Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: vergeraiders
« on: March 20, 2008, 10:43:06 AM »

yep 99.9% of the time it would not matter. Its those pesky .1% that drive programmers mad :)
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 20, 2008, 09:44:46 AM »

Quote from: "vergeraiders"
Could you keep your ships parked in orbit on the far side of the moon and acheive the same result - out of line of site scanner detection.

Of course with 2.6 missile targeting I guess they could still be missile targets if anything can track them.

There is currently no scope in Aurora for using planets to block fire. Because its a more strategic game, I have assumed planets sit below the field of battle, which is why orbiting ships are directly in the middle of planets. I could change that so that planets did block fire and add actual orbits for ships but it would get cluttered because the fleet names would not stack neatly if they were in slightly different locations.

Steve
Posted by: vergeraiders
« on: March 20, 2008, 09:30:43 AM »

Could you keep your ships parked in orbit on the far side of the moon and acheive the same result - out of line of site scanner detection.

Of course with 2.6 missile targeting I guess they could still be missile targets if anything can track them.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 20, 2008, 08:27:06 AM »

Quote from: "Kurt"
Interesting idea for a campaign, Steve.  I apologize for just getting around to reading it now, I've been struggling with a serious addiction to Hearts of Iron II - Doomsday/Armageddon, which has affected my own campaign for the worse.  All I can say is that I think I've gotten past it, and I'll be posting more write-ups in the near future.  

Now - I've got so say that given my recent experience with active sensor's ability to gather tech data I understand your government's desire to get their ships away from Earth, but doesn't that invalidate their very reason for existence?  Once posted away from Earth, they can no longer affect events there, except after the fact.  This is a catch 22, in a way.  

If a war breaks out in Earth orbit, all three sides have enough ICBMs in PDCs to severely damage each other's economies. Oceania for example has 200 Titan ICBMs with twenty point warheads, all in box launchers. There are also some large anti-ship missiles in the PDCs too. Therefore all three powers want to avoid any chance of a major war close to Earth, at least until they can get a large chunk of their population and industry off-world. The Pueblo sensor outpost can still gather data on opposing ships in orbit though. The warships are really needed to influence events away from Earth.

Tech data gathering get even more interesting in v2.6. Most of the time you successfully scan a ship in v2.5, you get nothing because its tehcnology you already have. However that information is still useful so in v2.6, any tech you scan gets added to the Tactical Intelligence window for the ship class scanned. This helps you eventually determine the purpose of new ship classes.

Steve
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 20, 2008, 08:13:13 AM »

Quote from: "rmcrowe"
The WW II fleet train was the basis for my original suggestion.  One option for rationale for a "yard" "ship" being able to maintain more than any other would be a limit that it can do nothing else.  Being towed in sections by tugs was how the AFDLs all got around (SLOWLY).  Then an AR provided shops, and assorted AF brought parts and subsystems.  Crew (both ship in overhaul and "yard" stayed ashore, or in a nearby AP or special barge converted to house 300+, with kitchen.

I note that in the last few edtions of Starfire, yard required NO maintenance (though the hull spaces mounting them did).

That sounds like a good way to handle it. If the maintenance facilities themselves don't require maintenance, then it would be possible to build a ship that could maintain itself. Or perhaps I simply say that any ship which has a certain percentage (50%?) of its mass as maintenance facilities, doesn't require maintenance. That would be a severe enough requirement that only specialised ships or bases would use it.

Steve
Posted by: Kurt
« on: March 18, 2008, 11:43:24 AM »

Quote from: "SteveAlt"

<snip>

Oceania?s military power increased considerably on May 12th with the completion of the Ark Royal class carriers Illustrious and Yorktown. Both ships left orbit almost as soon as they cleared the slipways. Although Titan Base could still not handle ships greater than 4000 tons, Vice Admiral Ryan did not want any of their technology being scanned by Eastasian or Eurasian ships and was prepared to handle the eventual overhaul costs to maintain security. The two Sao Paulo class jump tenders were launched ten days later. Both ships also headed for Titan from where they would move to investigate the closest two jumps points to Earth, located either side of Saturn?s orbit. A direct course to the jump points was avoided in case it raised suspicion among the other powers that Oceania might have completed a gravitational survey.  The eventful month of May concluded with Apache, Zulu and the Melbourne class gravitational survey ships Port Phillip, Sullivan Bay and Dandedong arriving at the alien jump gate.

