Skip to main content You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.

WikiFullscreen ChatVoice Chat (Discord)Org PageF.A.Q.

Topic: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center (Read 23076 times) previous topic - next topic

Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center


My fellow Citizens and Pitchforkers

After having some questions myself, seeing the 'questions to be answered thread' and after some personal deliberations and a short but positive PM discussion with Sailor67, Benjamin the Rogue and Jaustin89, I am hereby starting this thread to discuss the formation of an 'operation pitchfork intelligence, research and data analysis group.

Its job would be as its name implies: To deliver intelligence by performing research and data analysis. In other words by theorizing, analysing gathered data/statistics and also possibly by designing and/or running experiments.

This idea stems from two aspects 1. the following axiom: that the developers at CIG will be very clever and devious when programming and developing the Vanduul and that the operation will face fierce opposition when invading Vanduul space.

Now that is in itself no problem as we have many pilots who are highly experienced veterans from previous Chris Roberts space sims as well as newer pilots who will no doubt dedicate themselves with fresh vigour, so there is no doubt in my mind that this operation will be glorious.

However there is currently also the second aspect: 2. as it stands we have an additional enemy: The unknown. Currently we know very little of the terrain, little of the enemy and even less of how the enemy behaves in terms of movement and responses. And in combination with the axiom that CIG will be clever and devious... I will expect the worst as even the most dedicated forces can be defeated when fighting under unknown circumstances.

There are multiple ways to resolve this situation and gain more knowledge, one such way is the initiative of people like Jaustin89 who are currently already organizing to perform future scout and recon operations that will no doubt provide us with fascinating raw data. That leaves the question what to do with- and how to process the data they gather? And that is where the idea for this new group comes in.


I will give an example:

Say we want to know how Vanduul carriers behave, how many are there in the target systems and if they for example patrol multiple systems?

The role of the data analysis group would be to come up with a way for scout and recon (and independents) to file reports of Carrier sightings and identifications combined with information like dates and location (in- and intersystem) of sightings.

And then subsequently process the data as it comes in... after just a few days let alone weeks we would potentially be able to identify possible patterns (or come to the conclusion that they are totally static) and perhaps even attempt to extrapolate which carrier would be where at what time (and subsequently try to test the accuracy of said extrapolation).

And after that the real fun begins with possible experiments to try and see how and when the Vanduul respond to our actions.

And that is just one of the interesting things we can do by using data analysis and statistics from day one. Now as it is showcased here, the example is relatively simple, however there are many more interesting things to research and discover and this can get more complicated real fast by additional research subjects (from other potential Vanduul vessels and squadrons, we might be able to track hundredths or thousands of Vanduul vessels) and possible experiments to see how Vanduul respond to incursions or for example the destruction of a ship. So I therefore would suggest making a dedicated group.


To be clear, this group would not be so much about flight operations (though I am not 100% excluding it either as who knows what kind of experiments might be devised) but mostly about considering hypothesis and performing data analysis.

A couple of things that I think would be need to be considered before starting operations in the Beta phase:

-   Determine what kinds of raw data we would need and what potentially could be gathered
-   Developing a standardized reporting system that is "simple to use concise and accurate"  so scouts can hand in raw data.
-   Developing ways of raw data storage and processing
-   A way to allow for 'peer review' of research outcomes and inputs
-   Keeping track of all relevant lore and developer information for possible literature study
-   ??? etc
  • Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 03:37:38 PM by Marcus ImpaleMan

  • Benjamin the Rogue
  • [*][*][*]
  • Staff
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis
Reply #1
I look forward to seeing what IRADA discovers about the Verse, and what they're able to develop for us. Keep up the great work!

  • Benjamin the Rogue
  • [*][*][*]
  • Staff
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #2
I've added this thread to the Orientation Packet.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #3
I think this is a fantastic idea, Marcus! Pretty complicated, but I don't doubt you are up to it. And this information would be a fantastic force multiplier when the time comes. :)

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #4
      Suggestions for raw data:

      • Response/deployment times from in-system resource points


        • carries/carrier capable craft

        • planetary launches/etc...)


