Gut reaction

Unpossible and unprofitable. Get started on Hi Octane Murderfuck 2009 instead (XBox / PS3 option)   1 vote - 9 %
So trivial that it doesn't even warrant an answer. (Lunix option)   2 votes - 18 %
What's a game? (Mac option)   2 votes - 18 %
Make the starships giant robot caterpillars armed with feather dusters. (Wii option)   1 vote - 9 %
Nice try, but there's no way that you're a producer of anything except bile. (Veteran Husi option)   3 votes - 27 %
You're MUCH nicer to the nerds on other sites than to the nerds on this site. (Stating the obvious opion)   2 votes - 18 %
 
11 Total Votes
You re-enter with a starter ship by georgeha (4.00 / 4) #1 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:58:55 AM EST
and if you shot the right asteroid, you get a power-up.


Leave your drug paraphenalia jargon out of it by Rogerborg (4.00 / 2) #7 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:13:10 AM EST
This is a family site.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
BUTTON MASHING! by duxup (4.00 / 3) #2 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:24:33 AM EST
n/t
____
Leave your gay propaganda out of it by Rogerborg (4.00 / 2) #8 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:13:41 AM EST
This is a family site.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
The player stays constant? by blixco (4.00 / 1) #3 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:33:41 AM EST
ie his UID isn't destroyed along with his cargo, ego, and fingers? Are the tactical combat arenas set up as arenas or physical servers?

Seems pretty easy, from a design-only-fuck-the-coder standpoint, in that you assign mister player a combat UID of some value on entry into the game if no combat UID exists. If a combat UID exists, he is assumed to have been previously destroyed in said combat arena unless the UID is listed in table V (for Victorious). Thus he can't go back to the combat arena id'd by his account, but he can go to any other, racking up entries in the V list to gain experience points and nerdlinger status.

Right?  I mean, I don't know how to program is what I mean.
---------------------------------
"You bring the weasel, I'll bring the whiskey." - kellnerin

hey I can't program for shit either! by MillMan (4.00 / 1) #12 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 11:54:33 AM EST
But I was thinking approximately the same thing - define an "event horizon" for every battle, and don't allow reentry (ship or weapon fire) until the cool down timer is done.

When I'm imprisoned as an enemy combatant, will you blog about it?

[ Parent ]
Can you think of any justification for that? by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #17 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:12:34 PM EST
I mean, leaving aside the conceit that shells fly in arcs in space, how do you tell a player that they can enter the Ceta Alpha or Ophiucus systems, but not the Talos system, for no better reason than they just got pwned by the bumpy-heads there, and it would be a dreadful blow to their ego to revisit the scene of their losage?

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
reincarnation wasn't my idea by MillMan (4.00 / 1) #18 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:17:16 PM EST
you get to deal with the metaphysics.

When I'm imprisoned as an enemy combatant, will you blog about it?

[ Parent ]
IAWPeterFHamilton by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #20 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:45:23 PM EST
What every Future Girl really wants for her sweet 16 is a full set of clones backed up and ready to decant.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
Don't forget the built-in wifi! by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 1) #33 Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 07:25:21 AM EST
In the future, you will not be able to hide from the Internet.

--
Has anybody seen my clue? I know I had it when I came in here.
[ Parent ]
Even better, the emonet by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #34 Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 06:55:26 AM EST
In the Future, Goths will only be happy when everyone knows the pain in their souls.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
Well, by blixco (2.00 / 0) #23 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 04:29:12 PM EST
if they get pwned (I cannot believe I just typed that) by the zorlocks in sector 13, they obviously don't have the XP to, ya know, survive that sector. So if they try to enter any sector with the zorlocks, they get denied with a nice message asking them to learn how to fly before they crawl.  Or however that works in space.

Shit, that gets complicated.  Because I assume that the zones are just space, maybe with some objects that aren't other ships. But mainly space. So you can't really say, hey, you lost in zone 17 so you can't go there when zone 17 is no different from zone 56.  It's the enemy what makes the deny rule.

So, some math that says: this ship / fleet / race / whatever kicked my ass. I now have to kick the asses of other races / ships / fleets / pimply 13 year olds that they have beaten, so that I can work my way up to them.
---------------------------------
"You bring the weasel, I'll bring the whiskey." - kellnerin

[ Parent ]
We'll call that Plan B by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #24 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:59:01 PM EST
There game will be players-vs-player with few fleets (2 to 4 depending on how many resources I can swipe before being sued), so space-cock-blocking on a per fleet basis will likely be too gross a solution.  Those were vital but secret requirements.

Hey, I think I may be ready for a career in management, or even sales.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]
No design yet for combat zone or zones by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #16 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:59:51 PM EST
I should reveal that I have a pre-disposition towards discrete zoned areas, but there's some competition from the contiguous world camp.

Pragmatically, the zones will be logical spaces in a single server/process, but that shouldn't influence the requirements.

