LORE (Story, Background, Character, etc.)

  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I have a question about writing lore. do Males still exist in the SC universe? it seems like every piece of lore written is about women making companies, women designing weapons or discovering jump points, women disobeying orders and saving civilians, and women test pilots. occasionally they're working with what appears to be a male. but never any stories about Men making new discoveries, or breaking new grounds.

    as I commented in the lore post:

    Now i'm all for equal representation of women among the good guys in the lore, but for that there actually needs to be good GUYS too. cuz right now none come to mind.

    Hi @kidfusion3000,

    I'm not sure what you mean. As far as male characters making new discoveries, just off the top of my head I've got:

    Scott Childress (invented Quantum Drives)
    Nick Croshaw (discovered Jump Points)
    Neal Socolovich (negotiated treaty with Banu)
    Ivar Messer (established the UEE and started a despotic dynasty)
    Terrence Akari (senator who bravely negotiated peace with Xi'an Empire during the Messer Era)
    Cal Mason (dashing daredevil pilot of derring-do)
    Imperator Costigan (current leader of the UEE)
    Admiral Bishop (Savior of Vega II)

    For me, the goal is always to try and make these characters compelling and complex. The gender tends to be a secondary consideration unless it factors into their story. So while we aim to strike a balance, ultimately, I want you to root for Tonya Oriel as much as Cal Mason because you connect with their personalities or their struggles.

    Dave
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Hi CIG Team.

    I'm curious as to how the date in the Star Citizen universe relates to today's date. We all know that the year is simply this year plus 930, however it would be interesting to find out in a little more granular detail how the month, day, hour and minute relate.

    An assumption would be that it is simply the current UTC + 930 years, however it would be great to know if this is correct. :)

    Thanks!

    Hi @Talenin,

    The month and day have been correlating as well which you can see in some of the News Updates. We're also running with the idea that for simplicity sake, the in-game date is conformed to SET (Standard Earth Time). For time, I had just been going off of GMT.

    Dave
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I do believe that its current plus 930. as for what time zone that is a good one because the "Empire Report" things they did used SET or Standard Earth Time. But what is that time? It has two possibilities, One is its what was once US-Eastern since the UEE is headquartered in NYC afaik. Or Earth has gone singular time zone in which case the old standby for a universal time would likely be used which means SET is what we would call GMT or Greenwich Mean Time.

    Hi @Filan,

    Yes, as mentioned above, I was running off of GMT.

    Dave
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    CitizenCon 2016 presentation

    The 'Orpheus Horizon' hm...where did you get that name from?

    Well Laurence Fishburne was in the Matrix as Morpheus, but he also starred in the movie Event Horizon.

    Coincidence? I think not. That was the Sci-Fi reference yeah?

    Sssssssshhhhh @Debido. Don't tell.
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    In the Polaris brochure you refer to Polaris's corvette as the UEES Gilchrist, when that seems to be between five and fifteen years prior to the formation of the UEE. I assume UPE ships don't use that designation? So is that then 'retroactive naming' because the ship went on to serve in the UEEN or just a typo?

    >:P

    Dammit @DireEvangelist95, good catch.

    I like your retroactive naming solution. Let's run with that.

    Dave
  • elsie

    Posts: 985

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    Recently DiscoLando commented on the cables between mining colonies and asteroids.

    https://www.twitch.tv/starcitizen/v/84267087?t=5h40m49s

    Can this be clarified as it seems to have sparked debates as to why it may be scientifically incorrect to use cables and they may actually be rigid rods.

    Hi @The-Grizz,

    I haven't seen any of the debates, but the idea was that the tethers were used to keep the asteroids in place while/after they'd been mined. Since the mass was changing, they might start drifting which could potentially lead to some kind of catastrophe.


    Dave
    the cables are there to keep it orbiting all together, otherwise they would orbit at different speeds Orbital Mechanics say that it is impossible for 2 objects to occupy the same 6 points in space, by attaching cables all the pieces, though individual are now for all accounts 1 unit capable of occupying the same 6 points in orbital space and traveling at the same speed
    Hi @GojiraSamurai,

    Ah, okay. Based on all the feedback, we'll go have a look and maybe retcon how these things are supposed to work. Maybe making them more like rods than cables would make more sense.

