Author Topic: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)  (Read 4592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GeaXle

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • G
  • Posts: 44
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #45 on: May 17, 2018, 01:20:22 PM »
Currently I believe that jump gates (or stabilized jump points) should be permanent, for the reasons I listed earlier. The only way I would change that belief is if someone convinced me that an ability to remove jump gates would provide a 'game play' benefit.

An argument for whether the unspecified stabilization process for a fictitious object can be reversed is going to have less influence on that decision.

I would like to be able to un-build jump points for the following game play reasons:
- RP: perhaps a terrorist organisation disrupt the jump point to a recent colony
- to slow down an invasion
- to disrupt trade and logistic lines of enemies
 

Offline Hazard

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • H
  • Posts: 243
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #46 on: May 17, 2018, 03:52:51 PM »
The biggest issue with losing jump gates is the civilian logistics problem which now either has to recalculate a route to the intended destination and/or cancel a delivery. The player logistics issue solves itself; there's an 'insufficient jump drive capacity' message that also kills time progression.

Frankly, I think there's a fairly simple way to handle the problem. If a civilian ship is confronted with not having a gate at a jump point it triggers the routing code for a new route that follows the rules. If there is a route, it now starts following it. If there isn't, check cargo, and check for a place that wants that cargo. If it exists and is in range of the routing code limits, calculate a new route and go, if there's no place willing to receive the cargo, dump the cargo. Yes, this means that hundreds of thousands of colonists can disappear from your nation, unless you want to just dump them on a colony regardless of capacity.

An exception to this would be buildings, which can be hauled with civilian contracts. All buildings except Infrastructure (because those are a trade good) get routed to the nearest colony, even if that colony is uninhabited. If you don't dump colonies out into space but instead want to also bring them somewhere they get dropped off at the nearest already inhabited colony instead.
 

Offline the obelisk

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • t
  • Posts: 52
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #47 on: May 17, 2018, 08:19:53 PM »
If it exists and is in range of the routing code limits, calculate a new route and go, if there's no place willing to receive the cargo, dump the cargo. Yes, this means that hundreds of thousands of colonists can disappear from your nation, unless you want to just dump them on a colony regardless of capacity.

I think it would be better to leave civilians at colonies regardless of capacity.
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 843
  • Thanked: 37 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #48 on: May 18, 2018, 04:04:54 PM »
The means to remove Jump Gates already exists.  It's called SM Mode.  Therefore, what we are arguing about is whether NPRs should be able to destroy Jump Gates.

Ever since their invention I have been strongly in the "Jump Gates are forever" camp.  I found them to be a compelling strategic dilemma -- build a "superhighway for invasion" or complicate my logistics?  I found them so dangerous, I hardly ever built one and I have started countless wars over my refusal to let NPRs -- any NPRs -- build them anywhere I considered dangerous.

Personally, my first choice would be for Jump Gates to not be buildable by players / NPRs.  The random scattering of Precursor jump gates throughout the universe then becomes interesting terrain.  "Ooh, a Col Cost 0.4 world with lots of 0.7 Duranium, but there's a Jump Gate leading right into the system from Unknown Space!"

It also means if you want to build quarter-million-ton orbital habitats, you need to build quarter-million-ton jump ships if you want to move them to another system.

My second choice is for player/NPR-built Jump Gates to be instantly and easily destroyable --  guaranteed BOOM from even a single point of damage!  I would also make Jump Gate Construction Ships consume wealth & minerals every Construction Cycle they're building a gate.  (It has been so long since I built a Jump Gate I can't remember if this is the way it currently works or not.)

Whatever Steve decides for Jump Gates, I will continue to hardly ever build them.  If I am able (other than SM Mode), I will probably destroy any I find leading towards my territory.
 
The following users thanked this post: MarcAFK

Offline Garfunkel

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 851
  • Thanked: 50 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #49 on: May 20, 2018, 03:33:19 PM »
Wait wait what? How do I remove Jump Gates in SM mode?
 

Offline the obelisk

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • t
  • Posts: 52
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #50 on: May 20, 2018, 05:52:28 PM »
Could have sworn I responded to this earlier but I'm not seeing it.  Oh well.

Personally, my first choice would be for Jump Gates to not be buildable by players / NPRs.  The random scattering of Precursor jump gates throughout the universe then becomes interesting terrain.  "Ooh, a Col Cost 0.4 world with lots of 0.7 Duranium, but there's a Jump Gate leading right into the system from Unknown Space!"
I think it would be far better to have that be an option you could choose at the start of the game.  Alternatively, iirc we might be able to determine how much RP is needed for any particular tech, and you could simply lock jump gates behind absurdly high numbers.

It also means if you want to build quarter-million-ton orbital habitats, you need to build quarter-million-ton jump ships if you want to move them to another system.
I'd argue that this is a very good reason for why jump gates shouldn't be removed.

