It appears that you have not registered with Aurora 4x. To register, please click here...
VB6 Aurora > Aurora II
Aurora II
Steve Walmsley:
I am playing around with Visual C# at the moment and I like what I see. As playing around with VB led to Starfire Assistant and Aurora, I am considering what type of programme to try to write in order to keep up my enthusiasm for learning C#. 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. So the more I think about this, the more I think some updated, more realistic version of Aurora may be the way to go without going to full Newtonian mechanics. I am open to suggestions about fundamental changes that would be included in an Aurora II, rather than low level features. Bear in mind this is a LONG-term project. At the moment I am considering:
1) A resolution-independent game so it can be played on laptops and desktops with lower resolutions. The WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation) makes this MUCH easier.
2) Centering the game around the System Map and using popups to replace many of the separate windows in Aurora I.
3) 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.
4) Keeping the basic idea of Trans-Newtonian physics to allow naval-style manoeuvers
5) No jump points <shock!>. There would be actual interstellar travel rather than jump points, based on some form of warp drive equivalent. Stars would have a 'hyper limit' beyond which you can enter hyperspace and head for another star system. Systems would all be generated at game start and you would be able to add extra systems during the game as the SM. This adds a lot of flexibility in terms of detecting things at interstellar distances. At the moment I am considering a model where ships enter a 'warp bubble' and are cut-off from the universe until they arrive in your destination system. The arrival location for each ship will be variable but will be somewhere within a certain distance outside the hyper limit, perhaps hyperlimit radius x 20%. The bearing from the destination star would be based on a bell-curve with the most likely bearing being on a direct line to the star system from which you departed. So there would effectively be a 2D toroid around the destination star where you could arrive with the most likely location somewhere close to the hyper limit on a direct line between the departure and destination system, although you might end up on the far side of the system if you were unlucky. Time of arrival would also be subject to some variance due to the 'vagaries of hyperspace'. This means a war fleet is going to arrive in a scattered way over time and will have to assemble before a centralised defending fleet can defeat them in detail. Although it also means the defending fleet may not be certain about further attacking ships arriving. Due to this method of arrival, interstellar commercial shipping would be scattered around a system rather than concentrated on a single route.
Part of the rationale behind the above thoughts is to create the interest of a jump point assault on a much wider scale without having the movement restrictions and AI issues of jump points. Ships would need existing maneuver engines and hyperspace engines would replace jump drives, although these would likely be smaller in relative terms than jump drives as they would be more widespread. Ships without hyperspace engines would be restricted to their current system, or would have to be transported in carriers. Of course, this means no gravitational surveys.
6) Tracking the mass of ships and changing it as a result of fuel consumption, use of ordnance, dropping off cargo. Max speed would change as a result. This will allow more tactical options. Possibly, also have fuel storage tanks that could be discarded, or even strap-on boosters.
7) Area damage from nuclear explosions. Missiles would detonate based on proximity and damage would be based on warhead yield and distance from detonation. This would obviously create some disadvantages to ships travelling in close formation, as multiple ships would be damaged by the same explosion, and give the player some significant decisions with regard to escort deployment. No more 'Empire State' formations. With no jump points to consider, formations would no longer have some of their current disadvantages and I would add extra functionality to make them easier to manage. It will also reduce the need to build missiles on a 4/9/16 warhead basis as only a proportion of warhead strength will be applied against a particular target. Arriving in a new star system could result in a scattered formation so ship design would have to consider whether specialised units that could be separated for some time are better than multi-purpose units than could fight more effectively in isolation. Ships on the offensive would be more likely to be isolated than ships on the defensive so grand strategy may also influence ship design.
The above are just a few initial thoughts as this is a project that will take a year or more. This will not be a conversion of Aurora to C# but rather a new game that resuses a lot of the database tables and logic from Aurora. For example, I have already written the C# code that loads all the system information (Systems, Stars, Planets, etc.) from my current game into C# objects. This is something that Aurora only does for a single system on the Systen Map whereas my new C# program has all information from all systems in memory. I will probably handle such things as orbital movement on much smaller time-scales. In fact the current 5-day increment will most likely be subsumed into the general passage of time with things happening at different rates. Perhaps construction every 24 hours and population growth every week for example. The game is going to take longer to load and there will be a Save function but it should be quicker to run.
I'll use this thread to keep everyone updated as work progresses. This doesn't mean the end of Aurora though as I will continue to add functionality and release updates. It is unlikely I will make any major upgrades that require a large investment of time though.
Steve
Nibelung44:
That's a courageous undertaking, to say the least, congrats on this move!
I would say that in 2011 and onward, you should really allow player to mod almost everything. It means separating the data base from the saved games files, first and foremost. And then it means opening the database to modding. Either with a tool allowing access, or you propose functions like 'export DB to text' and the reverse 'import text files to DB', whatever floats your boat.
In any case, seeing that an unique file contains both the DB plus all saved game is nearly an heresy for me ;D Plus the fact that you can't mod anything.
And basic graphics please. I'm not asking any more than having the possibility of seeing a 2D bitmap for each ship on the ship design window and ship rosters, and a smaller, stylized icon on the space map. Even symbols are ok, as in Harpoon.
procyon:
This sounds good. I've tried Aurora and like it, just not enough for it to out compete our current games.
Thoughts from someone with VERY limited experience.