    Dave
    Could it be that the cables are similar to "memory metals" in that, when a specific electrical current is applied to them they stiffen? That way they could be "adjusted" as needed. Just a wee bit of handwavium there and could be used for other things.
  • Dread905

    Posts: 23

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I don't expect anyone to take this seriously nor get a straight answer cause . . "spoilers" but as a fun reference. . . Does Mark Hamill's Character in SQ42 have one hand?
  • Godwin

    Posts: 1793

    Posted:
    Posted:
    About asteroid tethers:
    [hide]


    Based on all the feedback, we'll go have a look and maybe retcon how these things are supposed to work. Maybe making them more like rods than cables would make more sense.
    Dave

    Please consider my idea as well, several people in this thread found it a good solution. For reference, here's the idea again:

    When I saw the ropes anchoring the asteroids I assumed (I studied astrophysics by the way, so maybe my assumptions are slightly slightly more valuable in this regard?) that they were put into place to shield the base from stray asteroids.
    I assumed the tethers were paired with some boosters fitted onto the large asteroids, which then could be moved around a bit to protect the base from incoming loose asteroids, like shields.

    It seems rather likely at least once a drunken rookie would crash head-first into an asteroid, maybe additionally setting off his rockets in the explosion (or a fight erupts somewhere and a missile hits an asteroid), thereby setting that one asteroid on a rogue path that may well cause it to collide with the station a month later. With the asteroid shields, the station can angle them to deflect the blow and fire boosters at the correct time to prevent them from, billiard-style, crashing the tethered asteroid into the station (also, tethers being very stiff but not so much as to break easily or be brittle or push the station too abruptly would make sense to me).

    PS: I know this isn't necessarily your department (although the story behind the tethers could be seen as lore), but I'd really appreciate it if you could forward it to whomever's it is since we were discussing it here, thanks!
    Let's create paradise together :) -- Sovereign Rubicon Union
  • Amontillado

    Posts: 2898

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Is the writing team aware of TSR's old sci-fi RPG 'Star Frontiers'? If so has anything in Star Citizen been inspired by it?
  • Algared

    Posts: 3571

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Hi David and Co.
    I'm currently polishing the Lore that has been written for the annual Crux Cup and I was wondering If you have the name for Earth's Senator to the UEE congress for the around the year 2915? Also how long do senators serve. Since 2946 was an election year.
    If you haven't named earth's senator yet may I suggest one Walden "shorty" Hughes, an outspoken earth first senator who regularly clashed with his Terran counterpart.

    Also do we know the Senators for earth and does Mars also have a senator. Lastly how many senators are their per planet. Is the number of Senators determined by the number of Population or is it just a straight one per planet?
  • lonespacewanderer

    Posts: 1

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Hi CIG Devs,

    I was wonderwing if you had picked out an official UEC Symbol? If not I would like to submit this...Credit_11-2.png?dl=1

    And this...

    UEC11.png?dl=1

    The were collaborated with the help of another community member.

    Would love to know what you folks think,

    Cheers!
    ~De Cosmos Et Terra~
  • RamsonCole

    Posts: 58

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Will players still be able to make it to Oretani even though the jump point has collapsed? Would a player be able to go to lets say Fora, and be able to set a course for Oretani and have any expectation of making it? And if the answers to this question is no, then why even make the system?
    I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
  • verran

    Posts: 17

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Aye Captain!

    I don't want to be a PC thorn in your side, but the names of humanity spread in the stars are a bit not so spread out themselves. Don't get me wrong, they sound awesome as they have to, but I kinda also want names that may derive from more than europian and sprinkling of east asian names in there.
    Maybe some polenesian or african root names in there? And some spanish, east europian and central asian names too. I know, it'll be hard work making them sound cool, but maybe still?

    Thanks. I am so thrilled to see you still interacting with us all these years hence!

    The question is, to be or not to be.
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]


    ...
    Official military ships are designated UEES which stands for United Empire of Earth Ship. For example, the UEES Countenance is the first ship Squadron 42 was assigned to.
    ...

    Thanks,
    Will

    Hi Will,

    Love you folks' work!