      • Response/deployment types based on hostile detection


        • single incursion craft by class


          • fighter class

          • bomber/Heavy Fighter

          • transport/cargo

          • Ship of the Line


        • squadron incursion


          • small (under 6 ships)

          • medium (6 to 15)

          • large (15+)




      This also potentially provides additional materials based on extra-system movements and deployments if we know what resources are available 1 or 2 jump points out, as well as possibly identifying unknown intrasystem jump points.

      If you like, I can work up a few scenario/strat-profiles outlining some "what-ifs" looking at best/worst cases based on what little historic data is available.
  • Last Edit: February 12, 2014, 05:01:06 PM by Hussars
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #5

      Suggestions for raw data:

      • Response/deployment times from in-system resource points


        • carries/carrier capable craft

        • planetary launches/etc...)


      • Response/deployment types based on hostile detection


        • single incursion craft by class


          • fighter class

          • bomber/Heavy Fighter

          • transport/cargo

          • Ship of the Line


        • squadron incursion


          • small (under 6 ships)

          • medium (6 to 15)

          • large (15+)




      This also potentially provides additional materials based on extra-system movements and deployments if we know what resources are available 1 or 2 jump points out, as well as possibly identifying unknown intrasystem jump points.


If I understand correctly your suggestion is to send in different craft and ascertain what the response is to that? That is also one of Sailor's main questions :) And indeed a very interesting experiment though difficult to judge on the smaller scales -> I have been thinking about how scout missions in itself might already change Vanduul patterns (unless they can stay 100% undetected, which I doubt).

However the question in itself if the Vanduul respond and change patterns systemwide, based on an incursion would be interesting to find out indeed. If we can for example place observers near Vanduul bases and see if they respond, launch additional fighters etc.

What I personally also would love to find out is see what happens if we take out a carrier: Would the Vanduul redeploy as you say including forces from adjacent systems... so many things to find out  ;)

If you like, I can work up a few scenario/strat-profiles outlining some "what-ifs" looking at best/worst cases based on what little historic data is available.


That would be very interesting :-)

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #6
With having several systems as the boarder between UEE and Vanduul space, each acting as an effective choke point for further advancement into either space, we're presented with a great chance to use that to our advantage.

We know UEE and civilian craft patrol not only "our side" of the boarder, but tend to make jumps into the hostile areas (with or without official sanction/knowledge).  So we post a bounty/reward for patrol video [preferably the game allows for capture like World of Tanks/War Thunder] (with a "At your own risk" disclaimer) from all of those systems and a simple after action report for each submission.

The video provides some limited proof of the actual patrol, and potentially details information the pilot might miss/not report/not feel is important.

The after action report would require time/date of patrol, ship type flown, number of people/ships/etc... Maybe have an optional data field for Faction/Standing with UEE/Pirate/Vanduul options.

The OPF intel/recon team(s) would also be submitting reports we can use to look for patterns and trends to verify back against the general population reports and if either team pushes into adjoining sectors as part of their recon, we can watch for changes/flight patterns from the Vanduul support craft and launch points.

Taking this a step further, using the recon team to stage incursions, we can set specific variables (e-profiles, active vs passive sensors, ship type/numbers) and look for the measured response.  Using the entire boarder for these actions could normalize the occurrence tracking and potentially be used to distract focus from specific areas.

Most likely outcome:  Vanduul perform a general increase/display of readiness in all systems until the general threat diminishes (we do this long enough and it becomes "normal" activity in those sectors, so it actually becomes easier to do future data gathering)
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #7

With having several systems as the boarder between UEE and Vanduul space, each acting as an effective choke point for further advancement into either space, we're presented with a great chance to use that to our advantage.

