Aurora 4x
New Players => The Academy => Topic started by: Mysterius on December 17, 2011, 04:56:32 PM
-
Hello,
I tend to limit my galaxy to 150 systems, 200 max, in order to avoid huge lag after some time.
However, I also hate having a ton of dormant jump points and "interconnected" systems everywhere. I think it breaks the territorial aspect of the game and also the exploration aspect "yeah i'm in deep space years from my homeland! Here's a jump point, let's get through ! ---> back to the home planet." Great :p.
The massive presence of hidden jump points is particularily true with such a low amount of systems since there are not a lot of system numbers for the game to assign.
So my question : is there a way to create a kind of "linear" galaxy where, when i go deeper in space, i ALWAYS get farther away from my homeland. There could still be some links/hidden JP, but not so much. The kind of rare links that you WANT to occupy and defend, because they are the crossroads of the whole galaxy (don't know if i am clear).
Using SM mode to edit JP is not a viable solution. NPRs explore, too :).
-
With SM mode enabled there's a 'Force New' checkbox in the F9 system view screen under the jump point tab which forces new systems on exploratory transits, but as you yourself said it's barely an option as it'd require you to check this box for every system and doesn't limit the SM-inaccessible NPR systems (no idea about designer mode).
An idea that sprung my mind was to set local system generation chance to 0% and the spread to at least 1 - This way it might make linking jump points impossible, but I'm not sure if Steve handles a zero percent chance as 'disabled' for this feature. Might be worth a try though.
You'll be unable to play with real star systems, however.
*edit*
I just realised that this won't stop the interconnection of systems in the way I first thought (it's 1 am here, I blame the clock! 8) ), since you'll get just the same number of hidden jump points with systems further away once the game ran for a couple years, especially if you get closer to the system limit. I doubt this is feasable without considerable SM micromanagement or altering connections retrospectivly.
-
With 1000 systems to choose from, I see precious little connectivity. Decreasing the number of available systems will tend to increase the likelyhood of branching.
The lag is not from the size of the galaxy-- its from the amount of smeg in it. Start with zero NPRs and that should help.
-
I doubt this is feasable without considerable SM micromanagement or altering connections retrospectivly.
That's what i fear, yes... At the moment, jump points seem to be generated without taking into account the restrictions placed in "Local System Gen. Chance" and "Local System Gen. Spread". For example, if you set "99" in the first option and "2" in the second, the game will still generate systems with 3+ jump points, which can only lead to the break of the said rules.
I am asking, but I already had the feeling that what i want is not feasible :(. I guess Steve could have the final answer.
With 1000 systems to choose from, I see precious little connectivity. Decreasing the number of available systems will tend to increase the likelyhood of branching.
The lag is not from the size of the galaxy-- its from the amount of smeg in it. Start with zero NPRs and that should help.
Yes I know, unfortunately.
Still, I think that the size of the galaxy do increase the lag. Not by itself, but because NPRs explore too and can generate new NPRs as such (thanks to the "NPR generation chance"). I start with zero NPR and I tend to add some in SM mode when I want to. But i also like to have the surprise of discovering a new one randomly generated.
-
That's what i fear, yes... At the moment, jump points seem to be generated without taking into account the restrictions placed in "Local System Gen. Chance" and "Local System Gen. Spread". For example, if you set "99" in the first option and "2" in the second, the game will still generate systems with 3+ jump points, which can only lead to the break of the said rules.
That's not quite the way it works. The "Local System Gen. Spread" is the range of the system IDs which make up viable targets for jump points leading out of the system -> It does in no way limit the number of jump points in itself. If you check the galaxy map, there's a display option to show you the IDs of every system. Sol, for example, always has the ID zero. Now, if you have a spread of two and the "Local System Gen. Chance" at 99%, there's a 99% chance that any exploratory jump out of this system will lead to a system within a two integer range from the ID of the current system.
For Sol, this means that there's a 99% chance that the system will have the ID 198-002, assuming you have a limit of 200 systems. There's also a 1% chance that the system will instead have any random ID.