    Sorry for asking such a nitpicky question but we working on these standards for Star Citizen Wiki at Star Citizen Tools, and noticed something odd:

    According to the Polaris brochure p19, its namesake -- CMDR Hester Polaris -- commanded a UPE ship named UEES Gilchrist whose final voyage was in 2543, three years before the UEE was formed?

    At first I was thinking, oh UPE used UEES too? But that can't be right can it?

    What is the proper equivalent for a UPE ship?
    Hi @CZenStar,

    Yeah, that was a typo, but @DireEvangelist95 had a good solution that had the ship continue on its service after the transition into the UEE.

    But I'm not sure what the UPE equivalent would be. I'd have to think on that.

    Dave
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    I assume that we can name our ships. What would be the correct way to name a civilian ship registered by UEE ?

    Would I name my Idris "UEE Viking" ?

    Hi @Xris

    Official military ships are designated UEES which stands for United Empire of Earth Ship. For example, the UEES Countenance is the first ship Squadron 42 was assigned to.

    Civilian ships typically do need any special prefixes, though some use a prefix that designates the ships intended purpose. Most just have a name composed of one or two words. Traditionally, you are not supposed to name your ship using words that are associated with needing assistance like 'help' or 'mayday.'

    In terms of writing style, a ship’s name is usually italicized.

    So, your ship would probably be Viking

    Thanks,
    Will
    In Maritime use, pretty much any civilian/commercial ship large enough to be an ocean going ship gets the designate SS, MV, MT, Or TS. Seems most personel use or inland waterway vessel have unofficaly dropped prefix use.

    Merchant Marine/Commercial prefix listing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_prefix


    Prefix Meaning
    AHT Anchor Handling Tug
    AHTS Anchor Handling Tug Supply vessel
    AOR Auxiliary, Replenishment Oiler
    ATB Articulated Tug Barge
    CRV Coastal Research Vessel
    C/F Car Ferry
    CS Cable Ship
    DB Derrick Barge
    DEPV Diesel Electric Paddle Vessel
    DLB Derrick Lay Barge
    DCV Deepwater Construction Vessel
    DSV Diving Support Vessel/ Deep Submergence Vehicle
    DV Dead vessel[2][3]
    ERRV Emergency Response Rescue Vessel[3]
    FPSO Floating Production, Storage and Offloading Vessel
    FPV Free Piston Vessel
    FPV Fishery Protection Vessel
    FT Factory Stern Trawler
    FV Fishing Vessel
    GTS Gas Turbine Ship
    HLV Heavy lift vessel
    HSC High Speed Craft
    HSF High Speed Ferry
    HTV Heavy Transport Vessel
    IRV International Research Vessel
    ITB Integrated Tug barge
    LB Liftboat
    LNG/C Liquefied natural gas carrier
    LPG/C Liquefied petroleum gas carrier
    MF Motor Ferry
    MFV Motor Fishing Vessel (mainly UK Royal Naval Reserve)
    MS (M/S) Motor Ship (interchangeable with MV)
    MSV Multipurpose support/supply vessel
    MSY Motor Sailing Yacht
    MT Motor Tanker
    MTS Marine Towage and Salvage/Tugboat
    MV (M/V) Motor Vessel (interchangeable with MS)
    MY Motor Yacht
    NB Narrowboat
    NRV NATO Research Vessel
    NS Nuclear Ship
    OSV Offshore supply vessel
    PS Paddle Steamer
    PSV Platform Supply Vessel
    QSMV Quadruple Screw Motor Vessel
    QTEV Quadruple Turbo Electric Vessel
    RMS Royal Mail Ship or Royal Mail Steamer
    RNLB Royal National Lifeboat
    RV / RSV Research Vessel
    SB Sailing Barge
    SS (S/S) Single-screw Steamship
    SSCV Semi-Submersible Crane Vessel
    SSS Sea Scout Ship
    SSV Sailing School Vessel, Submarine and Special Warfare Support Vessel[4]
    ST Steam Tug or Steam Trawler
    STS Sail Training Ship
    STV Sail Training Vessel or Steam Turbine Vessel
    SV (S/V) Sailing Vessel
    SY Sailing Yacht or Steam Yacht
    TB Tug boat
    TEV Turbine Electric Vessel
    TIV Turbine Installation Vessel
    TrSS Triple-Screw Steamship or steamer[5]
    TS Training Ship or Turbine Steamship or Turbine steam ship
    Tr.SMV Triple-Screw Motor Vessel
    TSMV Twin-Screw Motor Vessel[6]
    TSS Twin-Screw Steamship or steamer
    TV Training vessel