We know UEE and civilian craft patrol not only "our side" of the boarder, but tend to make jumps into the hostile areas (with or without official sanction/knowledge).  So we post a bounty/reward for patrol video [preferably the game allows for capture like World of Tanks/War Thunder] (with a "At your own risk" disclaimer) from all of those systems and a simple after action report for each submission.

The video provides some limited proof of the actual patrol, and potentially details information the pilot might miss/not report/not feel is important.


That is a very interesting suggestion, though depending on how many video's would be send in, it could take up a lot of time to analyse.  It is however an idea to make footage of key operations to use for later analysis.

The after action report would require time/date of patrol, ship type flown, number of people/ships/etc... Maybe have an optional data field for Faction/Standing with UEE/Pirate/Vanduul options.

The OPF intel/recon team(s) would also be submitting reports we can use to look for patterns and trends to verify back against the general population reports and if either team pushes into adjoining sectors as part of their recon, we can watch for changes/flight patterns from the Vanduul support craft and launch points.


I made a concept of how a report could be made here: https://operationpitchfork.com/forums/index.php?topic=628.0

If you have further suggestions to that it would be interesting  :) THe "Faction/Standing with UEE/Pirate/Vanduul" option for example is very interesting to see if reputation actually influences the number of encounters

Taking this a step further, using the recon team to stage incursions, we can set specific variables (e-profiles, active vs passive sensors, ship type/numbers) and look for the measured response.  Using the entire boarder for these actions could normalize the occurrence tracking and potentially be used to distract focus from specific areas.

Most likely outcome:  Vanduul perform a general increase/display of readiness in all systems until the general threat diminishes (we do this long enough and it becomes "normal" activity in those sectors, so it actually becomes easier to do future data gathering)


That is what I would like to find out  :)
  • Last Edit: February 18, 2014, 11:00:08 AM by Marcus ImpaleMan

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #8
Very Nice!

This idea means we can keep tabs on systems that are too dangerous to enter without the main fleet  etc.

Nice Work!

  • Andy_H
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
  • NMC Ambassasdor.
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #9
I'll help out where I can.

  • Andy_H
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
  • NMC Ambassasdor.
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #10
Some conjecture and random points to look out for:

One thing to point out is that with the economy, workers need to be shipped in too. So will Vanduul pilots need to be shipped in to the replacement ship area? Or will fighters be shipped in bulk to the carriers aboard transports? The first case seems more likely, but the second is also possible. So perhaps it will be possible to disrupt Vanduul combat replacement by cutting off one of these logistical spokes. Fighters and ships won't do any good if crews can't get to the "ship dealer" to pick them up. Or if the ship dealer lot on the carrier is empty because some humans hijacked the transport hauling those replacement scythes to the carrier.

The Vanduul ships are indeed bigger, but do they also serve as population centers and logistical manufacturing, training, ect in accord to their nomadic nature? A Kingship Carrier may well represent not just combat power, but a capital city for a tribe as well. Our large ships are smaller, but purpose built. They are not apartments, warehouses, and cities in space along with their intended role. Their size indicates strength, but also far more resources and time for construction. They may be bigger, but are there less of them?

Also, due to how they may be built are they bigger because the materials they are replicated from weaker? Many have an organic look to them, so are they grown as well as built?

As the Vanduul are guided on merit, will the vast majority of ships we see be the smaller scythes rather than a more "balanced force" a regular military strives for? Large ships may well require earning the "right" to fly them in addition to just obtaining them. Also related, are the freighters run by Vanduul who couldn't cut it or perhaps crewed by the youngest adults who have yet to prove themselves? It is possible that these crews could be "weaker" than ones found on even smaller sized combat ships. Lore states that upon reaching adulthood, a Vanduul is basically ejected from their family with nothing but a knife. They have to start somewhere, and I doubt they would just be given a scythe. They have to earn it.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #11
Great thinking points Andy_H  :)


Some conjecture and random points to look out for:

One thing to point out is that with the economy, workers need to be shipped in too. So will Vanduul pilots need to be shipped in to the replacement ship area? Or will fighters be shipped in bulk to the carriers aboard transports? The first case seems more likely, but the second is also possible. So perhaps it will be possible to disrupt Vanduul combat replacement by cutting off one of these logistical spokes. Fighters and ships won't do any good if crews can't get to the "ship dealer" to pick them up. Or if the ship dealer lot on the carrier is empty because some humans hijacked the transport hauling those replacement scythes to the carrier.