You could require grav surveys. Just base the 'hyper drive' use for a destination on exact pinpoint of the other system's gravity well in respect to the current system. This would require detailed analysis of gravatic acceleration and transition from many points at quite a distance from the primary to gain accurate data for using the drive.
Would make jumping in grav ships to the other system in the first waves early on VERY important, otherwise how are your ships going to get home. Can't just build and send battlewagons, you'll need to look after the little guys or build that capability into your warships.
And shooting those little guys could be more important at that point than fighting the big boys. Patrol forces to deal with surveys would be VITAL.
Like the area damage from nukes, but not sure how you plan to apply it. If nukes damage over an area, you might look at AMM's based on larger warhead sizes as they wouldn't require direct (or close) hits. One big nuke might be able to take out an entire salvo if they are clustered. Might force folks to feel out the opposition as to how they shoot down missiles and could make 'energy' weapons more valuable in combat.
Like the idea so far. Anxious to see where it goes.
Might just have to make time for a 'video' game after all.....
Steve Walmsley:
--- Quote from: procyon on October 17, 2010, 06:29:23 AM ---You could require grav surveys. Just base the 'hyper drive' use for a destination on exact pinpoint of the other system's gravity well in respect to the current system. This would require detailed analysis of gravatic acceleration and transition from many points at quite a distance from the primary to gain accurate data for using the drive.
Would make jumping in grav ships to the other system in the first waves early on VERY important, otherwise how are your ships going to get home. Can't just build and send battlewagons, you'll need to look after the little guys or build that capability into your warships.
And shooting those little guys could be more important at that point than fighting the big boys. Patrol forces to deal with surveys would be VITAL.
--- End quote ---
Good suggestion. Not sure exactly how I would implement it but the idea that grav surveys could substantially reduce the 'scatter' from a jump makes a lot of sense. Surveyed systems at both ends would be best. If neither system is surveyed, I guess there could even be a chance you could end up in the wrong destination system :)
--- Quote ---Like the area damage from nukes, but not sure how you plan to apply it. If nukes damage over an area, you might look at AMM's based on larger warhead sizes as they wouldn't require direct (or close) hits. One big nuke might be able to take out an entire salvo if they are clustered. Might force folks to feel out the opposition as to how they shoot down missiles and could make 'energy' weapons more valuable in combat.
--- End quote ---
Excellent point. It would certainly solve the massed salvo issue :). I don't think it would take too much coding effort to allow ships to specify a 'spreadout' effect for their salvos so that missiles would move apart during flight before converging on the target. I will give this some thought when the time comes to look at missile combat.
Steve
UnLimiTeD:
-That should also include realistic Warhead strengths.
Nukes would deal more damage in Atmospheres, the thicker the more damage, but also be limited to the impact space, so no armor penetration, making mirvs more important.
-I think Jumpgates could actually still be possible, to accelerate Travel and have a specific destination. It would be the peak of technological development and allow a race to boost it's economy between any two systems, and thus consume enormous amounts of resources, and require a lot of development and planning. Rare, natural wormholes could still be allowed, working like normal travel, but not requiring hyperdrives.
-If you have jump carriers, why not allow attachment on a wider scale, not only fuel canisters, but things like weapon platforms that can be detached, but only have limited batteries without the carrying ships generators.
-I think if your going to redo everything anyways, why not improve shipbuilding? One could, like in current commercial 4x games, put his ships together on a grid, (I think 3d grids would be too much) and decide what is more protection worthy and fragile and thus go inside. Most weapons would obviously have to be outside.
MIRVs should be able to have various bomblets, like flares, decoy missiles, and actual damage dealers, or maybe deploying small laser satellites, and armor piercing missiles that require energy weapon tech.
Shields could be specialized to specific damage distributions, a Bubbleshield would take more damage from missiles, but due to more covered space be more efficient versus beams, and maybe one could build Guard ships that protect multiple ships under a huge shield bubble.
Armor penetration could also factor that stuff in, if armor is hardened and coherent, maybe hits might deal less damage to it, but deep damage templates could deal more damage after penetrating the outer shell.
-Most important off all, wouldn't the combat distances be different? Currently, point blank range is 10k kilometers, I don't thing a nuke in open space would damage anything that that distance.
-Also, you could revise engines, with a ship ship packing a high efficiency cruise engine for slow, but cheap flights, and a few additional overcharged engines for inefficient, but fast combat maneuvers. You could even have a weaker hyperflight, say, with only double speed, without a bonus to evasion, so you can have more refined flight and movement calculations in combat without having problems like in that other recent thread.
- Life simulation, Free O2 hints at natural wildlife, which might be dangerous, but could also be a factor of economy and tourism. Races might require water, toxic gases, or other stuff to survive (like we breath oxygen), or even radiation (if you think thats too far off, which it isn't, I guess increased modability might allow that).
-Populace sum; war always results in unrest, different economy types might result in quicker growth, but also the possibility of recession.
Genetic modifications might result in unrest, same as high unemployment.
- Conventional Materials. Those could be available in higher spread, and be required for the economy; given that ships calculate fuel and other stuff that is essentially also weight, players could build their ships partially from conventional materials to be cheaper and faster, but also a lot less durable.
-And finally make beam weapons do something versus atmosphere. it doesn't need to be much.
Edit: As for small things, more diplomacy maybe? feints? Intrigues? Reverse psychology? ;)
*frenetic jubilation* well, whatever you do, it will quite possibly be great. I just hope I live to see the day X-D
Good luck, keep on making people waste their time. :D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version