    Most of these would have no usable function in space, although some might still carry on a tradition to be re-used (SS, Sinlge-scew Ship/Steam Ship becomes Star Ship).
    Hi @Snagletooth,

    I remember looking at a similar list back when we were doing the Lore Builder about the fleet designations, but this is good reference to have handy. Thanks.

    Dave
  • Snagletooth

    Posts: 4750

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]



    Hi @Snagletooth,

    I remember looking at a similar list back when we were doing the Lore Builder about the fleet designations, but this is good reference to have handy. Thanks.

    Dave

    I was part of that discussion session. Several of us posted listings,but they were purely of military/government owned ships (Navies in particular). What I posted here is relevant to maritime commercial/civilian vessel

  • Shadow-Knight

    Posts: 492

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]


    ...
    Official military ships are designated UEES which stands for United Empire of Earth Ship. For example, the UEES Countenance is the first ship Squadron 42 was assigned to.
    ...

    Thanks,
    Will

    Hi Will,

    Love you folks' work!

    Sorry for asking such a nitpicky question but we working on these standards for Star Citizen Wiki at Star Citizen Tools, and noticed something odd:

    According to the Polaris brochure p19, its namesake -- CMDR Hester Polaris -- commanded a UPE ship named UEES Gilchrist whose final voyage was in 2543, three years before the UEE was formed?

    At first I was thinking, oh UPE used UEES too? But that can't be right can it?

    What is the proper equivalent for a UPE ship?
    Hi @CZenStar,

    Yeah, that was a typo, but @DireEvangelist95 had a good solution that had the ship continue on its service after the transition into the UEE.

    But I'm not sure what the UPE equivalent would be. I'd have to think on that.

    Dave
    Dave,

    Maybe even though it was "United Planet of Earth" their ships retained the localized ship naming, as things were still in transition.

    For example, the UPE ship Enterprise would have been USS Enterpise, or the Dauntless would be the HMS Dauntless.
  • Tannxar

    Posts: 7

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Look NASA made a starmap not unlike ours http://eyes.nasa.gov/
  • GOD_Shive

    Posts: 735

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Hey there! :D

    I was wondering: Will any of the races (Vanduul, Xi'an, Banu, Tevarin) lay eggs?
    The Tevarin look kinda bird like and the Banu look a little bit turtle like...
    I've asked the question a few times before, but, back then I was told it was too early to tell, so here I am again with my eggcellent questions...

    Furthermore, if yes, would that change or affect how they look at boiled eggs and other egg food stuff we have here on earth, or would the difference in look simply make that an insignificant factor.
    photo e8e3bc4d304a9bb0d37c16238447d807.png

    Hesitation is the seed of defeat
  • aniron

    Posts: 5929

    Posted:
    Edited: by aniron
    Posted:
    Edited:
    I have a couple questions about the UEEN designation system and the 'missing' ships.
    There are plenty of designations for which we, the backers, do not know the ships.
    My main question is if the lore of these ships have been fleshed out yet?

    As I understand, the designations are modeled after the 1922 USN system.
    (Mission)(Design Number)(Manufacturer)-(Subtype)(Minor Modification)

    This gives:

    Anvil Aerospace
    Founded 2772.

    Fighters
    F(1)A through F6A - unknown
    F7A - Hornet (2700's?, pre-dates the **** F7C by 'almost 2 centuries')
    F8A - Lightning, 2947?

    Did Anvil really develop six separate fighter designs in their first 70-odd years of existence which were accepted into UEEN use, only to then come up with the Hornet and have that still in service 200 years later?

    Torpedo bombers
    T(1)A through T7A - unknown
    T8A - Gladiator,
    Also shown in some places as the T3A Gladiator, which one is correct?

    Attackers
    A(1)A through A3A - unknown
    A4A - Hurricane (2600's, 2nd Tevarin War)
    This fourth attacker made by Anvil apparently came out almost two centuries before the company itself was founded?
    Edit: Explained in AtV, the original Hurricane was not an Anvil design and the Anvil version is a modern revival of the concept.

