idea, though I must confess I can't remember the details. Might be worth digging up and adapting to VSF, if anyone has a secret stash of 80s WDs in the attic.

I'm sure I have a copy of the 40K Compendium somewhere that has those robot rules.  I'll have a root about and see if I can find them.

[Westfalia Chris]

I'm thinking that Victorian robots would be too small to accommodate any kind of even rudimentary computer system. A cool idea would be to have a steam-powered battlefield "Difference Engine" that sits at the rear running the software (punch cards or something), and the advancing automatons all trail India rubber cables back to it to receive their instructions.

I imagine it like a kind big static wheeled thingy, like an armoured threshing machine in outward appearance, with a separate traction engine providing the steam to power it. That would look fantastic on the table top.

This way would provide extra game play. The user would have to protect the Difference Engine, and the enemy could try and sever the cables, too. You'd have to decide if robots that lose their connection simply shut down, or instead go berserk and attack at random like a Dalek who's had his eye stalk chopped off.

I think sometimes we just make our VSF like regular SF but with steampunk stylings. I think including more problematic things like this would give games much more of a Victorian feel.

Ohhhh... myyy...

*wallows in the splendid imagination of this great idea*

Good Sir, Mr. Plynkes, that is some jolly fine concept you have there. I just wonder if one should prefer guttapercha for the mantling.

[answer_is_42]

I'm thinking that Victorian robots would be too small to accommodate any kind of even rudimentary computer system. A cool idea would be to have a steam-powered battlefield "Difference Engine" that sits at the rear running the software (punch cards or something), and the advancing automatons all trail India rubber cables back to it to receive their instructions.

I imagine it like a kind big static wheeled thingy, like an armoured threshing machine in outward appearance, with a separate traction engine providing the steam to power it. That would look fantastic on the table top.

This way would provide extra game play. The user would have to protect the Difference Engine, and the enemy could try and sever the cables, too. You'd have to decide if robots that lose their connection simply shut down, or instead go berserk and attack at random like a Dalek who's had his eye stalk chopped off.

I think sometimes we just make our VSF like regular SF but with steampunk stylings. I think including more problematic things like this would give games much more of a Victorian feel.

Ohhhh... myyy...

*wallows in the splendid imagination of this great idea*

Agreed. I've gotta make me one of those!

Or what about an observation balloon that the wires are connected to? It'd be able to control their actions in far more detail (which is in turn connected to a difference engine on the ground...?). Though I suppose it would be rather easy to shoot down and destroy such a device...hmmm...

[Geudens]

I'm thinking that Victorian robots would be too small to accommodate any kind of even rudimentary computer system. A cool idea would be to have a steam-powered battlefield "Difference Engine" that sits at the rear running the software (punch cards or something), and the advancing automatons all trail India rubber cables back to it to receive their instructions etc etc etc....

Splendid (and all the others' idea too, btw).  I'm brewing on a "control centre" aboard a (steam) vehicle with (rubber) connections to the "automations".  I'm going to have a go at it!

Rudi

[Skrapwelder]

Sir Hugo Cunningham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Asphyx) did some remarkable experiments with light and projection. Perhaps your automatons could have some form of visual receptor and receive their instructions via heliography.

[Cory]

We've assumed they use a player piano like brass roll with nobs. Prior to the game the player puts together an order deck using cards from Robo Rally for each machine and firing is assumed to be an area of effect with no real targeting. Orders can't be changed, but the roll can be rolled ahead or wound back if you can get behind the contraption. Half of the program cards are played before the movement phase, the other half after.



 

[Ramshackle_Curtis]

They would have crap path finding routines. I think a good analogy is bad video games, where the baddies get stuck behind scenery.  Also they would probably fall over quite alot. But yes, specific orders from the start of the game is a good idea. Hold the objective, destroy a certain target, move to a specified point and shoot everything on the way.

[Ricco]

In my world automatons will not have independent action but are controlled by a handler.  The handler controls up to five automatons.  The basic automatons are sound activated so may react to a few voice, bugle, drum or even ‘pipes’ commands from the handler. Halt, advance, turn left or right (by degrees), shoot (at range in yards) and attack (melee to front)etc. would be “normal” activations. Activations per turn would be of a limited number and combinations. Eg, shooting = 1. Halt,  2. Range 200yards 3. Commence shooting.  Or to charge them into combat =  1. Halt 2. Melee 3. Advance.
Automatons would continue to follow the last order given until halted. All change of orders would start from a Halt order so that the Babage Engine can reset.
The more complex the actions available to an automaton, the fewer automatons under control of a handler. Very complex machines have a handler trailing behind playing an Accordion type instrument.  (Or heaven forbid, a wild eyed techno-piper on the steam pipes.)
To paraphrase the song “if you know the notes to sing, you can control most anything”