Good point, though it is my current suspicion that CIG might very well 'cheat' on this point by using the lore of Harvesters and warcamps on planets to simply spawn Vanduul if they ever run the risk of the Vanduul being 'too wiped out'.

Nevertheless the fact that there are cargo ships (and rather large ones) does indeed imply supply lines that could be potentially disrupted, depending on scanning equipment I would like to know what they are carrying before they are blown up, so we can figure out their economy.

The Vanduul ships are indeed bigger, but do they also serve as population centers and logistical manufacturing, training, ect in accord to their nomadic nature? A Kingship Carrier may well represent not just combat power, but a capital city for a tribe as well. Our large ships are smaller, but purpose built. They are not apartments, warehouses, and cities in space along with their intended role. Their size indicates strength, but also far more resources and time for construction. They may be bigger, but are there less of them?


Bigger means also harder to miss ;-) It does indeed seem to be true that Kingships are also flying warcamps (i am not sure if they are cities in a more civilian sense... vanduul seem too spartan for that), the concept doesn't show much in the way of weapons apart from the rather big gun up front so we will have to see... I do expect them to give Bengal Carriers a run for their money..

Also, due to how they may be built are they bigger because the materials they are replicated from weaker? Many have an organic look to them, so are they grown as well as built?


Adding to that -> Where are they built? Is there such a thing as a Vanduul shipyard, or are they building each carrier from scratch on site by temporary making construction structures and delivering materials

As the Vanduul are guided on merit, will the vast majority of ships we see be the smaller scythes rather than a more "balanced force" a regular military strives for? Large ships may well require earning the "right" to fly them in addition to just obtaining them. Also related, are the freighters run by Vanduul who couldn't cut it or perhaps crewed by the youngest adults who have yet to prove themselves? It is possible that these crews could be "weaker" than ones found on even smaller sized combat ships. Lore states that upon reaching adulthood, a Vanduul is basically ejected from their family with nothing but a knife. They have to start somewhere, and I doubt they would just be given a scythe. They have to earn it.


On the other hand that could make cargo pilots a lot more dangerous because they would have something to prove...  ;) though in truth this will be an aspect where I will not trust lore for a second and just await what we will actually encounter. Ship types might run on predictable AI or they might be random and surprise us at any turn even in cargo ships.

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #12

That is a very interesting suggestion, though depending on how many video's would be send in, it could take up a lot of time to analyse.  It is however an idea to make footage of key operations to use for later analysis.


Was thinking to prioritize more from a, "their report hits key words" kind of thing.


I made a concept of how a report could be made here: https://operationpitchfork.com/forums/index.php?topic=628.0


If the dev team implements some for of combat/flight recorder log, maybe a way to attach that as well.  (I commented on the thread and will try to provide a form sample base don what you have so far)


If you have further suggestions to that it would be interesting  :) THe "Faction/Standing with UEE/Pirate/Vanduul" option for example is very interesting to see if reputation actually influences the number of encounters

That is what I would like to find out  :)


Let me start on the form sample to better show what I was thinking for the form.  Would also suggest that there be two forms, one for general pilot use (kept to a minimum number of fields and as easy to use as possible) and more detailed form for action, and scouting/recon teams.
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #13

Was thinking to prioritize more from a, "their report hits key words" kind of thing.

If the dev team implements some for of combat/flight recorder log, maybe a way to attach that as well.  (I commented on the thread and will try to provide a form sample base don what you have so far)

Let me start on the form sample to better show what I was thinking for the form.  Would also suggest that there be two forms, one for general pilot use (kept to a minimum number of fields and as easy to use as possible) and more detailed form for action, and scouting/recon teams.


