It appears that you have not registered with Aurora 4x. To register, please click here...
VB6 Aurora > Aurora II
Aurora II
wilddog5:
I think you should keep jump points but change them so that they are allot more rare and rather than instant travel that act as high speed corridors so a hyper equipped ship might go anyware between 2X-10X normal hyper speed. They should also require an extensive grav survey (travel to all system bodies much like Geo survey does now) to map the systems grav fields in both of the end point systems to find the corridor.
jump gates should also stay allowing a ship to travel very fast along them like jump points but even faster (artificial tunnel is more smooth / kept clear of spacedust) and rarer but rather than being a starting tech they are a found tech (like plasma torps), should only link to 1 other gate and be fixed for that gate (no traveling the universe like SG1), should take a long time to build 50+ years at the start and have to be found with active sensors. There could also be unlinked gates that you could link with research / xeno teams?
will planets have a hyper limit as well given that a planet outside a stars limit could have a enemy fleet arrive in orbit with no chance of defending it self? what about a hyper jammer that prevents enemy ships from entering/ exiting hyper within a certain range (depending on tech) of an equipped planet.
i think i stop for now and let other people think on a few things
Steve Walmsley:
--- Quote from: wilddog5 on October 17, 2010, 08:19:20 AM ---I think you should keep jump points but change them so that they are allot more rare and rather than instant travel that act as high speed corridors so a hyper equipped ship might go anyware between 2X-10X normal hyper speed. They should also require an extensive grav survey (travel to all system bodies much like Geo survey does now) to map the systems grav fields in both of the end point systems to find the corridor.
--- End quote ---
In terms of their rarity and difficulty in mapping, it sounds like what you are describing would bear a strong resemblance to wormholes in the HonorVerse, where only a few systems have them, although they allow instant travel. In fact, something like an Honorverse wormhole junction, even with multiple termini, might be possible under this model. However, it would bring back some of the issues with jump points relating to formations having to compress and the AI. Although in the former case I guess a terminus could cover a wide area so a formation could go through intact.
--- Quote ---jump gates should also stay allowing a ship to travel very fast along them like jump points but even faster (artificial tunnel is more smooth / kept clear of spacedust) and rarer but rather than being a starting tech they are a found tech (like plasma torps), should only link to 1 other gate and be fixed for that gate (no traveling the universe like SG1), should take a long time to build 50+ years at the start and have to be found with active sensors. There could also be unlinked gates that you could link with research / xeno teams?
--- End quote ---
This would be similar to wormholes above, except they would be artifical rather than natural and have a single terminus.
--- Quote ---Will planets have a hyper limit as well given that a planet outside a stars limit could have a enemy fleet arrive in orbit with no chance of defending it self? what about a hyper jammer that prevents enemy ships from entering/ exiting hyper within a certain range (depending on tech) of an equipped planet.
--- End quote ---
That shouldn't be an issue because of the variable arrival point in a new system.
Steve
schroeam:
Sounds like a serious undertaking. I like the changes you've mentioned so far, but I am going to miss the jump points. I've been a jump point fan ever since I first played Wing Commander. I think that the model of fleet dispersement is a good way to shift the balance back to the defenders, but I would also like to see a max warp distance before the hyper drives need to reset, or whatever technobabble would need to be used.
I take it Aurora II is going to replace v5.3?
Anyway, based on the quality of work with SA and Aurora so far I can't wait to see what you come up with.
Adam.
UncleBob:
--- Quote ---Systems would all be generated at game start and you would be able to add extra systems during the game as the SM.
--- End quote ---
I kind of like the evolving nature of Aurora. A direct travel system wouldn't neccessarily mean to abandon that. We see stars based on their luminosity, and there's quite a well possibility taht we haven't discovered some red dwarfs in our near neighbourhood yet because them tricksters just don't shine enough.
So, a pre generated game-map where you see everything that has a certain apearant magnitude from the start, with the possibility of lower luminosity stars becoming visible when your ships are close enough (might also involve specialised observation ships or observatories in new colonies) might be pretty fun. The game map at the start would look pretty dense in the closer vicinity to the starting point, with less and less stars being visible the further you go, until you get a ship there to uncover the dimmer stars you couldn't see from earth.
--- Quote ---My first inclination was some type of Newtonian-based tactical combat. However, this does have some fundamental issues, as I just mentioned in another post, which is why I avoided it for Aurora.
--- End quote ---
I still think that, when you already start to write from scratch, newtons three laws with a few spherical cows might produce the best result in terms of realism. Strong enough engines and constant mass would simplify things enough calculus wise, and would provide a great expierience in the style of Attack Vector or Knight Hawk Vector (both boardgames). Of course, if it's Naval combat in space you want, your solution is the better.
--- Quote ---Real-time rather than stepped time. Time will be more like Harpoon or Europa Universalis where you can pause it, or accelerate it. This is isn't as different as it sounds because it will be similar to permament automated turns with the sub-pulses equal to the acceleraton rate and no defined increments. I intend to load everything into memory so the program will avoid any database access as time passes. This will improve performance considerably. You should also be able to watch ships move across the map if I can get the graphics working as I intend.
--- End quote ---
And at this point I really wonder if it wouldn't be easier to go C++ and use a graphics engine like Irrlicht. That doesn't mean that you have to do fancy graphics, but such an engine will do half the work for you even in a 2-d environment, and Irrlicht is open source and has quite a good GUI that isn't harder to program than the Microsoft GUI. It's a lot faster and would provide you with a lot more freedom. But since you already started coding in C# you probably won't change your mind about it. I know that I wouldn't.
--- Quote ---Area damage from nuclear explosions.
--- End quote ---
Nukes in space are a bit dubious, because the area effect follows the inverse square law. I. e. you have to be awfully close to have any effect, and formations would have to be -very- close to damage two ships at once. Using nukes as a missile defence sounds somewhat cost-ineffective, at least if the nukes are realistically priced.
Steve Walmsley:
--- Quote from: adradjool on October 17, 2010, 09:41:46 AM ---Sounds like a serious undertaking. I like the changes you've mentioned so far, but I am going to miss the jump points. I've been a jump point fan ever since I first played Wing Commander. I think that the model of fleet dispersement is a good way to shift the balance back to the defenders, but I would also like to see a max warp distance before the hyper drives need to reset, or whatever technobabble would need to be used.
--- End quote ---
I haven't decided about the exact mechanics of the hyper drives. Perhaps a cooldown period, or max range, or fuel use increasing by the square of the hyperspace distance. Whatever I end up with there will be trade-offs in hyper-drive design and it will have multiple research lines.
--- Quote ---I take it Aurora II is going to replace v5.3?
--- End quote ---
No, its much longer term than that. There will probably be several more versions of Aurora before a prototype Aurora II is ready.
Steve
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version