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: Steve Walmsley
« on: April 04, 2009, 09:53:18 AM »

Quote from: "IanD"
Quote
Because of the above, some changes are needed to shipyards. A new Commercial Shipyard has been added and the existing Shipyard becomes a Military Shipyard.

A small point. Could we have the Military Shipyard known as a Naval Shipyard?  :)
Yes, that does sound better. I'll make the change.

Steve
Posted by: IanD
« on: March 31, 2009, 07:54:44 AM »

Quote
Because of the above, some changes are needed to shipyards. A new Commercial Shipyard has been added and the existing Shipyard becomes a Military Shipyard.

A small point. Could we have the Military Shipyard known as a Naval Shipyard?  :)
Regards
Posted by: jfelten
« on: March 31, 2009, 05:31:05 AM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
It is an interesting idea in principle, although I can see a couple of issues. Firstly is that beam armed ships wouldn't have much trouble destroying them with no downside whereas missile ships would have to use up a lot of their ordnance. Secondly, with that in mind I would damage every jump gate in the Empire to within a couple of points so I could destroy it whenever I needed to without any trouble. If I avoided that by preventing damaged jump gates from working, then I could still prevent an alien attack by damaging them slightly.

I do like the idea that they could be destroyed though so there must be an alternative that makes it possible but difficult. Assume that a jump gate somehow binds with the jump point, keeping it open at all times, and becomes more than just a physical structure you can shoot at. Perhaps jump gate construction ships could undo the jump gate or perhaps the gate needs to be taken out in one huge explosion (like putting out an oil well fire). Perhaps a 100 point warhead (or even more) You would have to design gate-buster missiles and would need a launcher big enough to launch them.

Steve

Throwing out more ideas:  

A thought is that a damaged gate can still receive but cannot send.  

Another is that a damaged gate has a percentage chance of malfunction.  That would dissuade people from intentionally damaging their gates.  Also, they could have a certain rate of self repair, so even if intentionally damaged, they would soon repair the damage.  I can't think of a real good excuse why someone could build a gate but then not have an off switch for the self repair mechanism though.  

I was also thinking that instead of being assembled by special ships, that gate construction ships are purely robotic and become the gate and therefore are one use machines.  Once on station they reconfigure and lock in place.  Say their engines are rebuilt in to the gate mechanism, or are consumed creating the wormhole, or whatever techno-babble sounds best for why they can't be moved once emplaced .  

Yet another wild idea is that all warp points already have ancient indestructible gates of mysterious origin.  Instead of a special ship being needed to build gates, a special ship is needed to reactivate a dormant gate (sort of a gate jump starter).  Although it is pretty hard to make anything believably "indestructible".  Perhaps they are massive, say the size of a medium size moon.  But then they would be obvious and easily found eliminating the need for surveying, unless the survey is still needed to determine a precise course that must be set to transit the gate.  I guess you could say they are cloaked by inscrutable alien technology and very hard to detect.  

All in all though it is a pretty big stretch to come up with a believable reason why a physical gate couldn't be rigged with a command detonated antimatter bomb.  Personally I would just make jump drives small enough to fit on warships so the military is not reliant on jump gates to carry on an offensive.  You could make them expensive enough that it would not be economical to put them on freighters.
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: March 30, 2009, 09:19:11 PM »

I was thinking in terms of having a HTK of e.g. 1000 (or even 10,000 or 100,000), and treating them as "all or nothing golden BB" the way SY are, i.e. any particular hit would have a chance of strength/HTK of completely destroying the gate.  With this destruction mechanism, you'd pretty much have to:

A) Rig a bunch of 100pt bombs (all-warhead missiles) to the gate in advance, and blow them all at once in the hope that one of them blows the gate.

B) Have bunch (or maybe just a single, if you've got enough time) beam-armed ships sitting next to the gate, ready to start blasting away if things get dicey.

C) Burn through the magazines of several (or more) missile ships shooting at the gate.

I really like B, because it gives another raison d'etre for beam-armed ships, with A as an alternate method for pure-missile races.

As for technobable, I like the idea that a jumpgate isn't actually a physical object - instead it's a stable wormhole which the weapons fire has a (small) chance of disrupting.  With this technobabble, only energy weapons and explosions would have a chance of destroying the gate - gauss cannon and railgun shouldn't (the slugs would go right through).