Effectivly, this means that a high chance and low spread will amount to small clusters of systems discovered, which (in ID terms) are close to one another and often interconnected with various jump points. If you have many discovered systems around ID zero, there's a high chance that system #2 will connect to a known system, as there's only a 1% chance of it to break out of this 'cluster' of known systems.
Still, I think that the size of the galaxy do increase the lag. Not by itself, but because NPRs explore too and can generate new NPRs as such (thanks to the "NPR generation chance"). I start with zero NPR and I tend to add some in SM mode when I want to. But i also like to have the surprise of discovering a new one randomly generated.
Not so much if you disable planetary orbital movements. They're calculated only every five days and usually don't cause nearly as much lag as NPR movements. With 500+ systems the movement of 2000+ planets can be taxing, but only during (standard time) build increments. If you simply uncheck that option, the number of systems should have a very marginal impact on your delays.
-
That's not quite the way it works. The "Local System Gen. Spread" is the range of the system IDs which make up viable targets for jump points leading out of the system -> It does in no way limit the number of jump points in itself. If you check the galaxy map, there's a display option to show you the IDs of every system. Sol, for example, always has the ID zero. Now, if you have a spread of two and the "Local System Gen. Chance" at 99%, there's a 99% chance that any exploratory jump out of this system will lead to a system within a two integer range from the ID of the current system.
For Sol, this means that there's a 99% chance that the system will have the ID 198-002, assuming you have a limit of 200 systems. There's also a 1% chance that the system will instead have any random ID.
Effectivly, this means that a high chance and low spread will amount to small clusters of systems discovered, which (in ID terms) are close to one another and often interconnected with various jump points. If you have many discovered systems around ID zero, there's a high chance that system #2 will connect to a known system, as there's only a 1% chance of it to break out of this 'cluster' of known systems.
That's what i said. Okay... I wasn't very clear ;D. But yes, I understand how it works :).
What i was saying is that setting 90% in Gen. Chance and 2 in Gen. Spread. (for example) is, in fact, ineffective. With these settings, a system should only have 4 possible jump points, sometimes more if they fall into the "10%" that does not link to a local system.
But the game does not work like that. Jump points are generated randomly and this is only when they are explored that these settings are taken into accounts. As such, extreme settings like these are simply impossible for the game to follow. I cannot be completely sure of what I say, but this is what i observed in my testing.
This is why i am looking for an alternative.
Am i clear? I may not speak english very well... ^^
Not so much if you disable planetary orbital movements. They're calculated only every five days and usually don't cause nearly as much lag as NPR movements. With 500+ systems the movement of 2000+ planets can be taxing, but only during (standard time) build increments. If you simply uncheck that option, the number of systems should have a very marginal impact on your delays.
You misread my post :). What i'm saying is that since NPRs explore, they generate new NPRs and, as such, increase the lag. I always disable orbital movements anyway.
-
Heh, I read something entirely different form that post, but now I understand ;D
Perhaps if you set the spread to ~10 and the chance to ~50%, you could get something close to 'territories'. You have an equal chance that jump points will remain in their local cluster, creating a territory of interconnected systems or the chance that it spreads out in a (hopefully) further away system, where the whole process repeats. These further located jumps would serve as the choke points between your territories
I must admit, this is in no way a means to get a 'linear' galaxy, as progressive climbing of IDs could create a quite interwoven jump network and sheer luck will sooner or later fill out all the ID gaps caused from initial jumps, but I guess this is about the closest (slightly gambly) thing you can get (that I can think of). Some minimal SM adjustment to jump points once a decade or so could keep the territory-ish outlook of the galaxy up, I guess.
I always disable orbital movements anyway.
Personally, I couldn't live that way xD
I remotely remember a post (from Steve, I think) saying that the further away you go from Sol the less likely habitable planets are - this way the lag for NPR-discovered NPRs wouldn't increase too fast if they explore in the 200+ range of IDs. I tried the search function to find the post where that was mentioned in, but failed aptly =/
-
I remotely remember a post (from Steve, I think) saying that the further away you go from Sol the less likely habitable planets are
I don't recall saying that, although that is no guarantee I didn't say it :)
The chance of habitable planets is based on the system generation code, which doesn't change depending on the distance from Sol. However, I think G-class stars probably have the best chance of producing a habitable world so I might have said that the further you got from Sol in terms of star type, the less chance of habitable planets.