My second choice is for player/NPR-built Jump Gates to be instantly and easily destroyable --  guaranteed BOOM from even a single point of damage!  I would also make Jump Gate Construction Ships consume wealth & minerals every Construction Cycle they're building a gate.  (It has been so long since I built a Jump Gate I can't remember if this is the way it currently works or not.)
I'd be interested in turning jump gates into a type of station with a special component that gives it its properties, and having construction ships be capable of creating them in space using minerals and/or parts.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2018, 01:39:25 PM by the obelisk »
 

Offline Jovus

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • J
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #51 on: May 21, 2018, 12:09:17 PM »
Wait wait what? How do I remove Jump Gates in SM mode?

In the System Information window, there's a tab for Jump Points. If you switch to it and are in SM mode, it gives you all kinds of options having to do with jump points, including moving them, unlinking and re-linking them, deleting them, generating new ones, and whether or not they have jump gates.
 
The following users thanked this post: Garfunkel, serger

Offline Whitecold

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • W
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2018, 12:51:23 AM »
I'd be interested in turning jump gates into a type of station with a special component that gives it its properties, and having construction ships be capable of creating them in space using minerals and/or parts.

That would certainly be much neater than a dedicated jump point constructor ship. Also with a special component you can customize your jump gate to your needs, the maximum ship size your gates are laid out for, should the stations be able to move under own power, do they need PD systems, are they equipped with maintenance facilities...


I would not let the argument count that removing jump gate messes up civilian transports. If you voluntarily remove jump stations from critical junctions, you obviously are creating a mess. If an enemy manages to get deep in and destroy critical jump stations, you are deep in trouble anyway.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2018, 12:55:15 AM by Whitecold »
 

Offline Zincat

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Z
  • Posts: 283
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2018, 03:24:44 AM »
I don't understand some of this discussion.

I think Steve basically said that in C# Aurora jump gates will be renamed to stabilized jump points.

There is no station whatsoever. No structure. Nothing to build. Just a jump point that is stable, and so can be used by anyone even without jump engine.

Sure, a case can be made that it can be destabilized. But why there's so many posts about "stations"? There are no stations....


For the record, I am not against the possibility of destabilizing jump points. But then again, I'm not really for it. Maybe if it was a really BIG undertaking. Something that costs you a LOT to do.

Lorewise it could be said that it is somethign that happens naturally over tens of thousands of years or more...
 

Offline Profugo Barbatus

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • P
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #54 on: May 22, 2018, 03:36:00 AM »
The discussion is about how to frame it in universe as something that can be targeted and destroyed/destabilized. Having it be some distinct station seems to be the popular approach at the moment.

I'm still preferential to being able to undo these permanent jump points, however they're set up in the first place, but being able to do so via SM will have to suffice, seems Steve's made his mind up about this. As long as the ability to delete them via SM remains in the C# version, I'll be content enough.
 

Offline TCD

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • T
  • Posts: 207
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #55 on: May 22, 2018, 12:43:13 PM »
What I don't really understand is why people think removing jumpgates will slow down an invasion? All the NPR needs is a single jump ship and they can move their whole fleet through, surely? And you can defend a jump gate just as easily as a jump point. What am I missing?
 

Offline Jovus

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • J
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2018, 01:28:04 PM »
I think all y'all talking about how to destroy jump gates/destabilize jump points/whatever are going about it wrong.

Steve has already said he doesn't care about plausibility, since plausibility can be supplied with a technobabble explanation regardless of whether jump gates are permanent or not. Rather, if you want jump gates to be destructible, you need to demonstrate how that will enrich the strategic layer of the game, rather than diminish it.

Right now, setting aside NPR silliness that will change in C#, the creation of a jump gate is a real strategic decision. On the one hand you immensely simplify your internal logistics. On the other hand, you make yourself more vulnerable to strategic outflanking and enemy attack. Each jump gate you make is a decision that should be carefully considered.

If jump gates can be destroyed, that changes. Can we change it for the better instead of just taking away player agency? If so, then maybe jump gates should be destructible. Otherwise, they should stay permanent.

Don't worry about the how; focus on the why.

Myself, I think a cool system might be required jump-gate maintenance. Each jump gate you construct requires  both an initial mineral investment and some small but not inconsiderable annual upkeep. Further, jump gates come in different sizes, with larger sizes being unlocked by research and requiring correspondingly higher maintenance. You can choose to forego maintenance, but the gate will degrade and eventually cease to function on some time-scale to be determined, possibly with chance for bad effects if someone tries to transit a partially functional but unmaintained gate.

This opens the strategic decision to use jump gates from being a one-time thing to being ongoing, and still definitiely involves strategic trade-offs for simplified logistics, as well as not simply allowing the player to remove inconvenient jump-gates immediately (but nevertheless involving risk to invading forces using an empire's jump gates). Alternatively, you could be able to blow up or deconstruct jump gates instead of just waiting for them to decay, if that's desired. In either case, if you desired a jump-gate on that point again, you'd have to pay the initial construction cost again.

