|
Post by teeth on Jan 20, 2017 15:50:25 GMT
The problem with aliens is that none of their technology can be accurately calculated.
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 20, 2017 17:16:13 GMT
Post by David367th on Jan 20, 2017 17:16:13 GMT
Only if we can mod multiplayer... If it's about CoaDE 2, I would like to see a full-scale interstellar warfare (NOT with aliens!), with more black boxed, but plausible techs such as powerful NTRs, fusion drives or antimatter drives. Possible multiplayer features would mainly be a duel, with ships spawning in random relative velocity around random objects. Check your internet connection before performing any actions, and spamming objects can be a weapon of BSOD. Antimatter drives are plausible?
|
|
hast5250
New Member
Location: Nuking you from orbit.
Posts: 26
|
Post by hast5250 on Jan 20, 2017 17:36:38 GMT
Only if we can mod multiplayer... If it's about CoaDE 2, I would like to see a full-scale interstellar warfare (NOT with aliens!), with more black boxed, but plausible techs such as powerful NTRs, fusion drives or antimatter drives. Possible multiplayer features would mainly be a duel, with ships spawning in random relative velocity around random objects. Check your internet connection before performing any actions, and spamming objects can be a weapon of BSOD. Wait! all is not lost! Kerbal space program wos never intended to be multiplayer, but through modding, it has been made multiplayer!
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 20, 2017 17:42:00 GMT
Post by theholyinquisition on Jan 20, 2017 17:42:00 GMT
Only if we can mod multiplayer... If it's about CoaDE 2, I would like to see a full-scale interstellar warfare (NOT with aliens!), with more black boxed, but plausible techs such as powerful NTRs, fusion drives or antimatter drives. Possible multiplayer features would mainly be a duel, with ships spawning in random relative velocity around random objects. Check your internet connection before performing any actions, and spamming objects can be a weapon of BSOD. Antimatter drives are plausible? The issue with antimatter is that it's not an energy source. It takes energy to make it. The rest is just engineering.
|
|
utilitas
Junior Member
I can do this all day.
Posts: 59
|
Post by utilitas on Jan 21, 2017 12:14:31 GMT
Multiplayer is kind of a sticky think with the variable battle speed complication, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen. I'd say that online multiplayer would add quite a lot of replayability, and the lack thereof actually doomed quite a few potentially good games (I'm bitterly staring at you, Cortex Command), but even if there isn't full scale online multiplayer, I don't see the real issue with something like fleet on fleet duels, always in the combat screen and possibly without pausing. The time scale thing could be solved quite neatly by either making it practically turn-based, with time being advanced only upon all the players declaring themselves "ready" like in a Civilization-style game. They could also agree upon the amount of time to advance, to skip over long phases of boring nothing and get to the meat of things. Wait! all is not lost! Kerbal space program wos never intended to be multiplayer, but through modding, it has been made multiplayer! Last time I checked, the KSP "multiplayer" was basically a glorified screen share, or a shared solar system wherein you cannot really directly affect any other player or their vehicles, but that is partially due to the game being incompatible with the concept of multiplayer and general bad game design completely removing any semblance of competitiveness from the game. Ironically, proper multiplayer would've been easier to implement on KSP due to patched conics and the absence of any N-body physics (unless you mod it) but again, bad game design. CDE is a different matter. CDE is a competitive game by design instead of a glorified pet project taken up by a mexican insurance fraud company, and it is designed around that aspect. The concept of 'encounters' greatly simplifies different player's ships interacting with each other, and it's then just a matter of netcode, basic time limitations and making it work.[ The issue with antimatter is that it's not an energy source. It takes energy to make it. The rest is just engineering. Yes, but like charcoal, it allows a higher range of performance than just normal wood. You can't smelt iron very well just by burning a bunch of wood, but you can with charcoal, even if you have to burn twice as much wood to get it in the first place. That's the entire point of refining fuel. If we just ran on gas straight from the ground, we'd all choke to death and have to extinguish the car block every other day. If we used it as rocketfuel, we would've never arrived at the Moon, or at any other celestial body for that matter. RP-1 gives out more bang for its buck than raw oil, and therefore you can get farther with it, just like antimatter could be used to get a damn lot more bang for a drop of buck, even though you need to build several million tons of specialized particle collider to get it. Fuel density and, by extension, the mass per thrust ratio is the name of the game, and you shouldn't really be playing this game if you don't understand that.
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Jan 21, 2017 15:41:29 GMT
Only if we can mod multiplayer... If it's about CoaDE 2, I would like to see a full-scale interstellar warfare (NOT with aliens!), with more black boxed, but plausible techs such as powerful NTRs, fusion drives or antimatter drives. Possible multiplayer features would mainly be a duel, with ships spawning in random relative velocity around random objects. Check your internet connection before performing any actions, and spamming objects can be a weapon of BSOD. Well I think that antimatter drive is not very doable as it requir tons of equipment to store an atom of antimatter. In addition, I don't think interstellar war is practical because decadess of light lag and travel time make you can't rule beyond your system. But I do want to see the polished designs being released as one single game pack.