One of the things I like about requiring weapons fire from the far (enemy) side is that it gives the enemy an opportunity to interfere with blowing the gate, which gives more of an opportunity for "last stand" situations to show up.  Having civilian ships deconstruct them from the near side in a predictable amount of time seems a lot less exciting - although my ideas on this might change the first time the enemy launches an assault through the gate while the construction ship is trying to deconstruct it.  Hmmm - the far-side weapons-fire method also acts as a counter to the energy-combatant "duck through the wormhole when the missiles are due to arrive" strategy against missile ships - ducking through the gate means you can't be working on destroying it, so there's motivation to try and tough out the salvo rather than dodging it for longer than the missile loiter time.

I was going to say that I liked the idea of the disruption blowing the gate in both directions, and was almost ready to suggest "why do I need to build a jump gate on each side?", but then realized that this would allow deconstruction from the near/safe side which (as described above) I think is a lot less interesting.

John
Posted by: ShadoCat
« on: March 30, 2009, 07:45:07 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
An excellent point! Given that construction ships are going to be very large, that could be a problem. Perhaps the instability caused by removing a jump gate will cause jump gates at both sides of a jump point to be destroyed :)

That would work.

One other thought.  Maybe a ship on either side of a double gate can send a command or an energy stream to cause the gate to disrupt.  This wouldn't close the gate but would make it so that anything going through would come out in pieces.  The change would be visible.  You wouldn't have to own the gate but you would have to have a ship within X km to continuously send the beam.  Thus, either side can embargo the gate.

There are two ways this can go.  Either a jump drive can temporary sort out the jump point to allow ships to jump through it (as if the gate wasn't present) or the disruption overrides all travel.  In which case, in order to get through an embargoed gate, you have to deconstruct the gate on your side; then you can jump through.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 30, 2009, 07:18:32 PM »

Quote from: "ShadoCat"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
If I allow some type of instant scuttle command for an Empire's 'own' jump gates then there would still be a race to build jump gates at all key jump point in order to be the one who could destroy them. I think an ability for construction ships to dismantle any jump point is probably the best idea. It would take a lot less time than construction - perhaps one tenth of the construction time for a module.

That is probably the best solution for the way Aurora works.

One thing to consider is that a jump gate construction ship that is disassembling a gate to slow down an invasion will end up getting stuck in the system on the enemy side unless you have a jump ship big enough to get the construction ship through the jump point.
An excellent point! Given that construction ships are going to be very large, that could be a problem. Perhaps the instability caused by removing a jump gate will cause jump gates at both sides of a jump point to be destroyed :)

Steve
Posted by: ShadoCat
« on: March 30, 2009, 07:12:48 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
If I allow some type of instant scuttle command for an Empire's 'own' jump gates then there would still be a race to build jump gates at all key jump point in order to be the one who could destroy them. I think an ability for construction ships to dismantle any jump point is probably the best idea. It would take a lot less time than construction - perhaps one tenth of the construction time for a module.

That is probably the best solution for the way Aurora works.

One thing to consider is that a jump gate construction ship that is disassembling a gate to slow down an invasion will end up getting stuck in the system on the enemy side unless you have a jump ship big enough to get the construction ship through the jump point.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 30, 2009, 06:44:32 PM »

Quote from: "ShadoCat"
Instead of blowing a gate by causing damage to it, why not use a scuttle command?

Or better yet, turn the darned thing off.

I know that's the way I'd build them if i were designing a get on a JP in my home system....

If you can't switch them on and off like a light bulb, then being able to command a gate to vigorously disassemble itself works for me.
I originally had jump gates belonging to one race or another and planned to have races control who used them. However, it occured to me that they could cause a lot of problems. If you could completely shut down a gate that it becomes an impassable barrier. If they were indestructible then whoever got there first would have complete control over a jump point. if they were destroyable then races would be continually destroying each other's gates and replacing them. Ancient gates would presumably have everyone locked out. I decided in the end it would be better for gameplay and micromanagement if they were accessible to all.

If I allow some type of instant scuttle command for an Empire's 'own' jump gates then there would still be a race to build jump gates at all key jump point in order to be the one who could destroy them. I think an ability for construction ships to dismantle any jump point is probably the best idea. It would take a lot less time than construction - perhaps one tenth of the construction time for a module.

