Home » Stars! Clones, Extensions, Modding » FreeStars » The Galaxy (long)
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Tue, 06 April 2004 05:55   |
|
|
|
Not going to happen in my client - none of this 'stars moving around' stuff. Stars take eons to move anywhere appreciable in relation to any other star - I doub't that most races live that long.
On the other hand, I can add it and, if a game is still running after 1 million years worth of turns, the stars will have perceptibly changed locations by a light year or so. 
Ptolemy
[Updated on: Tue, 06 April 2004 05:56]
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Wed, 07 April 2004 22:01 |
|
|
|
It is a game. Lots of things aren't exactly true, take space combat for example.
If it makes the game more interesting, remapping a fraction of a ly each turn might be easy to do and worth it. (Since hosts sometimes remap HW locations it probably is possible to make a little addon to existing stars that does so).
It is possible to have a solar system that contains 3+ stars, many planets and many moons bigger than a planet like earth, and many other rocks floating. Temp, gravity, radiation in such a solar system may be based on position, etc rather than random. (A low grav race would like asteroids)
Or in the centre of a galaxy you might end up with a black hole surrounded by densely packed stars where their relative movements would be noticable in a year.
An interesting example of a real time solar system simulator was found in a game called Frontier Elite and Frontier First Encounters (can get for free now). Way beyond the needs of freestars, but an example of what 'true' physics might be like.
[Updated on: Wed, 07 April 2004 22:13] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Thu, 08 April 2004 00:16 |
|
|
|
Guys - in the first version of Freestars we will not get this complicated. Please keep in mind that those of us writing the game are doing so for free. If we ever want to get the game out to be played we aren't going to do things that require extra months of coding.
All these ideas are interesting but simply not 'doable' in a reasonable timeframe with all the 'normal stuff that we still need to get done.
Ptolemy
[Updated on: Thu, 08 April 2004 00:17]
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Thu, 20 May 2004 22:19 |
|
 edorfaus |
 | Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 8
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
Hm, I just had an idea regarding the idea in the first post here; one that would make things practically like he wanted(except the in-and-out-of-system delay), and which would require no host changes. It would be entirely a client and universe remapping thing.
Basically, the idea is that we generate a universe where planets tend to be in clumps of several, with no more than 1ly distance between them within clumps; and then the client can detect these blocks and display them as one "star" with several "planets", but still using their real positions for distance calculations, orders and similar. The fact that the planets wouldn't truly be at the same location could be said to simulate that it might take different amounts of time to get into different orbits, or something like that.
This would let the game still behave as stars! would, if you gave it a remapped universe, while still letting the player have systems. :)
Basically, what I'm trying to do, is make it a client issue. If the player doesn't want systems, he can still play in the same game, just will have to do high zooms a lot... ;P
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Fri, 21 May 2004 07:47 |
|
|
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 21 May 2004 06:28 |
I never made the connection that each 'year' in Stars was equivalent to an earth year.
20% population growth in one year is a bit much to ask. I think It'd be more appropiate to relate 1 game year to about 10 real years. So that means it'll only take 129.87012987012987012987012987013 years for the star to move 1 light year. Much better.... 
|
Think outside the simple homo sapien sexual reproduction box...
Cloning, non-human reproduction strategies (i.e. look at aphids sometime...), or use of technology that would allow higher rates.
Cherryh's "Union-Company" series books (_Downbelow Station_ and such) posits the Union using cloning/birth tanks and programmed instruction ("tape") to generate population for settling the area they are in.
[Aside: From a game point of view "year" is simply the title given to the period of game-time that allows you to carry out certain activities (one iteration of the processing loop). "Population" is simply the abstract unit for running facilities and claiming planets. We're the ones trying to connect it to our humancentric world view and thus press further limitations on it.]
- Kurt
[Mod edit: fixed quote]
[Updated on: Tue, 08 February 2005 06:21] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Fri, 21 May 2004 11:44 |
|
| edorfaus |
| Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 8
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
| LEit wrote on Fri, 21 May 2004 09:40 |
Orca already suggested that idea, interesting addition to say that the client could display them as one 'system'.
|
Yea, I seem to remember such being suggested before, I just wanted to add the bit about client display; included that to make sure people realized I meant such a combination. As I mentioned, trying to make it into a client issue. :)
Another idea; we might want to keep the universe generator separate from the game host, that way people can more easily pick which one to use, and make ones themselves - without having to modify freestars itself.
