🔒 Locked

Critique space travel system (interplanetary)?

Started by Wavinator Jun 30, 2004 at 5:55 PM 36 replies 6.9k views

Original Post

Jun 30, 2004 at 5:55 PM

I'm wrapping up travel rules for the RPG/empire hybrid I've been working on and would appreciate any thoughts you guys have. Basics The solar systems you play in will be realistically scaled so that planets really are tens of millions or even billions of miles / kilometers away. There are two types of in-system travel: Slower than light (STL) and interplanetary FTL (I-FTL). (Interstellar I'll bring up in another post). STL Flight Flight is pseudo-Newtonian but with a speed cap due to impact from gas, dust and debris. I'm fudging things here, but velocity is capped to around 1000 kilometers a second because of this. Acceleration is unrealistically high to keep manuever playable, but with a small nod to g forces, possible redouts / blackouts and acceleration dampening gear you can buy. For playability, there will also be a "friction" toggle option that causes your ship to drift to a stop when not accelerating. The view is 3rd person behind your ship, but with mouse-look that orbits your craft. This lets you target objects for scanning or combat while you move in a different direction. Under STL, fuel use is neglible compared to the tech level of fusion powerplants. Interplanetary FTL Ships can use I-FTL catapults or buy drives that accelerate them up to 50x light speed. This opens up the star system to real-time travel, making most planets a matter of seconds or minutes to reach. Modules will vary in quality, speed, durability or compatibility with other (alien) systems. Travel is in a straight line for most modules, but a few can accept "planck-space anchors" that allow them to turn and evade. The faster the drive, the more power it will consume, requiring you to tradeoff weapons / cargo with powerplant. Safety causes drives to slow or stop in areas of dense gas and dust, creating nav hazards. Ships can also interdict each other with gas cloud emitting torpedoes. However, a successful gravigation skill check can ignore this. Most I-FTL systems require a fuel resource, which might vary by species manufacturer. While the player can run out of fuel, they are never stuck, as they can always STL back or call for help. In systems with Syscats, they can either pay toll, hack or call in a favor from any contact that might control the catapult. To create a money sink, normal travel does wear and tear on the drive that requires repair, which can be paid for or done by crew. The amount goes up with the mass of the ship, but skills in navigation lessen the decline. This should allow easy advancement in the shuttle and fighter stage, but more challenge in the freighter / cap-ship phase later on. Gravity Whips Fuel concerns under I-FTL make gravity assists desirable because, if done right, a ship can fly around a system nearly for free. In STL, ships use the angular momentum of planets to alter velocity and in FTL use a body's "gravity waves." Storywise, STL assists are so easy that they're automatic. In order to support racing, escape and pursuit and beating competition to market under trade, FTL flybys are much more tricky. Constant skill checks are required, failure of which can result in gravitational shear damage to the ship or even crashlanding. The player can perform a ship task (basically charge up a meter) to boost their chances, and optionally play an orbital mechanics minigame which affects their skills by +/- 50 points. Under FTL, the closer a ship flies to a planet, the more gravity waves it can use. Gameplay wise, you get to risk fuel savings for safety. On critical failure, you deal with a crashland sequence (whose survivability rate is high for your character, but not necessarily so for your ship or crew). Aerobraking Ships can use planetary atmospheres to slow. Again, under STL this is easy, requiring a few nav checks whose worst result is some minor hull damage. Under FTL, the challenge again rises: You select how much you want a planet to slow you down, and this creates a challenge rating based on your speed, mass and the piloting skills of your character and crew. Planets with thicker atmospheres can slow you the most, shedding up to 90% of your speed (in comparison, thinner ones offer only about 15% change per contact). However, denser atmospheres provide a higher challenge rating for every percent you want to slow. Failure again is more severe, ranging from burning extra fuel in course corrections to experiencing thermal and kenetic damage; the worst results range from being deflected off the atmosphere up to 90 degrees, or crashlanding. Orbiting Under STL, you simply "drive" to the planet to orbit. Under FTL, you get similar challenge gameplay as with gravity assists and aerobraking. Success will place you right in front of your target in the orbit you want, failure might place you closer or farther or expose your hull to damaging gravity-wave shear. Quick Map Travel At 1000 kps you can get from the sun to the moon in about 7 minutes, Mars in around 3 days, and Pluto in about 2 months. Once you upgrade your ship with supply generators (advanced air recyclers, protein paste dispenser, etc.) you can travel anywhere in system. In single seat shuttles and fighters, however, your strength and dexterity stats go down every month, reflecting your confined environment. Ships with more floor space, mods for smaller ships like aerobic cabins and items like nano-regen lessen or negate this automatically. Fighters versus Capital Ships The one last mechanism to mention is the "blink module:" It allows a small enough ship (fighter / shuttle) to teleport up to 10 million kilometers. The drive is basically a scaled down interstellar jump drive, and requires special fuel that limits the ships to about 50 million kilometers max. What this should allow for is fighters and shuttles to carry out hit and run attacks from distant carriers or bases. I'm hoping that it keeps small ships relevant even once you've gotten into the big leagues, as being able to jump past defenses or obstacles can make a small shuttle or fighter very useful. As usual, comments welcome...

