Planetfall 2.0 (apparently)

[hiran]

Since some time I am questioning whether the whole game needs to be run on the one single executable which we cannot/wantnot change into all we imagine.

Now the same for planetfall: could we reuse existing stuff? What about integrating FlightGesr to perform atmospheric flight?

We'd have to provide a suitable ship model and planetary data, and a scenery for the landing site. But we could save the energy to create the simulation and focus on the seamless immersion when switching simulation engines.

[phkb]

It's worth noting that your ship already has to withstand heat buildup from the atmosphere, and that happens whether this OXP is installed or not. In fact, I would argue that, by the time the automated docking process kicks in, you have already descended far enough through the atmosphere to not have to worry about further heat buildup.

Re: desire for skill-based docking: I'm not against the idea, by the way. It's just that I'd have to come up with a valid mini-game the player can engage with using the flight controls, doing it in a way that doesn't break a pile of game systems, and yet is immersive enough that the player believes he is performing a landing manoeuver. That's a *big* job! No matter how much fun it might be, I can't switch direction at this point and come up with something new. That's a version 3.0 type of update.

I am questioning whether the whole game needs to be run on the one single executable which we cannot/wantnot change into all we imagine.

More the "cannot" than the "wantnot" from my point of view. That's not something I'm in any way capable of doing.

Without skill what controls the damages? random , installed protective equipment etc.

The "player.ship.takeInternalDamage" is the function. I'm not calling it directly if you dock in a controlled way. If you're angle is too steep, that could result in some damage, using that function. And I think it's fairly random in it's target: could be equipment, or cargo, or service level.

[hiran]

I am questioning whether the whole game needs to be run on the one single executable which we cannot/wantnot change into all we imagine.

More the "cannot" than the "wantnot" from my point of view. That's not something I'm in any way capable of doing.

I fully agree. The quoted bit is just stating a fact. What about the remainder?
What about integrating other engines?

[phkb]

What about integrating other engines?

That's what I was referring to. I don't have the skills or knowledge to even begin to work out how to integrate two different game engines. I'm struggling with just one engine, to say nothing of two!

[Redspear]

To be fair, it's quite logical that atmospheric entry might cause unusual wear and tear and so a heat shield might be a good idea but I'm straying very much into why territory.

I understood phkb's avoidance of "why" as being focused on our discussion of "why" would one want to land on a planet.

I feel that that "why" discussion is important. I also do not think it relevant to what Phkb is currently doing with this OXP.

OK, how about this then?

What - planetary landing
Why - working on it but lots of ideas
Who - the player
When - up to the player or mission
Where - main planets, moons, other planets
How - equipment requirements? skill based? (unlikely)

So we've really been talking about the how with regards equipment and general requirements.

Landing on planets involves coping with atmosphere and with gravity. Flying in space from station to station does not.

No but sun-skimming might. Furthermore the player can already make it to 1m altitude safely with just a little care.

Most ships will not be equipped to land on planets. It is much cheaper not to include this while building a spaceship.

For planet landing one needs:
*Engines capable of overcoming the gravity well (Oolite "magics" this away and Planet Fall v1.0 includes a booster)
*Atmospheric friction resistance
*Heat resistance
*Design (Engine, life support systems, packing of cargo holds, etc.) to cope with substantial levels of Gravity (safely ignorable in space)

I think that first statement is highly conjectural and further that your list is somewhat at odds with what the player can already do.

You imagine that the gravity-well of a planet exceeds that of a star?
Or that the heat resistance required due to friction exceeds that from close proximity to a star?
Heat resistance is already modelled in the game re planetary approach - slow down or else
Gravity is absolutely not safely ignorable when approaching a star (in game or otherwise) and furthermore the main station (that players typically dock at repeatedly) rotates at a speed designed to simulate Earth's gravity.

Wheels designed for use in a space station would be much cheaper than those designed for planetary landing. Windows (if such really exist) designed for use in space would be much cheaper than those designed for planetary landing. The doors of the cargo bay. Et cetera.

A ship designed purely for flying in space can have all sorts of things attached outside which are not atmosphere-friction resistant. And some atmospheres may well contain acidic gasses or other damaging agents which lobsters and lizards might just ignore, but spaceship materials might not be able to (Larais?).

And then there is the landing itself, where the skills involved might well differ from those for docking at a station. Effects of gravity. Effects of weather. Effects of friction/heat. Et cetera.

(Presumably landing on SW Economy "Mining Economy" planets don't involve atmosphere issues - and ditto for moons)

Again, quite abit of conjecture there in that ships might have such 'things' and further that atmospheric approach would endanger a shielded vessel significantly more than space combat involving lasers and missiles.

There is a discussion to be had here I think but the more conjectural it becomes the less useful it is IMHO.

Unlike trying to solve a real-world, high-risk problem, where considering as many possible permutation can be helpful, we're instead just dealing with an in game one. In game, there's no risk of missing some real-life critical eventuality, rather the main risk is having it be unbalanced or simply not fun.

