Looking ahead

[JensAyton]

I fully respect your right to stick to old hardware, but it’s unreasonable to expect new software, or new major versions of software, to work with old systems. One of the major motivations for developing new software, and new major versions of software, is to take advantage of the capabilities of new hardware.

For the purposes of this argument and this particular case, “new hardware” includes somewhere in the region of 95 % of the hardware that will be used by potential players of Oolite in a couple of years, probably more. Note that if we complete somehow complete Oolite 2.0 with all desired features in a mere year and a half, it will still be the primary version of Oolite for the foreseeable future as that number asymptotically approaches 100 %.

[Zireael]

Speaking of getting rid of 'players-only' options, what will happen to weapon overheating?
a) it will be done for NPCs like for the player
b) it will be gone
c) we'll get Laser Cooling Boosters (and potentially, the NPCs too!)

[Smivs]

This really isn't an issue, because NPCs don't tend to over-use their lasers and therefore they don't overheat. When was the last time you were hit by more than a quick 'stab' of laser from an NPC?
Laser overheating is not a problem for most players and NPCs and does not need a solution. Players who find it a problem need to look at improving their technique, because that is where the 'problem' lies.

[Commander Ragugaki]

Laser overheating is not a problem for most players and NPCs and does not need a solution. Players who find it a problem need to look at improving their technique, because that is where the 'problem' lies.

Exactly - ever run out of ammo and reached for your last clip? Survival is a matter of technique.

[Gimi]

Questions with regards galaxies in Oolite 2.0
Please keep in mind that I'm not arguing either for or against any of the points in these questions, and I don't want to start a debate. I'm quite happy with yes, no, undecided or "not telling yet" answers. I'm just curious.

Is there an ambition to expand upon or change the galaxy structure in Oolite 2.0, such as:
Completely new setup (e.g Frontier or FFE style) or
galaxy jump from any galaxy to any galaxy or
Additional (the fabled galaxy 9 in Elite+) galaxies.

If the intention is the change the galaxy setup, will this also have an impact on the 7ly limit, and will there be possibilities to explore "uncharted" space or create missions involving "secret" locations.

As I said, I'm just curious about the current ambition and I do understand if the questions are somewhat premature.

[JensAyton]

Questions with regards galaxies in Oolite 2.0

Here are my notes on the topic:

Procedural system generation with only 2048 systems seems more trouble than it’s worth, especially while maintaining Elite’s warts. The weird distance calculations cause UX problems and make scripting harder. Some goals for a possible new system:

• Define the default system data explicitly in config files rather than generating it.
• Define system positions in 3D floating-point coordinates on the natural LY scale.
  • The distinction between “internal” and “LY” coordinates in the scripting interface, which in any case is a wart, would thus become irrelevant. Since scripts dealing with coordinate values would need to be updated anyway, it seems reasonable to remove the “internal” forms (and use the names without InLY suffixes for LY measures).
• Jiggle the existing systems around so they still have the exact same connectivity while having approximately the same distances. This could probably be done (offline) with a point-spring physics model, with constraints or 2D springs keeping the systems near their original x, y coordinates while allowing more freedom in z.
• Allow scripts and configuration files to move existing systems around and define new ones. (Scripted modification shouldn’t be hard, and would allow missions where you “discover” new habitable star systems. Someone will probably come up with an excuse for actually moving systems, too…)
• Possibly also allow config files to create new galaxies, and allow scripted galaxy jumps to make out-of-sequence jumps.

A key point here is that we’d retain the systems in the core game, with the same connectivity graph, although precise distances might change slightly.

I haven’t contemplated relaxing the 7LY limit, but I’m not taking it off the table either.

[Griff]

I like that “not-quite-JSON” plist format, looks really neat and easy to understand (disclaimer: Reserves the right to change tune at later date)

I haven’t contemplated relaxing the 7LY limit, but I’m not taking it off the table either.

It would be really great to have a lot of this set in stone stuff opened up for OXZ-ing

[Zireael]

@ Ahruman: brilliant ideas.

[Commander McLane]

I haven’t contemplated relaxing the 7LY limit, but I’m not taking it off the table either.

It would be really great to have a lot of this set in stone stuff opened up for OXZ-ing

On the one hand, yes. As a scripter I like to have as much freedom as possible.

