General Category > Off Topic
Physics of Space Battles
x4000:
--- Quote from: zebramatt on December 18, 2009, 02:13:42 PM ---Have y'all played Osmos?
--- End quote ---
I have not, but it's on my list to check out when I have some time. :)
zebramatt:
--- Quote from: x4000 on December 18, 2009, 02:26:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: zebramatt on December 18, 2009, 02:13:42 PM ---Have y'all played Osmos?
--- End quote ---
I have not, but it's on my list to check out when I have some time. :)
--- End quote ---
A space rts game with orbits could definitely be a lot of fun... but maybe on a slightly smaller scale than AI War!
eRe4s3r:
No, No no no no no no
I tell you why its not fun, because its not .... fun.
There was a game that tried this, exactly 1, and that game demonstrated amazingly why orbits in - faster than real-time speed do not work.
1) Heres an idea - your shipyards are in stationary orbit
2) Around a moon A
3) Which orbits a gas giant with 60 moons
4) Which orbits a sun
Now imagine you want to get from planet 51 in the outer solar system to the moon around a gas giant which is the 5th planet to repair your damaged ships, how will you calculate the movement path? Do you go straight at the target (trailing the moon for 600 months?) will go calculate the trajectories of ALL entities involved (sun/gasgiant/moon/other moons!) Hoping your real-time calculations have enough increments to actually land even remotely near the moon (which is infinitely smaller than a gas giant or a sun) ?
What happens when enemies go to moon B and these moons only come close to each other once ever 631 years - how would you visualize that? Do you realize how much calculations are required to make a planet move on a elliptic shape faster than real-time without it appearing to be jerky, stuttering or jittery?
There is simply no way a RTS game simulating Space fully can be fun. Trajectories of super large masses are something humans are terrible at seeing and understanding without a super computer. Even 1 pixel difference on your screen could mean missing an enemy fleet by 600k km (and in turn, never meeting it at all), with every move of the enemy, you have to re-adjust YOUR movement or actually code a predictive algorithm for intercept (which would easily be fooled by simply re-adjusting the trajectory).
Osmos is the prime example - that game is based on luck, not on skill. Because even with a display you can not predict where you are going to end up once you gain mass by consumption.
I think Total War is the way to go for RTS - meta game on a turn based map with actual tactical situations in real-time - And unlike Total War these things could work fine in space settings... just don't look at Armada 2526 on how to do it.
Echo35:
--- Quote from: eRe4s3r on December 18, 2009, 03:33:04 PM ---There is simply no way a RTS game simulating Space fully can be fun. Trajectories of super large masses are something humans are terrible at seeing and understanding without a super computer. Even 1 pixel difference on your screen could mean missing an enemy fleet by 600k km (and in turn, never meeting it at all), with every move of the enemy, you have to re-adjust YOUR movement or actually code a predictive algorithm for intercept (which would easily be fooled by simply re-adjusting the trajectory).
Osmos is the prime example - that game is based on luck, not on skill. Because even with a display you can not predict where you are going to end up once you gain mass by consumption.
--- End quote ---
I know I've mentioned it a dozen times before, but http://www.geekdo.com/boardgame/6767/attack-vector-tactical. Granted, its tactical, individual ship level rather than a full on RTS, but you control thrust direction and burn (Even gaining some displacement when you lose mass from burned fuel) weapon trajectories (No pew pew lasers here. Real coilgun slugs and the like, though there are heat lasers simply for pounding down armor plating), heat management (Where are you going to radiate all that heat in space?), and even crew grades and quality. Definitely a huge learning curve, but surprisingly fun and despite having no real world model to compare it too, shockingly realistic.
eRe4s3r:
Realistic in the abstracted game world it models ;) I am not sure where the notion comes that its a problem to manage heat in space, if you switch of your heater you are going to freeze within seconds, worse - you are going to see the most awesome display of ice formation on your inside hull.
If you had really excess heath a simple heat exchanger (like liquid cpu cooling) would do the trick - heat is energy and energy can dissipate in a vacuum. The only situation where heat is a problem is if you would go stealth, IE. 0 Emission (and heat is a powerful emission that is extremely easy to spot in space..) Space is where the submarines of the future will reign supreme.. And it wouldn't even need a cloaking device, just paint your spaceship black - in space its unlikely you will ever get within "eye" distance before being obliterated...
And again we are at the ultimate topic - Lets make a Total war game in space !
How hard can it be? Hell i am a 3d-artist and i am sure we can scrounge some awesome texture and sound artists up in no time. It could be the next big thing, out selling Total War easily. Most importantly, we could do it better than Armada 2526 - easily .. brr, i wish i had never bought that.. ^^ You know .. what aggravates me really is seeing that game before me, so many things that are just, plain HORRIBLY ugly and idiotic.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version