• Is it likely that there would be some risk involved in landing on a planet? Yes.
• Might it but fun if that were in some way reflected in the game? Probably.
• Is it fun if your favourite player ship is excluded from a game activity? Generally not.
• Are some ship adaptations a likely requirement? Yes.
• Will the investment of any such requirements need to be weighed against the 'why' of landing? Yes.

The more requirements you have or the more convoluted the 'how' of planetary landing -

• The more it will cost in terms of initial investment and maintenace.
• The more the ability to land could be disabled at an inoportune (and potentially mission-critical) moment.
• The more difficult it will be to balance the rewards granted from the 'why' of landing (both before and after aquiring the necessary equipment).

[Redspear]

Here's a simple way of adding an equipment reqirement that mitigates potential costs without requiring 'reward' adjustments.

Equipment item: heat shielding

Landing with: no risk of damage

Landing without: 10% chance of damage to a random equipment item

So the 'risk' it presents is not really much of a risk to the starting player (if you have any equipment at all then you might damage your injectors etc. but by then you've made some money anyway). To the wealthy player however, not having the heat shielding might make that 10% chance seem awfully costly when it does come off.

With any hypothetical risk, the player will be weighing this against potenetial rewards. Therefore if there is an opportunity to buy their way out of this risk then we are left with the problem of the reward being rather high now that the risk has been removed (even if those equipment items were repairable).

So rather than requiring a downscaling of reward (in order to maintain balance post achieving 'landing ready' status), there would be an upscaling of risk but only when the player was in a position to afford the relevant immunity. The reward could safely remain unchanged along with game balance - rich or poor, the player knows when they're taking a risk and to what extent.

The better equipped you are, the higher the risk... which is balanced by the fact that the better equipped you are the more likely you are to be able to either afford or already have heat shielding and further the more likely you are to be in a position to be able to afford repairs.

There are other ways to do similar of course but it's presented herer in case it's of interest.

[phkb]

I'm not sure this is 100% ready for release, but it's also probably time I got some feedback on where it's at.

The first big change is the size. It's weighing in at a little under 130mb at the moment, which is on the large size. Much of that is made up of arrival report background screens, of which there are a few. If you don't like them, you can turn them off via Library Config.

Speaking of Library Config, there are a lot of settings you can tweak for this OXP. Pretty much everything is configurable, from the number of sites per planet, to the type of market you want at each location type, or whether the F3 screen is available at a location. You can adjust the spawning chances for different location types, and how much impact TL will have of the spawning of various landing types. There are lots of ways to get your ideal setup via the config options. If you think I've left something out, or the options need further explanation, please let me know.

The method of landing has changed a bit, as you would have seen in the demo videos I've posted. Landing at a planetary location requires you to line up one of the ground control interface points, and approach it at a non-acute angle. So don't try diving directly down towards it. If your angle is too sharp, you could take damage on landing.

Another big change is clear air turbulence. That's right: when entering the atmosphere of a planet, your ship will begin to be buffeted by turbulence, which will require you to work reasonably hard to maintain your flight path towards the ground control interface point. I *think* this addresses some of the skill factor involved in planetary landings, to make it require at least some piloting skill, like manually docking at a station in orbit does. If you don't want turbulence, or don't like the implementation, again, you can turn it off via Library Config. I'll be interested in how players find this, especially in ships other than the Cobra MKIII I've been testing in.

The "Planetary Landing Capability" equipment has been turned into "Atmospheric Stabilisers", and is an optional purchase to reduce the impact of turbulence. It retains the original equipment key ("EQ_PLANETFALL"), so any OXP that is looking for it can still find it. However, it is now optional. So, if an OXP is looking for that piece of equipment to know if planet landings are possible, they will need to be adjusted.

By default, I've turned off all markets at planetary locations. My reasoning: GalCop's treaty with each planet restricts access to planetary markets for interstellar travelers. If you don't like my reasoning, you can choose to have 1 of 3 different market styles: the original market, as was active in PlanetFall before the markets were broken by updates to Oolite; a market similar to what is used in "Stations for Extra Planets", where prices are adjusted based on distance from the main station; or a market that is a copy of the main station market, as was applied via the "Planetfall Markets" mod. Note that any change to the market type will require the system to be regenerated ie You need to jump out and then back in again.

I've employed the logic Littlebear used for naming planetary locations in his Galactic Almanac OXP. If you prefer a more prosaic naming method, you can turn this off via Library Config. Any names generated will be reused if the game is saved. If you, say, did a number of jumps and in the last system are killed on your way to the station, when the game is reloaded, the names for any landing sites in any system you visited since your last save will be regenerated and will be different from your first visit. Once the game is saved, all names generated for every system you have visited will be permanent (assuming you don't tweak the spawning parameters later).

I believe I've addressed most of the compatibility issues. So, any existing mod that uses PlanetFall 1.51 should work with this one. That includes the samples Thargoid originally created (Black Monk Monasteries, HoOpy Casino, PlanetFall - OoHaul), as well as In-System Taxi and In-System Cargo Delivery. I'm monkey-patching a few OXP's to ensure 100% compatibility. In-System Taxi and In-System Cargo delivery probably need some deeper tweaks though. Because the original PlanetFall allowed you to land anywhere, there was no distinction between landing sites on a particular planet. It was a random roll as to the type of location that spawned. The two "In-System" OXP's therefore didn't need to worry about *where* in particular you landed. They should still work now, but they could be made to work better with the specific sites now being created.

