Author Topic: Explaining Aurora  (Read 1766 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Explaining Aurora
« on: May 06, 2011, 04:42:38 PM »
Currently, I am trying to start a game of Aurora over a play-by-post forum where the players form a Senate that votes on matters of strategic importance to guide gameplay. 

Since the players I am drawing on are all friends of mine or my brother's, they are not familiar with Aurora at all.  Hence I find myself having to do a lot of explaining about the mechanics of Aurora in case they wish to see the detail. 
Crunching information is not a problem for them.  Most of them are able to read through entire roleplaying rulebooks and pick out semi-optimal choices in a few hours or less.  One of them is a known good player of many RTS and strategy games and should be fantastic for military doctrine. 

So far I have written down some rules in a (I hope) easy to read conversational style, without giving too many numbers or formulae they won't need to know the specifics of. 
This is intended to give an overview of what makes Aurora tick and enable them to make informed strategic decisions.  It obviously does not explain how to play the game since I will be handling the interface that they find a barrier to entry. 

http://rpol.net/display.cgi?gi=46368&ti=2&date=1304717557

Any errors you can spot are very welcome.  I want to know about them as soon as possible before it crops up. 
Any additional explanations you feel are necessary or clarifications about certain portions of descriptions are also good. 

Unfortunately, I would like to restrict players of the game to my friends.  At least at first, until I feel confident enough to handle a larger number of players. 

Also, feel free to use any material you wish to. 
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 04:46:27 PM by jseah »
 

Offline Thiosk

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 784
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2011, 05:11:51 PM »
I think its great that the other players will have only a rudimentary understanding of the game mechanics.  Gives each of them their own agendas that they seek to worry about, to the detriment of other agendas.  As I said in the related thread, thats probably the coolest part of public games like this.  Otherwise, we'd just be watching the professionals play the min/max game.

 

Offline Ziusudra

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Z
  • Posts: 210
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2011, 06:00:07 PM »
I would mention that Orbital Habitats are built by construction factories rather than shipyards.

In the population section when explaining worker requirements maybe add that if there aren't enough workers all installations run at reduced rates.

Maybe add a section explaining causes and results of unrest.
 

Offline Dragon

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • D
  • Posts: 7
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2011, 06:25:06 PM »
That was helpful to me and I am not even playing in your game.   :P

For example, when I was reading through all the tech in the game, I couldn't figure out the function of the hyperdrive.   Now I know.
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2011, 06:37:33 PM »
Ziusudra:
Done.  Thanks for that. 

Dragon:
No problem, glad it helped. 

I don't have any intention to turning it into a complete account of all of Aurora though, so there will be things to miss.  Especially little fringe things like tractor beam chaining (disallowed by me in this campaign) and important differences of various missile defence settings are not going to be handled. 

Also, I wrote this for a Transnewtonian start.  So alot of the individual research items that need to be done with a Conventional start are never mentioned at all. 

I should probably add in the jump drive (and cloaking) efficiency description as well though. 
 

Offline Ziusudra

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Z
  • Posts: 210
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2011, 06:52:01 PM »
Lagrange points are 1/6 of the orbit behind the planet.
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2011, 07:06:43 PM »
Oh... darn...

This will need some revising. 

I didn't know ships did not need a jumpdrive to make a Langrange Point jump... whut. 
 

Offline Ziusudra

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Z
  • Posts: 210
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2011, 07:46:41 PM »
This is really good, BTW.

A couple minor things in message 4:

In Ships CWIS should be CIWS.

"Space Stations require military jumpdrives" or a jumpgate
 

Offline Thiosk

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 784
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2011, 09:15:04 PM »
I didn't know ships did not need a jumpdrive to make a Langrange Point jump... whut. 

...huh.

Me either.
 

Offline Zed 6

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Z
  • Posts: 114
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2011, 06:08:44 AM »
Very nice write up.

I didn't know about CIWS on commercial ships. Always something new to learn and remember. Actually I keep notes.

A note on civilian mines in message 5:

"Civilian Mining Complexes have a mining output equivalent to 10 automated mines. The mineral output from these complexes can be purchased for 250 wealth per year for each complex. Complexes that send their output to the civilian sector will yield 125 wealth per annum per complex in taxation."

Economics page (F2) Civilian/Ind Status tab. At bottom are 2 checkboxes and one can be chosen for player to get minerals and pay 250 a year or let the minerals go to the civilian sector and get 125 per year which is the default setting. If you choose to purchase the output and get the minerals, then the mass driver box is active on the Mining/Maintenance tab and a destination should be chosen as it is "None". Civilians provide the mass driver.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2011, 06:16:04 AM by Zed 6 »
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2011, 06:33:06 AM »
Thanks for the corrections.  They have been included. 

I'm about halfway through the ship design and combat post, which should be of aid in forming fleet doctrines. 

This one is problematic. 
On one hand, I don't want to miss vital information.  On the other hand, I don't want to mention too much about how a fleet can be organized to avoid colouring any strategic analysis. 

The particular problem I have is the section concerning the cost of missiles.  The lines about how missiles are good tactically but bad strategically is something fundamental to the design of weapon balance.  And yet, they are not inherent to the system, coming about as a result of how the system works rather than being built in. 

Thoughts?  Should I keep the advice or leave out the analysis of missiles?
 

Offline Brian

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1213
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2011, 06:45:31 AM »
Maybe say something along the lines of "Every system in this game is ballenced against other systems.  For weapons it is not just the relative weapon capabilities, but also the economic costs of using them".  This gives them a hint and if they are smart they will look at the cost over time, and how long it takes to make a decent number of missiles.  In the mean time it will also make them look at the different beam weapons and decide if they want to trade the lasers versitility for the carronades cheap cost and damage output at short range, ect.

Brian
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2011, 07:46:24 AM »
Thanks. 

Can someone check my description of particle beams?  I've heard them described that way before but looking at the research project for them seems to indicate that they're pretty useless overall. 

Being that lasers outrange them, and at short range lasers outdamage them. 
They also suck alot of energy. 
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2011, 09:21:11 AM »
By the way, does anyone happen to know how much wealth research costs?
 

Offline sloanjh

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2703
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Explaining Aurora
« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2011, 09:57:54 AM »
By the way, does anyone happen to know how much wealth research costs?

Everything thing in the game that I'm aware of costs one point of whatever for one point of whatever.  For example, an 1100 Build Point ship will cost 1100 minerals and 1100 wealth.  So research costs 1 wealth point per research point.

There might be exceptions, and the specific example above might be wrong, but that's how it's supposed to work based on the underlying principle.

John
 

 

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