Steve


Interesting idea for a campaign, Steve.  I apologize for just getting around to reading it now, I've been struggling with a serious addiction to Hearts of Iron II - Doomsday/Armageddon, which has affected my own campaign for the worse.  All I can say is that I think I've gotten past it, and I'll be posting more write-ups in the near future.  

Now - I've got so say that given my recent experience with active sensor's ability to gather tech data I understand your government's desire to get their ships away from Earth, but doesn't that invalidate their very reason for existence?  Once posted away from Earth, they can no longer affect events there, except after the fact.  This is a catch 22, in a way.  

This is an interesting situation.  I look forward to more write-ups.  

Kurt
Posted by: rmcrowe
« on: March 10, 2008, 05:04:52 PM »

The WW II fleet train was the basis for my original suggestion.  One option for rationale for a "yard" "ship" being able to maintain more than any other would be a limit that it can do nothing else.  Being towed in sections by tugs was how the AFDLs all got around (SLOWLY).  Then an AR provided shops, and assorted AF brought parts and subsystems.  Crew (both ship in overhaul and "yard" stayed ashore, or in a nearby AP or special barge converted to house 300+, with kitchen.

I note that in the last few edtions of Starfire, yard required NO maintenance (though the hull spaces mounting them did).

robert
Posted by: TrueZuluwiz
« on: March 10, 2008, 01:32:17 PM »

Logical reason why bases with maintenance operations can maintain themselves: they don't waste large areas on propulsion, therefore can devote that space (and manpower, et al) to other purposes. If they need to be moved, they have to use tugs.

Note that this does not help with ships that have maintenance facilities.

When i was in the navy, there was a ship across the pier that never went anywhere: the USS Vulcan. She was a repair ship, her mission being to keep other ships going. She had the capability to move, but no reason to. There were, and i suppose still are, also submarine and destroyer tenders. They didnt move around much either, but deployed to forward areas and kept their squadrons in action as long as major structural issues werent encountered.

It seems like the Fleet Train might be a concept that needs revived in this one scenario. Tankers, repair ships, tenders, hospital ships, etc. The US navy brought this to a fine edge in the pacific war, but the Royal Navy scraped up a number of ships and sent them off to the south atlantic back in the early 80s.They had no dock or shipyard within several thousand miles, but the fleet had to remain on station regardless. If this is the example you are looking for, have fun with it.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 10, 2008, 09:47:46 AM »

Quote from: "ShadoCat"
One option is to allow any space vehicle that has a maintenance facility automatically maintains itself.  It makes sense since the facilities and personnel are all there.

The problem will be that the maintenance facilities themselves will be only capable of maintaining a ship smaller than the one mounting them. This is because each maintenance facility can maintain 200 tons of ship and the facilities will be larger than 4 HS. I think something along these lines is still probably the way to go but I need some logical reason why the ship/base with the facilities doesn't follow the same rules as other ships.

Steve
Posted by: ShadoCat
« on: March 09, 2008, 07:20:10 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
One issue to be handled though is how such a structure would itself be maintained. Currently one maintenance facility is sufficient to handle a ship of 200 tons As a space-going maintenance facility would likely be larger than that, the structure would not be able to maintain itself so I would need to come up with a reasonable method of handling that.


One option is to allow any space vehicle that has a maintenance facility automatically maintains itself.  It makes sense since the facilities and personnel are all there.
Posted by: Haegan2005
« on: March 09, 2008, 12:15:13 PM »

Good question. Much of the fun of this game is the exploration and, of course, the ship combat. Planetary wonders sound like a good idea. Limit one per planet. Have a chance of several having been built at the beginning of the game? 10% here, 10% there should be about the max I should think.

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "Kurt"
I like the concept.  My original idea for infrastructure, when back when Steve and I were discussing some basic game concepts, was large things like planetary transportation networks, beanstalks, orbital industry, gas giant scoop miners, solar collection mirrors, and so on.   This all got subsumed into generic infrastructure, and the game moved on.  

It would be nice to see some large construction projects, like bean-stalks, that would provide different bonuses to the civilization that invested in them.  
That still would be a possibility. As mentioned above by Haegan, the Space Elevator providing a bonus to ship construction speed would be a very good example. Something like a planetary transportation network could add a bonus to wealth, solar collection mirrors might provide a boost to industrial production, etc. Maybe I should start a new thread on possible "Wonders" :)

One other thing I considered including was the power to run a population, so you would have to build the solar collectors you mentioned, or build nuclear power stations, etc. I am not sure how much that would add though to game play though.