Good suggestion, indeed we might benefit from all the participating groups if the form is simple and easy to hand in. While being more accurate for people who are dedicated to scout and recon and might be willing to make more effort. Looking forward to your ideas :-)

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #14
Okay, really rough sample based on your original post... Non-functional obviously, and in need of a lot of refinement (is a 5 minute Proof of Concept mock up) and no presentation styling applied.



Ideally, it would have a bit of back-end code which would allow for a more dynamic presentation, such as a Number of Encounters field being used to generate the associated field groups (i.e Encounter 1 detail cluster, Encounter 2 detail cluster, etc...) and this would allow the use of a simple postdata form to be hosted on a site to gather the data which could be parsed/reported from.

I believe CR and team mentioned wanting to allow external website links, or at least org page links, viewable in-game.  Posting a quick link (which can "force" a new browser window) in the org pages to complete the after action report hosted form.

Makes the process fairly straight forward and potentially without leaving the game depending on how the functionality is supported in-game.

::Edit Insert::  For the next draft, I'll take a bit more design time and see about making it work as well :)

Still working on the "what-if" scenario samples, but think you can see my line of thinking based on conversation to date.
  • Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 06:03:36 PM by Hussars
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

  • Andy_H
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
  • NMC Ambassasdor.
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #15
Looks good to me. Could have a space for a rough location within the system though, so we can get a feel for patrol/transport lanes, and other hot spots.

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #16
Do'h!

Thought I had a "nearest jump point"/Nav marker entry >.<

Will add one in on the updated version.
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #17
Awesome work so far :) I am now going to comment using numbers for the different sections:



Section 1: Depending a bit on if we would want a report from every pilot joining a scoutmission or just a report from the scoutleader (or designated report filer), we may need something to perhaps also list their names or list all ships and shiptypes involved.

I would also pute a seperate date option there next to the timestamp (unless this can clearly be made part of the timestamp).

Section 2: Depending on how we can determine it, there might need an option to write down the coordination point telling where the encounter took place in-system

Section 3: Not sure what the difference is between "response encoutered" and "response vessel", my idea is to have the first for shiptypes/squadrons and the second as an open question where people can list ship ID's (see example below).

Section 4: No comment  ;)

What would indeed be interesting is what you also mentioned making it dynamic. Which I have been thinking how that would more or less look. To illustrate, I will use my example scout mission:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOS5W1sSdBI

A scout mission through Virgil and Tiber with 2 encounters and 3 ships encountered, in the example I have listed the scythes seperatly though they could be listed as Scythe flight/Blade flight/2 vessels or something like that.

If I understood you correctly the report would then look something like this:

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #18
Thanks for the feedback!

For the time stamp, because of the way communication works/has been presented in the PU, I assume the time/date stamps will allow for date inclusive formatting.  I'll add a date specific field with a requirement to use RL time/dates in-place of SC:PU time/date, maybe call this Earth Standard?

Location Id was intended to have a Nav/Jump point entry (oops forgot to include it) as well.  In multiple encounter scenarios, nearest nav for each encounter provide a derivable general flight plan as long as the encounters are recorded in order of occurrence (where the time/date stamps come in)

I'll rework the presentation of the (#2) and (#3) sections to clarify the requested data/field names, but you have the general idea.  For encounter reports, Number of Encounters will add 1 section (#2) multiplied by the Number of Encounters value.  Within each (#2) grouping there will be a Number of Ships Encountered value, which will operate the same as the Number of Encounters field.

So, a flight log with 1 encounter having a 3 Vanduul ship response would have one (#2) and three (#3) data groups.

Try this link and let me know if it works or not (Works best in Chrome currently):  http://paradoxflaw.com/?p=586

The submit button doesn't work (by design), the feature for auto-appending new groupings also does not function, and the comments field hasn't been added yet, but it might be a better sample to work with from a design discussion point.
  • Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 05:48:40 PM by Hussars
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #19
I'd be willing to lend a hand over here. You want me to start sifting through all the lore we have so far?