So, the $64000 question: Have I addressed the "Why"? As in, "Why would I want to visit a planetary location?" For this release, it's probably a "Maybe" at best. All (or most) shipyards have been relocated to be on the planet surface, which means if you want to buy a new ship, you have to visit the planet. The "Maintenance Overhaul" has also been moved to the main planet, rather than on main stations. With both of these, if you don't want it, you can turn it off via Library Config. If you do that, then the answer is definitely a "No", in that there is no compelling reason to land on a planet with the default settings (as markets are also disabled by default).

I do have a mission pack planned for this OXP, which will hopefully turn the "Maybe" into a "Slightly More Likely". But I think, to save over-complicating this OXP, I'll keep the missions separate for now.

Obviously, I'm after feedback on where I've taken this to. Good spot? Bad spot? Don't care/won't use spot? Let me know what you think.

You can download this version here: PlanetFall2.oxz

[Redspear]

Plan to try this out but from what you've written...

Some good ideas there I think with a clear awareness of the issues.
Configurable never hurts and you've had a go at addressing everything.

Maintenence overhaul on planets is a good idea I think. Not particularly becasue it 'makes sense' (although it makes enough for my tastes) but rather because it brings it into the game as something you'll need to do semi-regularly rather than often.

Likewise turbulence (depending upon it's implementation of course) and angle of approach. If nothing else phkb, you've written a very nice 'blurb'

[phkb]

Oh, forgot to mention that there are some required OXP's for this now:
- GNN
- Library
- Market Script Interface
- External Dock System

[Cody]

The addition of CAT is clever - is that configurable too, or is it only on/off?

[Cholmondely]

Downloading.

"Thank You" for this!

[Cholmondely]

Another relevant OXP. (Landing on the extra planets in a system)

Stranger's World: In-System Cargo Delivery

There are two types of cargo delivery missions:

Special cargo delivery - extra equipment for research stations beyond the limits of pre-planned regular supply.
Urgent cargo delivery - equipment for recovery from malfunctions and accidents (first-aid kits, auxiliary/backup systems etc).

Neither type of cargo are "cargo" in the common sense - each is a 5 ton container installed in the cargo bay as an equipment unit. It is loaded after mission selection and removed upon arrival at the correct destination port.

The mission selection interface on the F4 page (Ship, System & Status Controls) is now hidden after start-up - it reveals only after docking at the system's main station!

In-system cargo delivery missions generate for "extra planet" landing ports only - not for the "main planet" ports, nor for moon ports, nor for the various space stations! You need a ship with Planet Landing Capability installed and at least 5 tons of free cargo space to accept a mission. Missions will not be offered without satisfying these conditions. You need also at least 250 ₢ for the insurance fee to select mission. The Advanced Space Compass will be very useful for navigation to the destination port, but it is your problem if you hope to be able to navigate by sight without an ASC.

Select your mission after arrival at the main station and you can then save to continue later if you wish - your mission status will be written to your oolite-save file. 250 ₢ will be deducted from your cash - this insurance fee will be returned in the event of a successful delivery. You can also load extra cargo for destination port, if you have free cargo space after installing special/urgent cargo unit. Pick mission, load extra cargo, save and run! Start from main station, lock ASC onto your destination port and fly to your destination. The destination port is displayed on your manifest screen F5-F5. It is obligatory to perform mission without docking at any outside port. It is not a time-limited mission, but in case of docking with any outside port, the cargo container will be removed and the mission will be failed. In case of hyperjumping to another system, the mission will be failed too! The mission will be rated as successful in the case of a cargo delivery into any port on planet of destination. Land, and receive your payment, your refund and congratulations!

[phkb]

is that configurable too, or is it only on/off?

Some bits are configurable. The height where the "atmosphere" starts can be changed. Default is 15km. The maximum amount of effect is random, but with a hardcoded limit at the moment, although it could easily be made configurable. The effect is scaled up as you descend, and is more pronounced if you're flying faster. I was considering making the effect more pronounced based on your ship dimensions (eg wider ships are more likely to be rolled, long ships more likely to be pitched), but I'm not sure I could make it definitive enough that you would notice the difference. Especially because I'd probably need to increase the hardcoded limit and I found values above that limit tended to make the experience an unpleasant one visually (ie very jerky screen movements), rather than a purely challenging one. I'd probably have to change the method I'm using to apply the turbulence.

Landing on the extra planets in a system

This is included, and In-System Cargo Delivery should be compatible with it. At least, I've added code to make it compatible, although I haven't heavily tested it yet.

[Cody]

I was considering making the effect more pronounced based on your ship dimensions...

I was considering making the effect more (or less) pronounced based on planet size.

[phkb]

I was considering making the effect more (or less) pronounced based on planet size.

Right now it's a purely random number. But it would be easy enough to put that in. So, smaller planets have more turbulence, or the other way around?