    Utility
    U1A through U3A - unknown
    U4A-3 - Terrapin, "end of 28th century"



    MISC

    Transports
    R(1)M through R3M - unknown
    R4M - Quasar (Hull D)
    R5M - Proteus (Hull E)
    Are the Hull A-C the missing designations here or are they not in use by the UEEN?


    Aegis
    Formed by merger before first Tevarin war, 2500's.

    Fighters
    P(1)G through P4G - unknown
    P5G - Gladius
    P6G (or F6G?, N6G as trainer) - Avenger

    The Gladius appear to use the older 'pursuit' fighter designation. Is this a legacy of it being an older ship?
    When did the UEEN change from the P-designations to the F-designations like the Hornet, or is P used for light fighters and F for mediums?

    Just how old is the Gladius if the 200 year old Hornet is not notably outdated? Is it a relic of the first Tevarin war four centuries past?

    Does the Sabre have a (tentative?) UEEN designation?


    Attackers
    A(1)G through A2G - unknown
    A3G - Vanguard

    Bombers
    B(1)G through B3G - unknown
    B4G - Retaliator


    Are there any other ships that have UEEN designations other than the ones I have listed?
    I remember reading that the 350R was used by some covert units.
    sc_bwcsigs_solaria.pngBacon! Whiskey! Cake!
  • Atm0s

    Posts: 25

    Posted:
    Posted:
    With Dave liking the old Film Noir and with there being a PI mission already in there I was just wondering was there any idea floating about for more PI missions or any aspects of a PI/Detective career we could look forward to?

    Being a space detective [fedora included] would be a dream come true.
    I think it's time to blow this scene, get everybody and the stuff together...
  • Joxer

    Posts: 467

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]


    Fighters
    F(1)A through F6A - unknown
    F7A - Hornet (2700's?, pre-dates the **** F7C by 'almost 2 centuries')
    F8A - Lightning, 2947?

    Did Anvil really develop six separate fighter designs in their first 70-odd years of existence which were accepted into UEEN use, only to then come up with the Hornet and have that still in service 200 years later?

    That's not usually how it works. Assuming the numbering does indeed follow current US military practices, when the US military wants a new fighter, it sends out a bid request with a set of specs it wants the fighter to have. Bids are then put in by several manufacturers with design briefs, drawings, estimated time frames for building the prototype and for building 100 or so with a fully tooled factory and trained workforce (since they're two completely different things where time estimates are concerned), cost estimates, and a bunch of other stuff. The whole process from bid to win is not really important, but what is, is the end result. Once a design is chosen and the military signs off on it and says "This is our next fighter." Then it gets an F # designation. The F1 may not be made by the same company as the F2, or the F3 for that matter... And it's not uncommon for different branches of the military to all want new fighters at the same time, in which case you may have the F4, F5, and F6 all show up within a few months of each other and then nothing for 20 years. And sometimes jets are incorrectly numbered on purpose, as is the case for the F117 stealth fighter which is actually a light bomber, but as the military brass in charge of staffing the first jets discovered, they needed fighter pilots to fly them because of the hard turns necessary to avoid flying straight through radar sites at high speed and high G's sustained because of that, bomber pilots aren't trained for those maneuvers and couldn't fly them without a significant investment in retraining, and as the story goes, no self respecting fighter pilot would ever fly a bomber... So despite the fact it should have been given a B# designation being a light bomber and all, they gave it the F117 designation so fighter pilots would fly the damned things as soon as they were built.

    When a company significantly revises a design, such as completely upgrading avionics, weapons load out capabilities, adding or removing a second seat, bigger fuel tanks, stronger engines, whatever, then you get the b, c, d following the number with the original model retroactively being assigned an a.

    My 2 cents on the names/numbers:
    In the case of the hornet, there have only been 2 versions that we know of. The F7 that's been in use forever by the military which has the official F7 designation, and the new civilian model that got the unofficial F7c designation by Anvil, not by the UEE (likely because civilian starts with c, not because there's a b model out there... Though there could be since the UEEN calls it the F7a and they wouldn't unless there's a reason to make a distinction between two or more models. Maybe the Marines fly the F7b Hornet.)