C-Junkie

Jun 30, 2004 at 6:04 PM

Two comments pop out at me.

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
but with a small nod to g forces, possible redouts / blackouts and acceleration dampening gear you can buy.

Might I suggest gravity drive? Any kind of acceleration you want, no "g-forces" occur.

Quote:
I'm hoping that it keeps small ships relevant even once you've gotten into the big leagues, as being able to jump past defenses or obstacles can make a small shuttle or fighter very useful.

It gives them a nice technical advantage. You can jsutify it with somehting about how massive ships can't be targeted precisely enough to be able to make the jump safely.

Here's the thign that bothers me. I don't know what kind of game this is, but if we're talking amassive space battles here, you need some damn good AI for those fighters, because the player shouldn't have to do anything but give general directions to them.

Micromanagement sucks.

Wavinator

Jun 30, 2004 at 6:20 PM

Quote:
Original post by C-Junkie
Might I suggest gravity drive? Any kind of acceleration you want, no "g-forces" occur.

I could use this as a variant, certainly. My plan is to compensate for not having superior cutting edge graphics by giving lots of items which have gameplay tradeoffs. So maybe the gravity drive is slow at acceleration and a fuel hog, but has no problems with g forces versus some other drive that works on different principles.

Quote:

Here's the thign that bothers me. I don't know what kind of game this is, but if we're talking amassive space battles here, you need some damn good AI for those fighters, because the player shouldn't have to do anything but give general directions to them.

Agreed. This is an RPG with empire game elements. For space battles I envision a bubble that can only hold X ships (maybe 50, maybe 100 max). Fighters that blink out would leave your bubble, and be handled by logic I have in mind for away missions (you set goals, assign NPCs and equipment, and get a result).

Any ship inside your bubble is going to work by the same approach / attack / evasion logic as all other ships, depending on their pilot's skills and personality.

Quote:

Micromanagement sucks.

Whever possible, I'm trying to allow you to supplant micromanagement either with default results or by hiring NPCs or buying equipment. This way, for those that love it, it'll be there, but for those that hate it, you can get something to bypass it.

C-Junkie

Jun 30, 2004 at 6:28 PM

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
I could use this as a variant, certainly. My plan is to compensate for not having superior cutting edge graphics by giving lots of items which have gameplay tradeoffs. So maybe the gravity drive is slow at acceleration and a fuel hog, but has no problems with g forces versus some other drive that works on different principles.

Well, the point is you can have hig acceleration without G forces. Just makes it expensive. :)

TechnoGoth

Jul 2, 2004 at 9:22 PM

Out of curiousity are you including, the after image effect? Meaning that if you can travel FTL then you can effectivly appear in several places at once.

What about looking into the past? Technically with a powerful enough telescope and a fast enough FTL drive you could observe any point in history.

Also what about shockwaves? We all know that going faster the sound creates a sonic shockwave, it might be interesting strategicly to have ships generate a shockwave when traveling FTL.