When entering a discrete zone, how would you picture the placement of a ship working?  Given that combat may be ongoing at a variety of ranges within that zone, I mean, where do you put newly arriving ships?

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]
I think it would be by blixco (2.00 / 0) #22 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 04:24:30 PM EST
OK if you either had a safety island (randomly placed every X minutes) where ships would spawn and then be given some zone / corridor / time limit to sprint into location, or just have them randomly placed X sectors outside of other ships.

The only other way to do it is to have them come in from a known jumping off point, which would probably invite camping.
---------------------------------
"You bring the weasel, I'll bring the whiskey." - kellnerin

[ Parent ]
They'd all work by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #25 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:00:56 PM EST
I was pondering the effects of having them jump in on near to a friendly ship (possibly restricted to those of equal or larger size) in order to reduce the time wasted in transit.

But that's another of those supar sekrit requirements.  I've got them coming out of my bumpy-headed wazoo.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]
OK by herbert (4.00 / 2) #4 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:46:14 AM EST
Let's say that when you die you stay dead for 10 seconds before you appear again.

When you appear you have to get put at least 180-N seconds away from a tactical combat you've been in N seconds ago.

There can be at most 180/10 = 18 previous combats you were in during the last 180 seconds, so make the space big enough to fit 18 circles each of 180 seconds radius and that will be enough.

Ideally the point is chosen such that it is outside the radius of previous recent combats but within 60s of a different existing combat.  If there isn't a new combat you have to create some robots and make them have a combat that the player can join in.

OR, you don't create robots specially, you just have enough robot combats going on all the time over a big enough area that there will always be one that the player can be put near to.

You don't have to determine when a combat is happening really, you can just track approximately where the player has been for the last 180 seconds and appear him somewhere different.

Also, will there be a Brace for Impact button you can press to Brace For Impact and avoid taking so much damage?  This would also require a sound effect of someone shouting the order.

You think in such three-dimensional terms by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #14 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:48:45 PM EST
Fair enough, that satisfies the requirements, but it has a some issues:
  1. It presents a contiguous combat zone with transit times.  Time in transit is generally dead time.
  2. If the respawn point is chosen randomly, then it removes most strategic options.  Players will tend to join the combat that's nearest, rather than the one that they could be most useful in.
  3. It doesn't just preclude a player from rejoining the combat at their point of defeat within that time, but also every combat on the far side of it.
It's a usable first cut, but I'm sure you can do better, with enough taunting.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
Strategy was not in the requirements specification by herbert (4.00 / 1) #29 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:54:48 AM EST
Well, you did say "strategic territory" in your first paragraph but I didn't read that bit.

Can you have territory at all if bits of space aren't somehow different distances apart?  I suppose they can cost different amounts to get to while taking the same time for the player.

So then: using your warp super-hyper-zoomy drive uses up a lot of energy.  You get respawned far enough away from places you've been before that you can only get back there in a crippled state, or by using your impulse slow-and-boring drive which will take three minutes.

Possibly this only moves the problem, because you have to make sure the player has enough energy to go places fast some of the time, but stop them getting too much too quickly when they respawn.  Maybe they can't get a lot at a time from any single source, or something.

[ Parent ]
That all sounds very complicated by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #30 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:58:33 AM EST
On the other hand, you've inspired me to install San Andreas and go for another 100% completion, so that's all good.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
Copy and learn from biology, by komet (4.00 / 2) #5 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:06:02 AM EST
where this is known as a "refractory period".

--
<ni> komet: You are functionally illiterate as regards trashy erotica.
The correct answer by joh3n (4.00 / 2) #6 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:08:12 AM EST
is that you'll be sued by the makers of Battlestar Galactica before you could ever implement a solution.

----
I just ate about 7 pounds of meat
-theantix

Any similarities, living or dead, and so on by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #9 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:15:59 AM EST
Give me a nice plan shot of a dildo, and I'll have that texture replaced in short order.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
I'd just like to say by ad hoc (4.00 / 3) #10 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:24:57 AM EST
I don't know how to react to that by Rogerborg (4.00 / 4) #21 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:51:52 PM EST
Hang on a second...

Give a steely what?  A steely what?

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]
Screw the player. by ks1178 (4.00 / 2) #11 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:36:58 AM EST
with a fresh and fully functional starship

When a player's ship is respawned, tehy don't have fully powered shields/hull/weapons whatever.

It takes 180 seconds to fully recharge/repair those.

Now you can make it so they have a fighting chance, and not be one shotted immediatley.

Or you can set it up that they can be one shotted immediatley if you hate the players.


Nice thinking. Pondering on't. by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #13 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:25:34 PM EST
3 minutes to throw the whores out the airlocks when it leaves port sounds about right.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
Make the repairs part of the game play by Alan Crowe (2.00 / 0) #28 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:30:50 AM EST
You need to glue things back together, for example, route a new feed from the reactor to the plasma cannon. But it takes 10 seconds to weld one end of the feed to the reactor, stop too soon and it breaks and you have to start over. And another 10 seconds to weld the feed to the plasma cannon. Hang on, incoming missiles, I'll connect to the starboard shield generator instead and hope I can power it up in time. I shouldn't have rushed back, but stayed out of the game until I done my repairs...