If this idea were implemented, I'd like for minerals to be magically removed from stockpiles for maintenance, much like ships that are in orbit and using maintenance facilities.  Colonies could have a toggle called something like "Maintain in-system jump gates", and then the capital colony (or, perhaps, a player-designated colony) would be responsible for maintenance on all other jump-gates. Any gate maintained by a given colony should be togglable so that maintenance can be abandoned, much like how we can stop and restart a colony's industries.This would vastly simplify the logistical overhead of jump gate maintenance - otherwise I'd probably just deploy mobile gates aka commercial jump tenders instead of bothering with all the faff.

NPRs would use the same system. In event that multiple empires have colonies in the same system, you'd be able to see which jump gates some other empire is maintaining before choosing which you will maintain, with priority being given to whoever decided to maintain it first. This way you could mooch off another empire, at the expense of not controlling maintenance. Or, simpler, jump gates could track whoever built them, and the only empire capable of maintenance on that gate is the empire which originally built it. If you want to maintain it yourself, you have to wait for it to degrade (or destroy it, if that's an option) and build one yourself.

Precursor gates, on the other hand, should not be subject to maintenance and should probably be permanent - they're made of super-hard unobtanium-neutronium alloys and partially sunk into the liquid dimension, or something.
 

Offline Whitecold

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • W
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2018, 05:13:06 PM »
I think all y'all talking about how to destroy jump gates/destabilize jump points/whatever are going about it wrong.

Steve has already said he doesn't care about plausibility, since plausibility can be supplied with a technobabble explanation regardless of whether jump gates are permanent or not. Rather, if you want jump gates to be destructible, you need to demonstrate how that will enrich the strategic layer of the game, rather than diminish it.

Right now, setting aside NPR silliness that will change in C#, the creation of a jump gate is a real strategic decision. On the one hand you immensely simplify your internal logistics. On the other hand, you make yourself more vulnerable to strategic outflanking and enemy attack. Each jump gate you make is a decision that should be carefully considered.

If jump gates can be destroyed, that changes. Can we change it for the better instead of just taking away player agency? If so, then maybe jump gates should be destructible. Otherwise, they should stay permanent.

Don't worry about the how; focus on the why.

I'd flip the argument on its head. Since civilian ships and the pathfinder can use jump tenders now, why do we still need jump gates? Jump tenders (or stations, if you want to permanently emplace them) use upkeep already, and give some planning on what size of ships you are planning on building. If you have them large enough for your largest freighters, your logistics are identical for path finding. It is mechanically more elegant, and makes enormous jump drives useful, if you really want to move that 500kt station to another system.
The only rule change we would need is some jump drive tender that can handle both your largest freighters and your warships without getting prohibitively expensive, so you don't need two tenders/stations at each WP.
 

Offline Jovus

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • J
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2018, 06:22:21 PM »

I'd flip the argument on its head. Since civilian ships and the pathfinder can use jump tenders now, why do we still need jump gates?

Sure, that's another way to go, especially since the changes to the strategic situation have already been made in allowing civilian traffic to use 'mobile jump gates'. I'd be fine with that, too. Then, when you run across precursor jump gates, they're truly special.
 

Offline the obelisk

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • t
  • Posts: 52
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Jump Gate Construction/Destruction (split suggestions)
« Reply #59 on: May 22, 2018, 07:24:22 PM »
That would certainly be much neater than a dedicated jump point constructor ship. Also with a special component you can customize your jump gate to your needs, the maximum ship size your gates are laid out for, should the stations be able to move under own power, do they need PD systems, are they equipped with maintenance facilities...
When I said specialized component, I meant one that results in the station functioning exactly as jump gates do now, ie no size or engine type restrictions, and it doesn't travel when something else makes a jump.  Thinking about it, though, it would be odd to treat the jump gate as a station you own, in terms of considering how NPRs will interact with it, but it would also be kind of weird to build a station that exists as some kind of neutral entity.

I'd flip the argument on its head. Since civilian ships and the pathfinder can use jump tenders now, why do we still need jump gates? Jump tenders (or stations, if you want to permanently emplace them) use upkeep already, and give some planning on what size of ships you are planning on building. If you have them large enough for your largest freighters, your logistics are identical for path finding. It is mechanically more elegant, and makes enormous jump drives useful, if you really want to move that 500kt station to another system.
Gates are not jump tenders.  They don't work the same way.  If you need more gates, you build them with a construction ship.  If you need more tenders, you build them with shipyards.  Even if without considering the fact that gates ignore size and engine type, and don't make the jump themselves, the difference in how you acquire the two things is incredibly significant.

This difference, by the way, is a reason why, regardless of how the jump gate/jump point thing is done, I'd like to see us being able to use ships to construct stations in space, given that stations look like they'll be quite a bit more important in C#.  Should be fine to call them construction ships no matter how the jump point thing plays out, because if Steve does just rename jump gates to stabilized jump points, I imagine that what we currently call construction ships will be renamed as well, since they wouldn't be building anything.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52