Otherwise its good, I like that you're capping STL travel since that elimnates the pesky problem of the relativity effect that happens when objects approach near light speeds.

Also the gravity whips lead to another idea what if in more advanced empires that do a lot of intersolar transportation, had gravity catpults stationed around moons? These catpults charge a small fee to propel a ship at a specific jumpgate or planet, providing the vessel enough momemtum to reach the target without them having to use fuel for anything other then manuvering.

Lastly reading this topic made me think about space racing, something I've never seen in a space game. It would be fun if there where organized starship races players could particapte in, perhaps even a racing league to join. Thinking of the fun of customizing your ships so that you gain an extra speed boost when making the sharp turn around pluto, that should shave a few minutes off your time.

Wavinator

Jul 3, 2004 at 3:50 AM

Quote:
Original post by TechnoGoth
Out of curiousity are you including, the after image effect? Meaning that if you can travel FTL then you can effectivly appear in several places at once.

Hmm... I hadn't even thought about this. It might be a nice visual effect, but it might also be considered to be ripping off Star Trek (you know, how the ships are stretched with several after images).

Quote:

What about looking into the past? Technically with a powerful enough telescope and a fast enough FTL drive you could observe any point in history.

This would make a cool mission, with scientists trying to make something like this work (and maybe some secret society trying to stop them).

I'm not sure how something like this would be displayed in terms of gameplay if it were not part of a mission's pretext, though. It would be an awful lot of content if you could do it regularly.

Quote:

Also what about shockwaves? We all know that going faster the sound creates a sonic shockwave, it might be interesting strategicly to have ships generate a shockwave when traveling FTL.

I thought about this, as well as ramming at FTL. The problem I saw was that it would become a dominant strategy. Everything would become killer hyperkenetic torpedoes, which would kill the fun of space combat.

Quote:

Otherwise its good, I like that you're capping STL travel since that elimnates the pesky problem of the relativity effect that happens when objects approach near light speeds.

:) I'm still going to find some weird way to work in generation ships. Maybe not as practical gameplay, but they're the coolest STL ships around.

Quote:

Also the gravity whips lead to another idea what if in more advanced empires that do a lot of intersolar transportation, had gravity catpults stationed around moons? These catpults charge a small fee to propel a ship at a specific jumpgate or planet, providing the vessel enough momemtum to reach the target without them having to use fuel for anything other then manuvering.

This is one area I'd like to really improve. The star systems of most space games are very lifeless, with only a few stations here and there. I'd like to have not only system catapults, but flight corridors for mass driver cargo and STL drones. While I won't be able to draw a ton of stuff on the screen at once, if you get radio chatter, flight direction and these neon outlines of flight paths it will really make a system come alive. (And it'll make the ruined systems all the more foreboding).

Quote:

Lastly reading this topic made me think about space racing, something I've never seen in a space game. It would be fun if there where organized starship races players could particapte in, perhaps even a racing league to join. Thinking of the fun of customizing your ships so that you gain an extra speed boost when making the sharp turn around pluto, that should shave a few minutes off your time.

We are thinking exactly the same thing! Once you have a flight engine done, how hard is it to sprinkle a bunch of waypoints, add missions related to laddered prizes, and throw in the AI to get to them? Speed, armor and other mods, as well as the aerobraking and gravity whips are naturally a part of racing someone to market or chasing.

Different systems could have different hazards, anomalies and planetary boosting conditions. It could be like pod racing or Formula 1. And if the waypoints are across solar systems, it could be a kind of Paris to Dakar Rally.

evolutional

Jul 3, 2004 at 5:36 AM

Personally, I would consider scrapping the STL flight entirely. Replace it with interstellar and interplanetary only. In Elite 2, for example - it was TEDIOUS having to fly between planets with the STL drives. (If you don't remember, Elite had STL and Hyperdrives to 'jump' systems).

You could drop STL flight and still have the flight interrupted by pirates or random events. Perhaps design the flights as having a form of 'space' lanes, so you set your course to a point on the space lane and fly down there - either the entire lane or to a set point on it, thus still allowing you to intercept ships if needed.