You can make the repairs arbitary logic puzzles different every time. Maybe you get back into the fray quite soon and able to fight, but with easy puzzles that must be solved correctly (which polarity for the warp core containment). Make a mistake under time pressure/enemy action and the ship blows up.

[ Parent ]
Hasn't this already been by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #15 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:56:12 PM EST
done?

In your typical great-demo-but-unfit-for-purpose hippie style?

Perhaps, instead of wasting 2 years of your life in creating the next NEW THING, it would be more prudent to spend that time finishing something?


Meh, star-FIGHTERS by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #19 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:24:59 PM EST
Personally, I don't think that "3D" thing will catch on.  2D is where all the hotshot designers are partying just now.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
I'll take a broad shot by dark nowhere (4.00 / 1) #26 Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:17:59 PM EST
after being taken out:
  • 'relevant things' are reset to zero
  • 'relevant things' are reset to a specific base level (possibly zero) after a predetermined amount of time (<=60s, possibly zero)
  • then restore linearly or geometrically, such that after total 180 seconds (or, optionally more), everything is at full, until the player 'respawns'
after respawning, restoration is either:
  • no longer automatic -- handled directly in game via normal (pre-death) means OR:
  • restored at a (probably much) slower rate OR:
  • generally, in-combat restoration can be performed by some player-selected tradeoff, such as not firing, engaging, diverting resources, etc (technically falls under the first option)
Of course, 'relevant things' is to be taken as a combination. If 'respawning' is instantaneous, then restoration should be focussed around an accepted minimum effective level at 60s, and falling off in restorative efficiency from there.

This is probably to be too general to really be useful, but it might be a good way to focus slightly before getting into specifics.

Chill out, snowflake.

You are too cunning to be understood by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #27 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:52:14 AM EST
In broad terms, are you suggesting letting respawning players jump straight back into the same combat, but in a crippled ship?

If so, OK, fair enough, it satisfies both requirements.  I had toyed with the idea that all new/respawned ships should start off effectively crippled, but has dismissed is as an annoyance.  However, it does have an inherent fairness to it; why should destroying an enemy ship here simply result in a fully repaired version of it appearing over there?

Ponder, ponder.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]
Tricky balance by dark nowhere (4.00 / 1) #32 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:58:22 PM EST
I tend to look at things holistically (hence the previous post). This really doesn't simplify anything, rather it makes the simplest question into a travelling salesman problem.

You want the penalty for early reappearance to be a ship in a less-than-par state. Par is better than the state of a ship before it has made its last kill, but worse than 100%. How much better exactly is a specific question, involving how combat typically goes; do you survive by a hair or by a mile?

'Crippled', to me, says 'well under par' maybe to the point where the ship should be more concerned with protecting itself than anything else. I think you want to avoid that (barring leaving it as an option to separate good players from bad) so you could establish a level just below par that is still effective, or something at or just above par using a time delay to offset the freshness of the ship.

Getting above par should likely be more costly in time than reaching it.

Chill out, snowflake.

[ Parent ]
Why? by anonimouse (4.00 / 1) #31 Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:23:44 AM EST
Do you feel the need to have a player get into tactical combat so fast?

The easy way is to have a series of separate zones or sectors, and a dead player respawns at a "home" port in a new sector.

Getting killed or even damaged should carry a penalty; perhaps by using the principle of repairs or purchases. You perhaps want the mechanism of combat to encourage players to try and run away once it appears their shields/ armour is penetrated and real hardware starts to be damaged.

You've mentioned stealth and wanting to banninate it, but if you are going for naval battles in space you have to have the equivalent of the submarine, which relies on stealth for success. Smaller ships have to have some advantages they can use, such as being hard to detect, perhaps faster etc. I suggest that a starship submarine would combine something like a weapon capable of heavy damage but with a slow reload time, and it's stealth ability would cost it speed.


Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
Because time out of combat is dead time by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #35 Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:07:47 AM EST
The penalties for defeat will be:
  1. Loss of the resources used to build the ship, meaning that you may have to re-spawn in a space-Fiat.
  2. Peer punishment, through a player awarded merit/demerit system.
  3. Not being able to rejoin the same tactical combat, making it more likely that combat (and the strategic resources being fought over) will be lost.
However, stopping noobs from jumping back in somewhere else as soon as they get ganked - which will happen a lot - is not the best way to retain them.

Sensors, signature and scouting will be critical, but not cloaked (submarine) units.  They're dull, annoying and German.

Smaller ships will be slightly (but only very slightly) harder to spot, but their chief advantages will be manoeuvrability, peak (but not sustained) speed, and relative inconsequence as targets.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.

[ Parent ]