On the other hand, no. As a scripter of missions I don't like the player to have too much freedom. To illustrate my point, take the Longway-mission as an example. It's the clearest example involving the 7LY-rule. The whole mission is about ferrying a passenger from one system to another one which at first sight on the galactic chart may look like being just one jump away. However it turns out to be just above the 7LY-limit, and so you have to go the 'long way around', making several jumps, and encountering some resistance on the way. Obviously with the 7LY-restriction lifted, the whole mission (and therefore the whole OXP) becomes moot.

My own mission-oriented OXPs are also at several points scripted in a way as to require an effort on the player's side, like having to cross a whole galaxy in many jumps. One could even say that 'requiring an effort on the player's side' is basically the definition of 'mission'. Therefore, and actually as a conditio sine qua non, mission-oriented OXPing needs some basic, set-in-stone framework, some obstacles that can only be overcome by the player's effort, not by a script switch (which will usually be visible and available to the player in form of an equipment item).

Of course I am always free to not use the existing freedoms in my personal game, but that's only half the point. As a scripter of missions I want other players to enjoy what I've done, much like (I guess) the creators of ship OXPs want other players to enjoy their work. But in case of ship OXPs the enjoyment only relies on installing the OXP. In case of mission OXPs it also relies on installing them in an environment which doesn't make them moot. That's why I'm in favour of an environment which doesn't offer too many possibilities to make them moot.

There is a fundamental clash between the openness of Oolite and the pre-determinedness of a mission environment where you have to go from A to B to C in this particular order, doing X and Y and Z on the way. I am well aware of this clash. On this basis it could be argued that missions don't really fit into the concept of open gameplay, and possibly should be done away with. In my personal experience, however, missions have enhanced my gameplay in the open Ooniverse (and the openness of the scripting environment has enhanced the possibilities of mission scripting). I hope that other players see it similarly.

Since it existed, Oolite has offered both, the wide open sandbox (both in original gameplay and in customizability) and some restrictions from which challenges for the player can be devised. Almost everything can be customized to the player's wishes (with the potential to make life easier for them), but some things cannot (think laser cooling, or the 7LY-rule) and therefore the player is still required to get some skills. Generally I find Oolite well-balanced in this regard. Making more aspects of the game open for manipulation will change this balance, which will impact especially mission OXPs, because—as I tried to explain above—they tend to rely on a more closed environment. In the debate over the direction Oolite will take in the future I would like this aspect of gameplay taken into consideration as well.

[Killer Wolf]

once again, i find it funny the way people react to various canon issues. mention laser coolers and people sneer saying learn to shoot better etc. Talk about relaxing the 7LY thing and it hardly seems an issue, yet it is - to me - an even more integral part of the E/Oolite game - it defines the trading, in that sometimes great profits are two jumps away so you double the trips/risk of attacks/cost of fuel etc, whereas Like McL say, some of that now becomes moot.
to me, a laser cooler is a more logical addition - poor combateers/beginners/those who like jumping into the thick if a WS barney w/ Thargoids could/would need one - those hawkeyed types amongts you wouldn't fit one and get a great sense of achievement from a successful engagement. it's an optional extra. changing jump values could be written off under a bigger engine size/turbo fitting/whatever, but to me i think it would take away from the gameplay.
that's w/out even getting into the debate about larger jumps should only be possible w/ a fuel tank extension that would decrease cargo space or whatever other option comes to mind.

[Gimi]

It was never my intention to start a discussion around this (should have known better), and if you look at my question you will see that I sort make, a fundamental change to the galaxy system, a prerequisite for changing the 7ly limitation. Relaxing the 7ly rule with the current galaxy setup will, in my view, break the game. If the choice is to remodel/change the Oolite galaxies, I suspect a lot of location based OXP's will need major changes or may even be permanently obsolete. However, since Oolite 2.0 is to be a major overhaul, I think that all options should be on the table.
Personally I find the current 8x256 2D galaxy setup to be the main limitation in the game, and one that my imagination has a hard time to overcome when I play. Making it "3D" will help, making the play area bigger will help more, and implementing unexplored areas, blind jumps to coordinates etc. would make it great.

My 0.02 Credits worth.