I seriously think it that rather than add to the game, STL will detract from the enjoyability and increase the boredom of players. Most people jammed on the 10x speed setting and made a coffee when playing Elite 2, simply because the realism detracted from the enjoyability by becoming tedious.

Of course, you still need a STL-like flight model for combat - have a look how Privateer 2 implemented this for a decent way of doing things. It essentially made it impossible to fly between planets STL, but had STL for combat or other significant events.

serratemplar

Jul 3, 2004 at 8:10 AM

I think Wavinator intended for his players to use FTL to jump from (for example) Mars to Jupiter, but to use STL to navigate Jupiter's moons/starbases/etc.

I think the entire run down is pretty cool except for the "blink module". It's cool...because it's really powerful. For the player it might be nice because it's your constant "save your ass at the last second" button, but it could suck too as if you're dog fighting pirates who've got something you want and they feel they're losing (because you're the player and players tend to be awesome when they're fighting pirates) they could just blink...or worse, scatter-blink all over the solar system...then hyper-jump to some location.

My primary issue with this "blink module" is that I'm not sure how you'd balance it out. Balance isn't necessarily important, of course...I mean, you could impose cost...but then again, if you whup one of those pirate ships, couldn't you maybe steal it? Something else that might help would be nanite-clouds that do no damage but stick to ships to help track them. I thought to myself "I probably wouldn't use an atmosphere to slow myself down, because it seems sloppy...but if I had to shake some exterior tracking devices, I'd ram my ship through a crazy atmosphere." That opens a whole new can of worms though...both administering and dealing with these tracking-nanites.

Anyway, does this mean that fighters wouldn't have a hyper-drive and thus only be able to manuever within a system at best? This almost feels like Cowboy Beebop to me...which would be quite okay =) Cowboy Beebop was fantastic, and I recommend you watch a few episodes (if not all of them) for some inspiration. It's cool.

Anyway, this entire thing as gotten me back into Master of Orion 2 (as I thought it might). The space combat is fun (but quirky), and the game has a few problems with it that I didn't remember. Ah well...the price we pay to customize our own ships. :)

serratemplar

Jul 3, 2004 at 8:14 AM

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator

This is one area I'd like to really improve. The star systems of most space games are very lifeless, with only a few stations here and there. I'd like to have not only system catapults, but flight corridors for mass driver cargo and STL drones. While I won't be able to draw a ton of stuff on the screen at once, if you get radio chatter, flight direction and these neon outlines of flight paths it will really make a system come alive. (And it'll make the ruined systems all the more foreboding).

AWESOME!

Quote:

Lastly reading this topic made me think about space racing, something I've never seen in a space game. It would be fun if there where organized starship races players could particapte in, perhaps even a racing league to join. Thinking of the fun of customizing your ships so that you gain an extra speed boost when making the sharp turn around pluto, that should shave a few minutes off your time.

Wavinator

Jul 3, 2004 at 5:07 PM

Quote:
Original post by evolutional
Personally, I would consider scrapping the STL flight entirely. Replace it with interstellar and interplanetary only.

What about immersion and the ability to just hang outside of a planet looking at the starscape? I think this is a vital part of any space game.

Quote:

In Elite 2, for example - it was TEDIOUS having to fly between planets with the STL drives.

Yes, but what was there to do while flying STL? I remember being bored in Elite because there was nothing but combat between flight, and so I was eager to get to the meat of the game. But the inside of your ship is going to be highly detailed and geared toward RPG gaming. So you might interact with your crew, train your character, or improve the ship itself mid-flight.

Quote:

You could drop STL flight and still have the flight interrupted by pirates or random events.

How would you like it if I put in an option like "Always travel by quick map" in space?

Quote:

Perhaps design the flights as having a form of 'space' lanes, so you set your course to a point on the space lane and fly down there - either the entire lane or to a set point on it, thus still allowing you to intercept ships if needed.

If you travel by quick map (which shows the whole system), you can opt to fly along spacelanes, which should be safer, and select objects to intercept or dock with if you can see them.

Quote:

I seriously think it that rather than add to the game, STL will detract from the enjoyability and increase the boredom of players. Most people jammed on the 10x speed setting and made a coffee when playing Elite 2, simply because the realism detracted from the enjoyability by becoming tedious.