Steve
-
I seem to remember it being something about the real stars option in game creation, that G type stars and hence the probability of habitable planets were more common closer to Sol.
-
I seem to remember it being something about the real stars option in game creation, that G type stars and hence the probability of habitable planets were more common closer to Sol.
Still don't remember :). I did recently mention that for real stars in Newtonian Aurora there were less red dwarfs beyond 75 LY because we haven't mapped them yet, but that would actually mean a higher chance per system of a habitable planet beyond 75 LY. Also real stars generally will have less habitable planets because there are so many red dwarfs, while the system generation for random stars reduces the chances of red dwarfs compared to reality, which will increase the chance of habitable worlds. That doesn't depend on distance though.
Steve
-
Steve, what do you think about my initial "problem"? Is what I try to achieve impossible at the moment? (limiting dormant JP with a low number of systems)
-
Steve, what do you think about my initial "problem"? Is what I try to achieve impossible at the moment? (limiting dormant JP with a low number of systems)
Is this a real stars or random game?
Steve
-
A random one. I couldn't even play with the System Gen. Chance and System Gen. Spread options in a real star game ^^.
-
I could swear that I read something along that G-star line someplace here ... but I couldn't find it again, nor do I recall it precise enough to be 100% secure ;D ... But then again, the aurora board already showed up in a dream I had once, so I should better shut up at this point :-[
-
A random one. I couldn't even play with the System Gen. Chance and System Gen. Spread options in a real star game ^^.
Yes, I know but not everyone realises that :)
I would just set local system generation chance to zero and have a large number of systems. If you pick say 10,000 systems, then there is only a 1 in 10,000 chance that a jump point will connect to any particular system number. Once ten systems have been discovered, the chance of connecting to an existing system is 1000-1. When 100 systems have been discovered the chance of connecting to an existing system is still 100-1
Systems are not generated until they are explored so having 10,000 max or 100 max makes no difference to performance. That is only affected by systems that have been generated.
Steve
-
That's what i said. Okay... I wasn't very clear ;D. But yes, I understand how it works :).
What i was saying is that setting 90% in Gen. Chance and 2 in Gen. Spread. (for example) is, in fact, ineffective. With these settings, a system should only have 4 possible jump points, sometimes more if they fall into the "10%" that does not link to a local system.
Not quite. It is possible to have multiple JP in a system that go to the same destination system (although different JPs obviously) - the most I have seen is three JP pairs linking the same two systems. I believe that its even possible for a system to link to itself, but I'm not sure if the time I saw this was in Aurora or Starfire Assistant. I certainly remember it being quite useful as the physical locations of the two ends were quite far apart, and allowed a short cut from the outer edges of the system to the inner planets (a bit like Lagrange points can be now)
-
Systems are not generated until they are explored so having 10,000 max or 100 max makes no difference to performance. That is only affected by systems that have been generated.
Yes, increasing the max number of systems is clearly a good option. I was only asking if it was possible to limit hidden JP while also having a limited number of systems.
I understand that systems are only generated when they are explored. Still, since I like to play with NPRs, they will tend to generate new NPRs as they explore (and increase lag). Or is the "NPR generation chance" enabled only when the player race explores?
Thanks for the answers anyway people, i'll live with what I have ;D
-
NPRs can 'awaken' other NPRs.
Actually, you could manually set the NPR generation chance to 0% at the game info screen whenever you're not transiting a jump point for the first time yourself. This way you'd stop NPRs from creating new ones, but keep the chance for yourself. That'd require minimal increment adjustments / attention for your survey fleets.
-
Yes, increasing the max number of systems is clearly a good option. I was only asking if it was possible to limit hidden JP while also having a limited number of systems.
