Make cross-type templates behave more sensibly, like legacy

[GinjaNinja32]

Two example cases:

• PlayerSpaceship():setTemplate("MT52 Hornet") ("Player"), a player ship with a "CPU ship" template
• CpuShip():setTemplate("MP52 Hornet") ("CPU"), a CPU ship with a "player ship" template

Component	Current	New	Notes
ai_controller	Both	CPU	If the template does not set AI, then CPU/CPU.
comms_receiver	Player	CPU
comms_transmitter	CPU	Player
long_range_radar	CPU	Both	The AI system expects CPU ships to have radar ranges.
coolant	CPU	Player CPU
hacking_device	CPU	Player CPU
reactor	CPU	Player CPU
scan_probe_launcher	CPU	Player CPU
science_scanner	CPU	Player CPU
self_destruct	CPU	Player CPU

[daid]

In general, I think this is the wrong direction. The templates are not designed for cross-use like this. And I much rather see some simple checks in :setTemplate() to check for certain odd combinations and report that. (like having both player and ai_controller, or an ai_controller and energy/coolant)

[GinjaNinja32]

Updated.
Ship capability components (reactor, coolant, hacking, etc) are back on the templates.
Control-type components (AI/player control, comms tx/rx) are still in CpuShip/PlayerSpaceship/SpaceStation and are maintained across template changes.
Long range radar is still on all ships, since the AI code does process it. There's TODOs in the component, there's definitely some player-only bits in there (waypoints!), but the long/short radar range bits should be on AI ships too.