After playing years of non-combat flight sims, I can totally understand this. And space is WORSE! At least in the air there is weather and gauges to monitor.

Here's a side question I'd like to just float: What if you had to manage the ship's reactor, balance shields and do a bunch of other tasks as you're flying. For the RPG player, this might be cool, a bit like the Sims stat bars. But for those who just want to get to the action, I think it would suck.

One other reason, btw, to keep STL is as an absolute failsafe if you run out of Interplanetary FTL fuel or get your drive damaged. It's a way of "walking back home" and I'd expect you'd use the quick map to do so.

Wavinator

Jul 3, 2004 at 5:37 PM

Quote:
Original post by serratemplar
I think Wavinator intended for his players to use FTL to jump from (for example) Mars to Jupiter, but to use STL to navigate Jupiter's moons/starbases/etc.

Exactly. Like in I-War, you whip past planets and even moons, then drop out of FTL near stations when you want to dock.

Also, a crucial role for STL is NPC interaction. It gives you time to talk to random ships and captains without it being forced by random encounters. (Funny enough, this same issue comes up when I'm plotting out travel through cities).

Quote:

I think the entire run down is pretty cool except for the "blink module". It's cool...because it's really powerful. For the player it might be nice because it's your constant "save your ass at the last second" button, but it could suck too as if you're dog fighting pirates who've got something you want and they feel they're losing (because you're the player and players tend to be awesome when they're fighting pirates) they could just blink

When YOU'RE the pirate, you'll like it! :) But you're right, if you're chasing someone, this could suck.

But fortunately you don't just vanish without a trace. Since it's almost the same (miniaturized) drive as the insterstellar FTL drive, you can deal with it the same way: Target the drive or fuel cells, or keep a scanner lock on a ship to see where it's going. Now if the pirates use stealth...

Quote:

...or worse, scatter-blink all over the solar system...then hyper-jump to some location.

They're limited to about 50 million kilometers, at 10 million a jump. Now, if you're a big ship and know where they're going, you can switch into interplanetary FTL and run them down.

At 50 million and the cheapest i-FTL drive, which goes 2x light speed, you can get to where they are in almost 2 minutes real-time. Under the best, at 50x the speed of light, you can get there in about 4 seconds.

Now this might seem to make the blink drive worthless, but the REAL way to use it isn't to go stealth, it's to use the "terrain" of the star system: Put a dense gas cloud between you and your foe, or use a shatterzone, a post-anomaly region of ripped up space that alters ship stats and game rules. The strength of the blink module is that it can jump over these, whereas larger warships have to go through or around.

Quote:

My primary issue with this "blink module" is that I'm not sure how you'd balance it out. Balance isn't necessarily important, of course...I mean, you could impose cost...but then again, if you whup one of those pirate ships, couldn't you maybe steal it?

The large number of missiles, point defense and shield options REALLY imbalances things in favor of larger ships. With the right weapon / defense mix, you'll be able to swat fighters and pummel mid-sized ships. Yet I feel the game SHOULD NOT be a race to the capital ships, with you having to slog until you get there (this happens in most RPGs, it sucks to be small).

Quote:

Something else that might help would be nanite-clouds that do no damage but stick to ships to help track them. I thought to myself "I probably wouldn't use an atmosphere to slow myself down, because it seems sloppy...but if I had to shake some exterior tracking devices, I'd ram my ship through a crazy atmosphere." That opens a whole new can of worms though...both administering and dealing with these tracking-nanites.

No, this actually seems straightforward (unless I'm missing something?) I've already got a system specced out for per module testing of heat damage, which uses the regular combat system and assigns HP damage to atmospheres based on density and your speed. Since logically nanites or marines or things like the tesla hammers mentioned in the combat weapons thread will go in a list of attached objects to your ship, I can simply test them as another "module." (In fact, I'll even be anal enough to account for WHERE they are on the ship, in case it's your character on the outside of a ship that's about to aerobrake).

Quote:

Anyway, does this mean that fighters wouldn't have a hyper-drive and thus only be able to manuever within a system at best?