Steve
Posted by: Kurt
« on: March 09, 2008, 12:05:12 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "rmcrowe"
It appears that Oceana definitely needs to develop a new technology similar to the mobile (floating, in WW II) docks, so as to be able to reset maintence clocks in remote orbit.  Obviously, supplies (parts, raw materials, workmen, etc.) would have to be drawn from a colony somewhere, but your average Asian (East or Otherwise) would have to work REAL hard to figure that THIS freighter was going somewhere important.  A by-product would be orbital habitats with hydroponic/soil gardens and living quarters.
I have been wondering how to handle this while keeping to my internal consistency mantra. It occured to me though that a few functions of populations are already handled by ship-based systems. For example, terraforming modules, fuel harvesters or asteroid mining modules. These tend to be smaller but more expensive than their ground-based equivalents and of course they have to maintained which adds a long-term overhead. Therefore the easiest way to handle an orbital habitat or space station would be to handle it as a very large ship, using the existing rules plus I would add additional systems such as a maintenance facility type module. Of course, this is still going to be fairly large so any structure that includes enough to be an effective space-going floating dock is going to be huge.

In game terms, the problem for the player would be building such a huge structure in the first place. So perhaps the way to handle it is to allow non-mobile structures to be built in pieces and assembled in space. In principle, you would build smaller parts of the whole (which would still be valid classes in their own right) and then tow them to the location and join them to the main structure, in a similar way to the creation of the International Space Station. The two or more pieces would become one new class generated by Aurora using all the combined component of the pieces.


Hmmm...perhaps like jump gates.  Manufactured by ground-based industry, and then transported by freighters and assembled by construction ships.  

Kurt
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 09, 2008, 07:58:25 AM »

Quote from: "Kurt"
I like the concept.  My original idea for infrastructure, when back when Steve and I were discussing some basic game concepts, was large things like planetary transportation networks, beanstalks, orbital industry, gas giant scoop miners, solar collection mirrors, and so on.   This all got subsumed into generic infrastructure, and the game moved on.  

It would be nice to see some large construction projects, like bean-stalks, that would provide different bonuses to the civilization that invested in them.  

That still would be a possibility. As mentioned above by Haegan, the Space Elevator providing a bonus to ship construction speed would be a very good example. Something like a planetary transportation network could add a bonus to wealth, solar collection mirrors might provide a boost to industrial production, etc. Maybe I should start a new thread on possible "Wonders" :)

One other thing I considered including was the power to run a population, so you would have to build the solar collectors you mentioned, or build nuclear power stations, etc. I am not sure how much that would add though to game play though.

Steve
Posted by: Haegan2005
« on: March 08, 2008, 12:21:44 PM »

rofl
Quote from: "TrueZuluwiz"
But where would you get the magic beans? *runs for cover*
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 08, 2008, 07:37:50 AM »

Quote from: "rmcrowe"
It appears that Oceana definitely needs to develop a new technology similar to the mobile (floating, in WW II) docks, so as to be able to reset maintence clocks in remote orbit.  Obviously, supplies (parts, raw materials, workmen, etc.) would have to be drawn from a colony somewhere, but your average Asian (East or Otherwise) would have to work REAL hard to figure that THIS freighter was going somewhere important.  A by-product would be orbital habitats with hydroponic/soil gardens and living quarters.

I have been wondering how to handle this while keeping to my internal consistency mantra. It occured to me though that a few functions of populations are already handled by ship-based systems. For example, terraforming modules, fuel harvesters or asteroid mining modules. These tend to be smaller but more expensive than their ground-based equivalents and of course they have to maintained which adds a long-term overhead. Therefore the easiest way to handle an orbital habitat or space station would be to handle it as a very large ship, using the existing rules plus I would add additional systems such as a maintenance facility type module. Of course, this is still going to be fairly large so any structure that includes enough to be an effective space-going floating dock is going to be huge.

In game terms, the problem for the player would be building such a huge structure in the first place. So perhaps the way to handle it is to allow non-mobile structures to be built in pieces and assembled in space. In principle, you would build smaller parts of the whole (which would still be valid classes in their own right) and then tow them to the location and join them to the main structure, in a similar way to the creation of the International Space Station. The two or more pieces would become one new class generated by Aurora using all the combined component of the pieces.

One issue to be handled though is how such a structure would itself be maintained. Currently one maintenance facility is sufficient to handle a ship of 200 tons As a space-going maintenance facility would likely be larger than that, the structure would not be able to maintain itself so I would need to come up with a reasonable method of handling that.

Steve