[Disembodied]

I think the element of "geography" is important in the game, which would be lost if the 7LY barrier is removed. Even if the galaxies (galaxy? Should we consider abandoning the 8 x 256-star galaxy setup for one big, possibly continuously-procedurally-generated galaxy a la Frontier?) are remodelled, I think it would be a mistake to lose the sense of trade routes and connected/unconnected systems.

[Killer Wolf]

"It was never my intention to start a discussion around this (should have known better),"

heh, check out the name of the forum.

[ClymAngus]

I fully respect your right to stick to old hardware, but it’s unreasonable to expect new software, or new major versions of software, to work with old systems. One of the major motivations for developing new software, and new major versions of software, is to take advantage of the capabilities of new hardware.

For the purposes of this argument and this particular case, “new hardware” includes somewhere somewhere in the region of 95 % of the hardware that will be used by potential players of Oolite in a couple of years, probably more. Note that if we complete somehow complete Oolite 2.0 with all desired features in a mere year and a half, it will still be the primary version of Oolite for the foreseeable future as that number asymptotically approaches 100 %.

Well, I'm a packrat at heart. Sometimes I see conspiracies that aren't there, or are convenient to maintain my view of the world. To be honest I've been meaning to scratch build a linux box for some time now. This might just afford me the excuse.

I can't fault your argument, (to be honest my main issue is with software that costs £500+ and it's loss means a serious curtailment of my creativity).
Not with the freebies like oolite. In all fairness if this means we can have a crack at movie track animated exterior views, lense flares, polarising bangs, shrapnel and other such eye candy then yehaw and pass the ammunition.

[Ganelon]

I don't think that any OXP can or will "break the game". The game is the game, and the OXPs are expansion packs which are purely optional. An OXP could result in making the game of a player who loads it pointless or no fun to play, but that doesn't "break the game".

Consider Killit.OXP

Pylon mounted weapons that can do everything up to and including destroying everything else in the game (and giving the player a clean legal status as well). That's a lot more significant than laser coolers or the 7 ly jump limit.

And yet, Killit.OXP existing did not break Oolite 1.x so far as I have ever seen. That OXP is available, but we still get new players and have plenty of remaining players. We still enjoy playing the game, and the game continues to be improved and interesting OXPs continue to get written.

To be honest, I don't give a rat's patootie about laser coolers. If my laser heats up, it's time for some evasive flying while it cools or switching to another laser (if I'm flying a ship that mounts anything but a front laser). But then, I don't care about the docking computer either. I don't use the docking computer. My personal feelings are that I fly my ship, and to me (personally, no reflection on anyone else), that includes being able to dock it. Think of airplane pilot licenses for a moment.. Should we issue them to people who can't land the plane and should we call those people pilots? To me, landing/docking is a part of flying the ship, and I expect to do it every single time I take off. LOL

That isn't everybody's POV, but my having that POV doesn't interfere with anyone else's game, nor do other players using docking computers interfere with my playing.

Why doesn't it ruin the game balance for me that some people use docking computers? Why wasn't the game "broken" as soon as Killit.OXP made it possible to destroy everything with a single shot (and get a clean legal status to boot)? Because using anything that's in the game or installing an OXP are matters of choice. We all start with the basic game, most of us add some options that we like, and if we don't find it to make the game more enjoyable for us personally, then we don't use it or with an OXP we can take it back out.

The game is much more robust than some people give it credit for. It won't "break" easilly. If it did, then Killit certainly would have broken it. The basic game is what people get hooked on. They either like it or they don't and if they don't they go play something else. If they do like it, they are likely to pick OXPs to fine tune it even more to their liking. If they add in something that ends up making the game less fun, then they take it back out and maybe try something else.

Personally, I think every limit could be removed, making every facet of the game customisable (even adding laser coolers LOL) and so long as the core game itself keeps getting made better, the game will continue to live and grow and get new players/fans. OXPs could change anything. Add or remove galaxies, shuffle stars around, add a thousand different kinds of ships or take it down to only one, whatever.. And it still won't take away from the basic game or break it.

Well, enough of my opinion. I have a question!

If the prime goal of Oolite 1 might be stated as having been to make an open source game that was a faithful recreation of Elite with some enhancements, then what would be the goal of Oolite 2?