Fighters and shuttles can still use interplanetary FTL, but what I want to stress is the ability of you, as a player, to make a tradeoff. The i-FTL system will take up X mass and Y energy, which either leaves you slower, or with less firepower. Adding both a blink module and i-FTL will make you somewhat underpowered, but that might not matter if you're a swarm say robbing a transport (heh, as long as it's not a Q-ship!)

Quote:

This almost feels like Cowboy Beebop to me...which would be quite okay =) Cowboy Beebop was fantastic, and I recommend you watch a few episodes (if not all of them) for some inspiration. It's cool.

I'm glad for the comparison, hopefully it'll draw people in. I always watch Beebop when I'm low on inspiration! :)

Quote:

Anyway, this entire thing as gotten me back into Master of Orion 2 (as I thought it might). The space combat is fun (but quirky), and the game has a few problems with it that I didn't remember. Ah well...the price we pay to customize our own ships. :)

Very cool. I'm tempted to drag out my copy, too (or Civilization), but I know it'd just slow down finishing up the design.

Jotaf

Jul 4, 2004 at 6:12 PM

I think you can solve the problem of fighters doing interplanetary and interstellar trips if you include some huge transport ships specifically for that task. They could look like a big piece of junk for a poor system or more like a high-tech space station, complete with recreational activities and stuff (kinda like our sea cruisers), for rich ones... parking on one of those and getting a ticket to get to some other place would be really cool :)

If the bus gets attacked by pirates, the pilots can hop on their fighters and take care of them, which is different from fighting them alone like you use to. If something bad happens like a crashlanding, it's a different situation and it can get really interesting. You can also walk around the ship while you're waiting, which is a lot cooler than sitting on your chair for 7 months. I'm hoping you have a good system to let time go by, like 8 months on fast-forward for a long trip, stopping only when there's a major event; this system would be really nice even if you don't have these transporters.

As to using a planet's atmosphere to slow down, that's a bit unrealistic. Are you considering using jets of particles travelling at FTL speeds (or just high speeds, or accelerated ions) as a weapon? Because if that can damage a ship (and I don't see how it wouldn't), shooting through an atmosphere FTL is just the same =/ The same system that accelerates a ship to FTL should be able to deccelerate just by pushing in the opposite way, I don't see the need to further complicate it.

Hmm... what about if the blink module needs an anchor to work? It could be a module of a space station or capitol ship, with a limited radius around it. This way you have all those tactics, but it's still only in a limited radius of maybe 50 million kms, and to counter it you can always take down the mothership. Using the system's features to your advantage, you can station the main ship behind an asteroid field and attack from there ;)

C-Junkie

Jul 4, 2004 at 6:24 PM

Don't get rid of FTL missiles because you think it'd just be a slugfest with hyperkinetic torpedoes, come up with a defense!

One thing that annoys me is when game designers make something impossible because it'd unbalance the game.

If FTL torpedoes are a huge advantage, then all we need is "spacial fold" shields that makes ANY FTL projectile get "lost in the folds of spacetime" and be completely ineffective. OR, to prevent ships from being affected, make the shields HIDE the ship from "FTL space". Justify it by claiming it "twists space around the ship, so that FTL objects jump to the other side, but STL sees no difference"

C-Junkie

Jul 4, 2004 at 6:28 PM

OH, as for the blink module, the point is that you CAN have pirates attacking you, get something, and blink away.

I like the idea, just come up with a countermeasure.

a nice, expensive "subspace sink" that causes all FTL drives to suddenly drop to STL (without G forces, it jsut eliminates the medium on which FTL travels, or something), thus making "jumping" (or any FTL) away from your ship require destroying the field generator, or getting far enough away STL.

Wavinator

Jul 5, 2004 at 2:39 AM

Quote:
Original post by Jotaf
I think you can solve the problem of fighters doing interplanetary and interstellar trips if you include some huge transport ships specifically for that task. They could look like a big piece of junk for a poor system or more like a high-tech space station, complete with recreational activities and stuff (kinda like our sea cruisers), for rich ones... parking on one of those and getting a ticket to get to some other place would be really cool :)

Yes, I like the idea of smaller ships piggybacking on larger ships. I've done that for the interstellar FTL, but was planning to make it cheap enough for even starting shuttles to have interplanetary FTL. But I will consider this.