    Also, just because the T3 Gladiator and the T8 Gladiator have the same name, doesn't mean they're the same craft. For example, Lockheed made the P-38 Lightning in WW2 (a heavy fighter), they're now making the F-35 Lightning a little more then 70 years later. P-38, F-35, not the same craft, but both fighters are made by Lockheed, and both are called Lightning. It's probably just a typo, 3 and 8 look a lot alike, but if it isn't, I wouldn't get hung up on the name, they get reused sometimes.

    And lastly, remember, the UEE has 3 services, not just the Navy, and they all have their own ships. We know a fair amount about the Navy, a little bit about the Marines, and even less about the Army. Your missing ships may come from those branches, we just haven't been given the info on them yet since those branches haven't really been discussed much.

    *pokes writers* need more info on other military branches.
    My hornet's name is "Kindness". I plan on killing a lot of people with Kindness.
  • aniron

    Posts: 5929

    Posted:
    Edited: by aniron
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    [hide]


    Fighters
    F(1)A through F6A - unknown
    F7A - Hornet (2700's?, pre-dates the **** F7C by 'almost 2 centuries')
    F8A - Lightning, 2947?

    Did Anvil really develop six separate fighter designs in their first 70-odd years of existence which were accepted into UEEN use, only to then come up with the Hornet and have that still in service 200 years later?

    That's not usually how it works. Assuming the numbering does indeed follow current US military practices, when the US military wants a new fighter, it sends out a bid request with a set of specs it wants the fighter to have. Bids are then put in by several manufacturers with design briefs, drawings, estimated time frames for building the prototype and for building 100 or so with a fully tooled factory and trained workforce (since they're two completely different things where time estimates are concerned), cost estimates, and a bunch of other stuff. The whole process from bid to win is not really important, but what is, is the end result. Once a design is chosen and the military signs off on it and says "This is our next fighter." Then it gets an F # designation. The F1 may not be made by the same company as the F2, or the F3 for that matter... And it's not uncommon for different branches of the military to all want new fighters at the same time, in which case you may have the F4, F5, and F6 all show up within a few months of each other and then nothing for 20 years. And sometimes jets are incorrectly numbered on purpose, as is the case for the F117 stealth fighter which is actually a light bomber, but as the military brass in charge of staffing the first jets discovered, they needed fighter pilots to fly them because of the hard turns necessary to avoid flying straight through radar sites at high speed and high G's sustained because of that, bomber pilots aren't trained for those maneuvers and couldn't fly them without a significant investment in retraining, and as the story goes, no self respecting fighter pilot would ever fly a bomber... So despite the fact it should have been given a B# designation being a light bomber and all, they gave it the F117 designation so fighter pilots would fly the damned things as soon as they were built.

    When a company significantly revises a design, such as completely upgrading avionics, weapons load out capabilities, adding or removing a second seat, bigger fuel tanks, stronger engines, whatever, then you get the b, c, d following the number with the original model retroactively being assigned an a.

    My 2 cents on the names/numbers:
    In the case of the hornet, there have only been 2 versions that we know of. The F7 that's been in use forever by the military which has the official F7 designation, and the new civilian model that got the unofficial F7c designation by Anvil, not by the UEE (likely because civilian starts with c, not because there's a b model out there... Though there could be since the UEEN calls it the F7a and they wouldn't unless there's a reason to make a distinction between two or more models. Maybe the Marines fly the F7b Hornet.)

    Also, just because the T3 Gladiator and the T8 Gladiator have the same name, doesn't mean they're the same craft. For example, Lockheed made the P-38 Lightning in WW2 (a heavy fighter), they're now making the F-35 Lightning a little more then 70 years later. P-38, F-35, not the same craft, but both fighters are made by Lockheed, and both are called Lightning. It's probably just a typo, 3 and 8 look a lot alike, but if it isn't, I wouldn't get hung up on the name, they get reused sometimes.

    And lastly, remember, the UEE has 3 services, not just the Navy, and they all have their own ships. We know a fair amount about the Navy, a little bit about the Marines, and even less about the Army. Your missing ships may come from those branches, we just haven't been given the info on them yet since those branches haven't really been discussed much.