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #20

I'd be willing to lend a hand over here. You want me to start sifting through all the lore we have so far?


Howdy EvilTwinn, welcome to the discussion! :D

With CIG still making changes to the systems, might be too early for an initial SitRep or ThreatCon review, and while I don't speak for the Pitchfork team or leadership, if you have something you want to share or think might help, please do! :)
----

On the topic of the AAR, this is what I was thinking to use as a guide for the planned (i.e. more detailed) scouting/recon actions: (Link)

It will obviously need to be modified based on usage/need, but should give us a good frame work for more detailed AAR submissions from official OPF scout and recon members.

Basically, I'd suggest something like:

  • Intel team drafts scenario identifying major targets/goals/etc...

  • Draft related mission(s)

  • "Management" reviews/approves mission outline

  • Recon/Scout teams (or other groups if needed) run the missions

  • Flight Leader/Team members completes a "short" form like the previously linked AAR form

  • Intel team uses short form AAR to evaluate the scenario outcome

  • Detailed AAR is completed by Intel team

  • Assessments/Assumptions are updated

  • Rinse & Repeat



Depending on the sophistication of the mission creation tools available within Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, we may be able to use the actual in-game mission terminals/system to achieve this portion.

Else, we'll need to draft missions manually which are related to approved scenarios, and use other data means (such as in-game flight recording) to verify submitted data.

Overall, my idea is to let the action oriented folks do as little paperwork as possible, while still getting information we can use to evaluate for the leadership (and individual members) to try and plan around.

Again though, this is Marcus's party, I'm just throwing ideas out :)
  • Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 05:33:23 PM by Hussars
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #21

I'd be willing to lend a hand over here. You want me to start sifting through all the lore we have so far?


If you want to  :) On Vanduul we have several entries such as writers guide 7,  the system information about for example Tiber and Orion.  Notes on the Scythe, the Cal Mason stories and the wiki also has a little information. If we could combine it that would be helpfull. Things may change, but we can keep up with the changes that way

Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #22

Maybe have an optional data field for Faction/Standing with UEE/Pirate/Vanduul options.
areas.


Your comment gave me an idea for an experiment i've posted here


Thanks for the feedback!

For the time stamp, because of the way communication works/has been presented in the PU, I assume the time/date stamps will allow for date inclusive formatting.  I'll add a date specific field with a requirement to use RL time/dates in-place of SC:PU time/date, maybe call this Earth Standard?


Earth standard sounds good :-) I wouldn't put too much fate on the game time because as it is a beta all sort of weird things might happen with it.

Location Id was intended to have a Nav/Jump point entry (oops forgot to include it) as well.  In multiple encounter scenarios, nearest nav for each encounter provide a derivable general flight plan as long as the encounters are recorded in order of occurrence (where the time/date stamps come in)


Perhaps also in combination with landmarks, such as planets. Though this is probably something we will have to figure out during the early stages of the Beta or I might try to ask this on WMH

I'll rework the presentation of the (#2) and (#3) sections to clarify the requested data/field names, but you have the general idea.  For encounter reports, Number of Encounters will add 1 section (#2) multiplied by the Number of Encounters value.  Within each (#2) grouping there will be a Number of Ships Encountered value, which will operate the same as the Number of Encounters field.

So, a flight log with 1 encounter having a 3 Vanduul ship response would have one (#2) and three (#3) data groups.

Try this link and let me know if it works or not (Works best in Chrome currently):  http://paradoxflaw.com/?p=586

The submit button doesn't work (by design), the feature for auto-appending new groupings also does not function, and the comments field hasn't been added yet, but it might be a better sample to work with from a design discussion point.


Looks good so far  :) Only thing i'm missing so far is an option to fill in a ship's name or ID. We need that especially for the bigger ships to see if they fly in patterns. 