Quote:

If the bus gets attacked by pirates, the pilots can hop on their fighters and take care of them, which is different from fighting them alone like you use to. If something bad happens like a crashlanding, it's a different situation and it can get really interesting.

Especially getting out of the crash if you have ships or shuttles onboard. I'm not 100% sure how detailed to make something like this. Part of me thinks it should be difficult to get out of because you're crashing, and crashing is a big event. There's also the issue of could your character really get out of danger in time.

Quote:

You can also walk around the ship while you're waiting, which is a lot cooler than sitting on your chair for 7 months.

In fact, most of your ability to level up yourself and crew (inexpensively, that is) as well as build their loyalty will come from walking around. If I can pull this off you'll get into a blend of Sims needs management and RPG story development.

Quote:

I'm hoping you have a good system to let time go by, like 8 months on fast-forward for a long trip, stopping only when there's a major event

What I have in mind is the ability to either travel emphasizing safety, speed or stealth; to warn you when supplies are at X percent; and an optional sensor scan that eats up energy but has a chance to warn you about encounteres before they happen.

Quote:

As to using a planet's atmosphere to slow down, that's a bit unrealistic.

Ummmm.... yeah, but so is faster-than-light travel. :>

Quote:

Are you considering using jets of particles travelling at FTL speeds (or just high speeds, or accelerated ions) as a weapon? Because if that can damage a ship (and I don't see how it wouldn't), shooting through an atmosphere FTL is just the same =/

But you're expecting traditional newtonian physics to be in play here. Let me ask you, what would be the implications of a massless object?

Quote:

The same system that accelerates a ship to FTL should be able to deccelerate just by pushing in the opposite way, I don't see the need to further complicate it.

The complication arises from the need to make the universe more weighty and meaningful: It gives your crew tasks they can excel at (such as sometimes ignoring the rules to escape); it gives you strategic considerations with fuel; it thickens up other forms of gameplay like racing someone to market in trade, or by high performance star ship racing; and by making it concrete it makes the science fiction atmosphere come alive.

Ships, though, CAN decelerate (thought not by Newtonian opposite action as you suggest, more by reincorporating themselves into the universe and being dragged back into the traditional realm of physics). The tradeoff is fuel. If you never want to aerobrake, you don't have to-- but you'll save gas if you do.

Quote:

Hmm... what about if the blink module needs an anchor to work? It could be a module of a space station or capitol ship, with a limited radius around it. This way you have all those tactics, but it's still only in a limited radius of maybe 50 million kms, and to counter it you can always take down the mothership. Using the system's features to your advantage, you can station the main ship behind an asteroid field and attack from there ;)

I really really like this. It could not only be an improvement to your normal interstellar FTL drive, as a module (modules? 1 per every X fighters?)

Wavinator

Jul 5, 2004 at 2:45 AM

Quote:
Original post by C-Junkie
Don't get rid of FTL missiles because you think it'd just be a slugfest with hyperkinetic torpedoes, come up with a defense!

One thing that annoys me is when game designers make something impossible because it'd unbalance the game.

But at some point you have to draw the line and say X defeats Y or Z stops A.

Consider, otherwise, that if you have a weapon that is ultra-powerful and a defense that negates it, not having the defense is tantramount to suicide.

Quote:

If FTL torpedoes are a huge advantage, then all we need is "spacial fold" shields that makes ANY FTL projectile get "lost in the folds of spacetime" and be completely ineffective. OR, to prevent ships from being affected, make the shields HIDE the ship from "FTL space". Justify it by claiming it "twists space around the ship, so that FTL objects jump to the other side, but STL sees no difference"

In keeping with the above, why, then, would you not carry these all the time? And why wouldn't they be built into every ship?

Worse, yet, what are you supposed to do as a player if you get hit with something like this? I believe in full reciprocation: If you can do something, so can the AI.