I understand that systems are only generated when they are explored. Still, since I like to play with NPRs, they will tend to generate new NPRs as they explore (and increase lag). Or is the "NPR generation chance" enabled only when the player race explores?
Thanks for the answers anyway people, i'll live with what I have ;D
Unfortunately they are mutually exclusive requirements. If you generate 100 systems with a max system number of 10,000 then they will tend not to be interconnected. If you generate 100 systems with a max system number of 100 then they have connect to each other because there is nowhere else to go. This is regardless of whether you or NPRs are doing the exploring.
Steve
-
Thank you all :)
-
When 100 systems have been discovered the chance of connecting to an existing system is still 100-1
But the chance of a loop existing somewhere in that 100 systems is O(1). Intuitively, this can be understood by thinking about the next 100 systems. You'll be rolling against odds of at least 100-1 100 times, so the odds are that at least one of those rolls will come up a winner. For the first 100 systems, the odds will be lower than 100-1, but the same general principle applies - systems 51-100 will give you at least roughly 1-in-4. This is very similar to the "compare birthdays" cocktail game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem) - the odds of two people in a room having the same birthday approaches unity for a surprisingly small number of people, because it doesn't matter which birthday gets a match. The reason that this maps to the birthday problem is that the "new" end of a link can be thought of as that link's "birthday".
As discussed in the article, the true probability of no matches occurring in m links with N systems is roughly m!*(N choose m)/N^m (up to shifts by 1 or two in the value of m). Also as discussed in the article, the easy way to see when the probability of a match approaches unity is to compare N to (m choose 2) = m*(m-1)/2. When m ~ sqrt(2N), these will be roughly equal and the odds are high of a match somewhere.
So if you want to be able to generate roughly M systems before the odds are good of getting a match, you need roughly M^2 total systems. I would choose N at either 1,000,000 or even 1,000,000,000 (assuming Steve didn't use 16-bit ints for system index). I wouldn't go much above 1,000,000,000, since that would overflow a 32-bit integer.
John
-
Thanks for that John, it allowed me to solve a minor (but very irritating) problem at work.
Who says gaming is not good for productivity! ;D
-
Thanks for that John, it allowed me to solve a minor (but very irritating) problem at work.
Who says gaming is not good for productivity! ;D
You're welcome. And here I was, thinking people would say "ho hum" :)
John
-
But the chance of a loop existing somewhere in that 100 systems is O(1). Intuitively, this can be understood by thinking about the next 100 systems. You'll be rolling against odds of at least 100-1 100 times, so the odds are that at least one of those rolls will come up a winner. For the first 100 systems, the odds will be lower than 100-1, but the same general principle applies - systems 51-100 will give you at least roughly 1-in-4. This is very similar to the "compare birthdays" cocktail game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem) - the odds of two people in a room having the same birthday approaches unity for a surprisingly small number of people, because it doesn't matter which birthday gets a match. The reason that this maps to the birthday problem is that the "new" end of a link can be thought of as that link's "birthday".
As discussed in the article, the true probability of no matches occurring in m links with N systems is roughly m!*(N choose m)/N^m (up to shifts by 1 or two in the value of m). Also as discussed in the article, the easy way to see when the probability of a match approaches unity is to compare N to (m choose 2) = m*(m-1)/2. When m ~ sqrt(2N), these will be roughly equal and the odds are high of a match somewhere.
So if you want to be able to generate roughly M systems before the odds are good of getting a match, you need roughly M^2 total systems. I would choose N at either 1,000,000 or even 1,000,000,000 (assuming Steve didn't use 16-bit ints for system index). I wouldn't go much above 1,000,000,000, since that would overflow a 32-bit integer.
John
Yes, I was aware of that. Until recently, odds were quite important in my day job :). I was just pointing out that after 100 systems have been discovered, the next jump point you go through has a 100-1 chance of connecting to one of those systems. I didn't really express that as clearly as I could have done :)
Steve
-
Until recently, odds were quite important in my day job :).
Which I was thinking while I was typing :) It was more exposition for the OP....
Merry Christmas!
John