    *pokes writers* need more info on other military branches.
    You describe the current joint service designation system, but the UEEN system is based on the older US Navy system used between 1922-1962

    The A in F7A, U4A-3, A4A and T8A stands for Anvil Aerospace, not 'version A' of the ship.
    Versions and revisions are designated as for the U4A-3, with a dash and version number at the end.

    For example, in the US Navy you had the

    F4B - 30's biplane made by Boeing
    F4C - 20's biplane made by Curtiss
    F4D 'Skyray' - 60's jet fighter made by Douglas
    F4F 'Wildcat' - 40's fighter made by Grumman
    F4H 'Phantom II' - 60's jet fighter made by McDonnel-Douglas
    F4U 'Corsair' - 40's fighter made by Vought


    It might well be the case that the UEEN system does not number separately per manufacturer, despite using manufacturer codes in the designation like the 1922 USN system. In that case the number of 'missing' ships is reduced considerably.

    (Pursuit) Fighters
    P1 through P4 - unknown
    P5G - Gladius
    P6G? (or F6G?, confirmed to be N6G as trainer) - Avenger
    F7A - Hornet
    F8A - Lightning
    F9G? - Sabre if/when accepted into service?

    Previously lore-mentioned military ships include the
    Anvil 'Devastator'
    Anvil 'Osprey'
    'Anvil' - possibly one of the first ship made by Anvil Aerospace, a predecessor to the Gladiator perhaps?
    'Cestus' dogfighter
    'Zipper' - pilot nickname according to Dave Haddock

    'Volksfighter' - the ship the Drake Cutlass lost its military contract bid to.
    sc_bwcsigs_solaria.pngBacon! Whiskey! Cake!
  • Godwin

    Posts: 1793

    Posted:
    Edited: by Godwin
    Posted:
    Edited:

    But when Aegis’ billion-credit babies decided that their comms were compromised and shut them off – just in time to miss their recall order – we had to chase down and destroy our own mistake, the death knell for Aegis in the shipbuilding industry.

    From https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/spectrum-dispatch/12977-News-Update-WILL-WE-NEVER-LEARN

    Is this still correct? Aegis seems alive and well in the shipbuilding industry.

    Anyway, my original question was: Is this AI initiative something we'll encounter ingame? Has this failed? Is there any update (planned) on this?
    Thanks!
    Let's create paradise together :) -- Sovereign Rubicon Union
  • BearSquish

    Posts: 4880

    Posted:
    Posted:
    With racing being a part of the game universe, will the lore implement an "Imperial Regatta" of sorts for 890s or something that the uber rich attend to? (I guess it could be a Monaco Grand Prix type of event, too, with the smaller and faster ships.) But not only a place for racing, but a place for trade and corporate deals and espionage to take place.
    _|ΞΞ|_ .................Hmmm. Quite..................................................................................... (╭ರᴥ•́)

  • greyhart

    Posts: 76

    Posted:
    Posted:
    So...something that has been bothering me for a while now:

    Why is there no UEE Space Force?

    We have the UEE Army, UEE Navy, UEE Marines, but as far as I can tell, no fourth branch of military. Since in the current time, the Air Force is arguably the most influential branch of service, being able to reach out to any part of the globe much faster than any other branch of the military, I find it's exclusion from the Verse troubling.

    I can envision the UEE Space Force as being stationed at planet bound military space ports in just about every UEE controlled system, flying patrols on a regular basis, especially when the UEE Navy has little or no presence in that system. The bases could be specific areas of a planet, or entire planets in some cases, presenting highly restricted airspace above them, which would be a challenge to some navigation.

    I could also see the UEE Space Force flying specific craft that the other branches do not, as well as some craft that other branches use, with variations to better suit the type of missions that branch of service is likely to run.

    The Navy has always been big ships that project massive power. Aircraft have just been a way to extend some of that power. The Air Force on the other hand, secures the air above land and sea. I would suspect that the UEE Space Force would be a way to secure space within a system, with long range craft flying missions to other systems when required.
    Now Recruiting...The Nassau Trading Company. Don't be fooled by imitators, search for NTC.