So how fun is it to be flying through space and INSTANTLY die because some object hits you at 99% of c? Because even if you tweak the "spatial fold" idea so that objects get lost, what's to stop FTL missiles from dropping into STL at a significant fraction of light?

Wavinator

Jul 5, 2004 at 2:48 AM

Quote:
Original post by C-Junkie
OH, as for the blink module, the point is that you CAN have pirates attacking you, get something, and blink away.

I like the idea, just come up with a countermeasure.

a nice, expensive "subspace sink" that causes all FTL drives to suddenly drop to STL (without G forces, it jsut eliminates the medium on which FTL travels, or something), thus making "jumping" (or any FTL) away from your ship require destroying the field generator, or getting far enough away STL.

This could be a good catchall, but again, it becomes one of those things that should be so obvious that it would be a standard optionl on all new models once sold (yes, businesses could be unethical, but we're talking a galactic universal here).

ggs

Jul 5, 2004 at 7:21 AM

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
But at some point you have to draw the line and say X defeats Y or Z stops A.

Consider, otherwise, that if you have a weapon that is ultra-powerful and a defense that negates it, not having the defense is tantramount to suicide.

Then make the cost of replacing a interplantary FTL drive hidiously expensive.

Yes people can use hyperkinetic missiles, but if they can affort to fire more than zero at you they could have just got several massive ships and gunned you down that way.

When trading for new ships, you trade in the old interplantary FTL drive to offset the cost of the new FTL drive or rip the drive out and put it into a new superstructure. And since these interplantary FTL drives would be uber reliable (under conditions which dont void the warrenty), you would take out insurance for when you lose the FTL drive.

But the biggest problem with using FTL missiles, is the aiming. You need super-accurate FTL sensors, since at the speed of the missile it has zero chance of reaquiring the target when it misses.

evolutional

Jul 5, 2004 at 7:47 AM

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
I remember being bored in Elite because there was nothing but combat between flight, and so I was eager to get to the meat of the game. But the inside of your ship is going to be highly detailed and geared toward RPG gaming. So you might interact with your crew, train your character, or improve the ship itself mid-flight.

Ah, I think I missed this part. Yes, if there are things to be doing whilst you're in flight, this would certainly add a lot to the STL concept.

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
How would you like it if I put in an option like "Always travel by quick map" in space?

If you travel by quick map (which shows the whole system), you can opt to fly along spacelanes, which should be safer, and select objects to intercept or dock with if you can see them.

That would be a good idea, mainly because players will want to be building up their skills, ships and crews before taking on anything dangerous.

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
Here's a side question I'd like to just float: What if you had to manage the ship's reactor, balance shields and do a bunch of other tasks as you're flying. For the RPG player, this might be cool, a bit like the Sims stat bars. But for those who just want to get to the action, I think it would suck.

This would be a good thing, perhaps allowing the player to 'tune' up their own ships, making them 10% faster for a bit less sheild power. For the action fans, this would be skipped but for uber nerds like me, I'd love this sort of tinkering.

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
One other reason, btw, to keep STL is as an absolute failsafe if you run out of Interplanetary FTL fuel or get your drive damaged. It's a way of "walking back home" and I'd expect you'd use the quick map to do so.

I appreciate that and it's a good idea. In Elite 2, when your hyperdrive malfunctioned, you would literally be stranded and had to restore from a save. If your option of space lanes allows things to speed up (eg 'skip time') then I can see the STL working as being a 'fail safe'.

liquiddark

Jul 5, 2004 at 11:20 AM

Quote:
Original post by Wavinator
I thought about this, as well as ramming at FTL. The problem I saw was that it would become a dominant strategy. Everything would become killer hyperkenetic torpedoes, which would kill the fun of space combat.

How about using quantum tunnelling pseudo-science? Above a certain speed, the collider begins to partially or completely tunnel through the energy barrier, damaging it in the borderline cases and making it useless as a weapon as the speed reaches the pass-through threshhold. This could also mean that the old submarine standby of turning into the torp would be given new legs, since the effective approach speed would be increased (? - don't know how you're handling relativity, if at all).

ld

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.