Also perhaps we could test it  later with one of the older CR games like freelancer or privateer to get an idea if we are missing something or not based on historical game mechanics.



On the topic of the AAR, this is what I was thinking to use as a guide for the planned (i.e. more detailed) scouting/recon actions: (Link)

It will obviously need to be modified based on usage/need, but should give us a good frame work for more detailed AAR submissions from official OPF scout and recon members.


Interesting I will read it in the morning.

Basically, I'd suggest something like:

  • 1 Intel team drafts scenario identifying major targets/goals/etc...

  • 2 Draft related mission(s)

  • 3 "Management" reviews/approves mission outline

  • 4 Recon/Scout teams (or other groups if needed) run the missions

  • 5 Flight Leader/Team members completes a "short" form like the previously linked AAR form

  • 6 Intel team uses short form AAR to evaluate the scenario outcome

  • 7 Detailed AAR is completed by Intel team

  • 8 Assessments/Assumptions are updated

  • 9 Rinse & Repeat



It looks like a list I send to Sailor Jaustin and Benjamin when I pitched this  :)

"- gather and formulate questions like those by Sailor and others
- think of ways to answer such questions and make research proposals
- upon approval coordinate with for example Jaustin and the scouts on what data needs gathered (the actual operation of gathering data would lie with them)
- analyse the gathered data and report back"


3 is not applicable, as each initiative isn't that centrally run (we do keep Sailor and Benjamin in the loop of what is going on) have a go to run operations as we see fit, though that does mean that for 2 and 4 we will for example discuss it with Scout and recon (or other groups)

For the rest it seems like a good research cycle.

Depending on the sophistication of the mission creation tools available within Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, we may be able to use the actual in-game mission terminals/system to achieve this portion.

Else, we'll need to draft missions manually which are related to approved scenarios, and use other data means (such as in-game flight recording) to verify submitted data.


I have an idea for that, but I will get back to it.

Overall, my idea is to let the action oriented folks do as little paperwork as possible, while still getting information we can use to evaluate for the leadership (and individual members) to try and plan around.

Again though, this is Marcus's party, I'm just throwing ideas out :)


Wouldn't be proper research if people weren't free to throw ideas  ;) The bold and underscored lines are especially important though, we need to make it less like a chore as possible while still getting enough data.

  • Harker
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #23
That was a pretty impressive demo for scouting runs, Marcus. That's exactly the kind of visual tutorials we need for role descriptions. For Earth Standard time can I suggest GMT +0? It's nice and central.

For the incident log entries I would suggest adding a section for "Current destination," and "Destination start" and "Intercept source" as well, so we can get an idea of how/where they were flying and where the hostiles came from. That may get a bit too much extra info, but it could potentially be quite useful.

  • Hussars
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Intelligence, Research and Data Analysis Center
Reply #24
While I agree in-flight notes for position relative to major landmarks, current leg/next leg and intercept details are important, I'm trying to keep the "short" form simple for the majority of players.

Again, I'm not against adding/changing fields, just trying to clarify information intent.  I've posted a 10-4-C question about flight logs/recorders to see where the team is currently thinking on these things.  As their answer will help to better plan what we can leave to the system to capture and what we need to ask for in any data forms.

For the "management review", I think we're saying the same thing, group leaders look at the suggestions/requested data mission and either agree or disagree to pass it on to their teams.  This could be simply helping to add flight missions to whatever log/system is in-place, up to staging coordinated flight plans.

Finally from the time-stamp values, to keep it simple, I was planning to leave it at the person's local time index.  A server can capture regional information when you post/submit, so all times can be adjust to a specific regional time automatically in the data log.

Still a large portion of the public that doesn't deal with GMT conversion correctly, and would rather they enter local time and let the system do the work for them.  That way if there is an error, it's consistent!  :D
People say the 'verse is a hard place, that she'll just as soon leave you for dead as to help you.  I think that she must truly love us in order to hate us so much.