    See what you're missing at https://robertsspaceindustries.com/orgs/NTC

    YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCY_YMaIUhgpxXbDyIJBzy9A

    #IMASTARCITIZEN
  • N7_Shadow

    Posts: 2580

    Posted:
    [hide]

    Hi CIG Devs,

    I was wonderwing if you had picked out an official UEC Symbol? If not I would like to submit this...Credit_11-2.png?dl=1

    And this...

    UEC11.png?dl=1

    The were collaborated with the help of another community member.

    Would love to know what you folks think,

    Cheers!

    Hello CiG. I was wondering if Lonespacewanderer and I can get a response on this. He created the upper one, and I created the lower one. So let me explain why we even submitted these. In short, Lonespacewanderer is one of the leaders in our Business and Logistics Division. We were trying to come up with a better design for that Division than the one presently used. I am the leader of our Military Division, and helped with the design of our new Division logo.

    It went from this
    emblem_d2_military.jpg

    To this.

    Military2.png


    Now we are trying to come up with something better than this.
    emblem_d1_business_and_resources.jpg

    never mind the Science and Exploration title. This was just a place holder image that was big enough for us to work with. The interior symbol is what we are trying to replace.

    This is a rough idea that we came up with. The Business Cycle, with a UEC symbol at the top, and this would all be over that planet in the military logo.
    emblem_d1_business_and_resources1.jpg

    So the issue we ran into is that we have no idea what the UEC symbol looks like, or whether you have even made one. So we spent a few hours tossing ideas back and forth. We realized that it would have to be somewhat simple. People would need to be able to quickly draw it, assuming that people still occasionally hand wrote things.

    So we figured we would submit something, figuring that either you might like it and use it, or that it might give you some ideas to work with, or...that you might let us know that you already have a UEC symbol written into the Lore, and might be inclined to share it so that we can incorporate it into our Business & Logistics Division logo.
    AFFILIATED WITH WSC, DSK, SATO, TEST, OPPF, COURAGE and GRS.
    N7_Shadow_6.jpg
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Political question time!

    Some of the lore we have been getting recently has indicated that systems on the UEE's fringe near the Vanduul border are becoming increasingly unsatisfied with the UEE, and are turning more and more towards themselves to provide defense.

    What I am wonder is, are fringe systems on the other side of the empire experiencing the opposite? With the Vanduul threat being much more distant thing, one might think that those systems resented the tax burden the UEE was placing on them to fund the growing military.

    Based on the lore, we do have reason to believe that fringe systems near the Vanduul are feeling the pressure of the Vanduul threat, and that the core UEE worlds may be starting to split between Earth and Terra. But what's the political situation for those systems which aren't really central to the UEE nor in any real threat from the Vanduul? Are there other political pressures at work there?

    Hi @TBenz,

    Great question. Yeah, I would imagine that there are people who aren't directly under threat of Vanduul who are upset that an already strained economy is now being tasked with military a prolonged military campaign. But there are also more localized political issues to those systems. The civil war on Charon III is one example.

    Dave
  • DHaddock_CIG

    Developer

    Posted:
    Edited: by DHaddock_CIG
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    How are the Alien Languages coming along? I dont think we have heard much about them since they have been announced. Any chance will get some material to learn from before the game comes out, so we can at least know some basic words to help us communicate with the other species?

    Hi @Hitsman,

    I realize this question was from a while ago (and again, apologize for the delay), but we did release a really fun interview with Britton Watkins, our xenolinguistic specialist where he talked about the Xi'an and Vanduul languages over here in case you missed it.

    But we've continued digging into the languages. More recently we've been delving into the Xi'an society to help flesh out some of the dictionary, which has led to some really fun discussions.

    EDIT: Sorry, forgot to answer your second question. We're still discussing the release plan for these, so I'll have to get back to you on that when we know more.

    Dave
  • DeltaForce9559

    Posts: 16

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Hello Lore Team. I'm not sure if this is solely a lore kind of question or if I should approach the design team. My question is will there be a chance for...things to come through jump points? Like say a ship goes in, disappears and comes out somewhere else, derelict. Some kind of sci fi movie premise I imagine. Something for us Scavvers and Salvagers to be entertained with, you know? Signed a Fallout and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series fan.
Sign In or Register to comment.