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 21, 2017 16:21:51 GMT
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 21, 2017 16:21:51 GMT
Only if we can mod multiplayer... If it's about CoaDE 2, I would like to see a full-scale interstellar warfare (NOT with aliens!), with more black boxed, but plausible techs such as powerful NTRs, fusion drives or antimatter drives. Possible multiplayer features would mainly be a duel, with ships spawning in random relative velocity around random objects. Check your internet connection before performing any actions, and spamming objects can be a weapon of BSOD. Well I think that antimatter drive is not very doable as it requir tons of equipment to store an atom of antimatter. In addition, I don't think interstellar war is practical because decadess of light lag and travel time make you can't rule beyond your system. But I do want to see the polished design being released as one single game pack. Orion's ArmSpace opera meets moderately hard science.
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 21, 2017 21:23:26 GMT
Post by theholyinquisition on Jan 21, 2017 21:23:26 GMT
Well I think that antimatter drive is not very doable as it requir tons of equipment to store an atom of antimatter. In addition, I don't think interstellar war is practical because decadess of light lag and travel time make you can't rule beyond your system. But I do want to see the polished design being released as one single game pack. Orion's ArmSpace opera meets moderately hard science. And a bad case of Writer on Board, of the political variety. Or, if you want to be precise, Author Tract, because the original author is not quiet about how he thinks libertarianism is amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Tom on Jan 22, 2017 1:45:42 GMT
Without multiplayer, I don't think it's possible to work out the doctrine. The AI doesn't know how to use missile buses. It doesn't shut off the guidance on its nuclear missiles and detonate them simultaneously to avoid flares and predetonation. It doesn't set guns that fire guided shells to ignore range. It doesn't set ignore range at 10 seconds out on high-velocity drone intercepts. And as soon as the AI is improved or the gunnery algorithms are fixed, humans will come up with new tactics that it can't keep up with. Figuring out the methodology for teaching the AI how to use certain behaviors however is going to be a vital hurdle to overcome. I would say that creating a system that lets the user personalize ship behavior is as important as the spacecraft and module design systems. Considering the velocities and scales space combat takes place at 'AI controlled behavior with Human oversight' is the most likely control scheme, and modeling it in game raises the realism.
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 22, 2017 10:30:58 GMT
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 22, 2017 10:30:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Tom on Jan 22, 2017 14:45:59 GMT
At the same time, don't discount OA just because of a perceived political bias. I can't say I've noticed a significant libertarian in any of the current material, and they've been around long enough to propose some really neat ideas and consider some interesting issues.
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 22, 2017 15:13:28 GMT
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 22, 2017 15:13:28 GMT
At the same time, don't discount OA just because of a perceived political bias. I can't say I've noticed a significant libertarian in any of the current material, and they've been around long enough to propose some really neat ideas and consider some interesting issues. For the really neat ideas, Orion's Arm solved Mars' lack of magnetosphere since 200X. How? Put a magshield at L1!
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 22, 2017 22:36:48 GMT
At the same time, don't discount OA just because of a perceived political bias. I can't say I've noticed a significant libertarian in any of the current material, and they've been around long enough to propose some really neat ideas and consider some interesting issues. For the really neat ideas, Orion's Arm solved Mars' lack of magnetosphere since 200X. How? Put a magshield at L1!
|
|
|
OOPS
Jan 22, 2017 23:17:39 GMT
Post by theholyinquisition on Jan 22, 2017 23:17:39 GMT
At the same time, don't discount OA just because of a perceived political bias. I can't say I've noticed a significant libertarian in any of the current material, and they've been around long enough to propose some really neat ideas and consider some interesting issues. Ah. I was thinking of the other Orion's Arm: The William Black one. This one seems much less political (and better overall.)
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 22, 2017 23:26:25 GMT
At the same time, don't discount OA just because of a perceived political bias. I can't say I've noticed a significant libertarian in any of the current material, and they've been around long enough to propose some really neat ideas and consider some interesting issues. Ah. I was thinking of the other Orion's Arm: The William Black one. This one seems much less political (and better overall.) I don't feel like I like this one. It's merely politically unrealistic and stuffs. I don't see how Earth would forgot Mars, and currently, the details are just too ambiguous (right now, it seems like Mars has stuck in another dimension without Earth's contact). While waiting for further information, I rate it at 6/10. If one factor fails, it dragged everything else down. In my opinion, Orion's Arm World Building Project has much realistic development (it is created with help from scientists and other co-authors as a multi-author project) and technology, giving it 8/10, from how old-looking their pics (made in 2000) are. A good sci-fi must have many aspects, not just science. With OA promoting libertarianism and transhumanity, I don't see how that's wrong, though. The future's ideal trend will change, and with the society promoting libertarianism, the in-universe encyclopedia articles must also follow these trends.
|
|