Steve
Posted by: ShadoCat
« on: March 30, 2009, 06:30:48 PM »

Instead of blowing a gate by causing damage to it, why not use a scuttle command?

Or better yet, turn the darned thing off.

I know that's the way I'd build them if i were designing a get on a JP in my home system....

If you can't switch them on and off like a light bulb, then being able to command a gate to vigorously disassemble itself works for me.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 30, 2009, 03:05:35 PM »

Quote from: "sloanjh"
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
The result of this is going to be easier jump gate construction. Possibly too easy but I will see how it pans out in the test game. With the other changes though, more jump gates will be necessary to allow freighters and colony ship access to other systems and they will also facilitate some of the future civilian changes I have mentioned in the last week or so.
If you're concerned about the easy of jump gate construction, you might contemplate making them destroyable.  That would allow races to "blow" jump gates as a defensive measure when their empire is penetrated, which in turn would require the attacker to make jump assaults at every system, rather than just to break into the perimeter.  If you gave them 100 or 1000 HTK, then it would probably require a sizable effort to blow them, similar to the tactical difficulties of blowing bridges.
It is an interesting idea in principle, although I can see a couple of issues. Firstly is that beam armed ships wouldn't have much trouble destroying them with no downside whereas missile ships would have to use up a lot of their ordnance. Secondly, with that in mind I would damage every jump gate in the Empire to within a couple of points so I could destroy it whenever I needed to without any trouble. If I avoided that by preventing damaged jump gates from working, then I could still prevent an alien attack by damaging them slightly.

I do like the idea that they could be destroyed though so there must be an alternative that makes it possible but difficult. Assume that a jump gate somehow binds with the jump point, keeping it open at all times, and becomes more than just a physical structure you can shoot at. Perhaps jump gate construction ships could undo the jump gate or perhaps the gate needs to be taken out in one huge explosion (like putting out an oil well fire). Perhaps a 100 point warhead (or even more) You would have to design gate-buster missiles and would need a launcher big enough to launch them.

Steve
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 30, 2009, 02:57:52 PM »

Quote from: "cjblack"
Quote from: "SteveAlt"
I have had to update the designs for the colony ships and freighters in the Trans-Newtonian Campaign. Here are the new designs for the Commonwealth. Note that some of these are older ships still in service so I created commercial equivalents for Magneto-Plasma Drive, Ion Engines and Nuclear Pulse Engines.

Should these really all have the Commonwealth's current best fuel efficiency, even when the original engines were built with lower efficiency tech?
That's a good point. I have changed the Ion-equivalent to 0.08 and the nuclear pulse to 0.09

Steve
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: March 30, 2009, 02:57:13 PM »

Quote from: "Beersatron"
So I take it you removed Jump gate Components from the ruins list that you can find in exploration?
Yes, I have removed them

Steve
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: March 29, 2009, 07:35:46 PM »

Quote from: "SteveAlt"
The result of this is going to be easier jump gate construction. Possibly too easy but I will see how it pans out in the test game. With the other changes though, more jump gates will be necessary to allow freighters and colony ship access to other systems and they will also facilitate some of the future civilian changes I have mentioned in the last week or so.
If you're concerned about the easy of jump gate construction, you might contemplate making them destroyable.  That would allow races to "blow" jump gates as a defensive measure when their empire is penetrated, which in turn would require the attacker to make jump assaults at every system, rather than just to break into the perimeter.  If you gave them 100 or 1000 HTK, then it would probably require a sizable effort to blow them, similar to the tactical difficulties of blowing bridges.

John
Posted by: cjblack
« on: March 29, 2009, 07:00:48 PM »

Quote from: "SteveAlt"
I have had to update the designs for the colony ships and freighters in the Trans-Newtonian Campaign. Here are the new designs for the Commonwealth. Note that some of these are older ships still in service so I created commercial equivalents for Magneto-Plasma Drive, Ion Engines and Nuclear Pulse Engines.

Should these really all have the Commonwealth's current best fuel efficiency, even when the original engines were built with lower efficiency tech?
Posted by: Beersatron
« on: March 29, 2009, 05:38:09 PM »

So I take it you removed Jump gate Components from the ruins list that you can find in exploration?