Although I suppose it would be a good idea to at least have a simple universe generator built-in... Well, ok, let's just make sure it can use externally-generated universes in a simple way?
I suppose there might be issues with homeworlds and similar... hm, wait. the .xy only contains positions, names and uni-size, right? no minconcs or similar... as that should only be knowable after scanning... hm. I guess we'll need two files from such a generator, the .xy and one defining concs and such, and where homeworlds etc are... that is kept only at the host.
Hm, maybe I should have looked at how this is done at the moment before starting rambling with new ideas like this...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Fri, 21 May 2004 18:35 |
|
| edorfaus |
| Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 8
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
Hm, one thing that could help a little bit with things like that, and that might be nice to have anyway, is to have a zoom key.
Basically, a key(e.g. ctrl) that while pressed, makes the planet view zoom in on the area under the mouse, to e.g. 400%, and when released, zooms out to the previous view.
Maybe put the zoomed-in view in a (smaller) window on top of the other view, moving with the mouse or something.
I guess this is sortof similar to the system idea I proposed, except it would be much more general, and useful in more places, not just with planets - for instance if there are ships/minefields/whatever with 1ly distance, and you want to go to a specific one of them, you wouldn't have to change the zoom of the main view, just zoom in temporarily with the zoom key.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Sat, 22 May 2004 01:57 |
|
| edorfaus |
| Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 8
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
Well, yes, I can see what you're getting at. It wouldn't much help with that. Would need some changes in the GUI for that to work better in any case; one option might be to have a mode where red planets, even majorly red ones, are still only signified by a single pixel - or at least put at the back of the display order so the green ones come out on top. The spreadsheet method might be better anyway, assuming you have more accurate value numbers there than can easily be distinguished in the GUI.
I wasn't as much thinking of the process of deciding which planet to go to though, as managing to actually hit that planet. For instance if you're going to a group with a scout, to figure out the planets, and there are several such groups of planets a bit apart, it might be useful. Or maybe not. I guess I wouldn't really know, not having played all that much. It just struck me as something that could be nice to have, but I suppose it might end up as a feature never used... *shrug*
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Sat, 22 May 2004 02:24 |
|
|
|
Or, add greater levels of zoom so that there's more than one pixel per lightlear in the grid. Useful for parking sweepers just outside of orbit, for one.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Sun, 23 May 2004 18:13 |
|
|
|
| overworked wrote on Fri, 21 May 2004 21:47 |
| Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 21 May 2004 06:28 |
20% population growth in one year is a bit much to ask.
|
Think outside the simple homo sapien sexual reproduction box...
Cloning, non-human reproduction strategies (i.e. look at aphids sometime...), or use of technology that would allow higher rates.
|
I think the resource model of Stars! forbids the use of technology to enhance population growth. If cloning etc. was an available technique, then it should be possible to directly exchange resources and minerals for population.
I accept your point with the apids etc., however I'm relucant to let it into my model because if we go down that route then we preclude the option of having a competitive human race (growth wise, they simply couldn't keep up without the use of technological aids, which has already been precluded by the game model.)
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Galaxy (long) |
Sun, 23 May 2004 20:20 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I accept your point with the apids etc., however I'm relucant to let it into my model because if we go down that route then we preclude the option of having a competitive human race (growth wise, they simply couldn't keep up without the use of technological aids, which has already been precluded by the game model.)
|
It is [ahem] probably possible for humans to reproduce at 20% growth rate without cloning. Fertillity drugs can increase the chances of twins, triplets. Probably possible through drugs and other methods to get mostly female children. The average starting age for females to get pregnant could probably be lowered.
I think such a road goes down closer to a horror/SF type future than one most of us would want to be in. 10% growth is a little more managable.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri May 03 21:02:54 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
OK - I stand corrected. It therefore takes 1298.7012987012987012987012987013 years for the star to move 1 light year. 
