Page 8 of 8

Re: TAF and game build configurations

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:31 am
by Diziet Sma
cim wrote:
It could be done complicatedly with an OXP, though. Capt. Murphy's Escort Contracts already has a basic version of NPC torus drive and drive-syncing, and the rest is "just" changes to AI, system population, and some special effects.
Really?.. weird viewing effects, distance-based speed changes, NPC "interesting objects" decisions, etc, etc, etc, and all? :shock:

Re: TAF and game build configurations

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:08 am
by cim
Diziet Sma wrote:
cim wrote:
It could be done complicatedly with an OXP, though. Capt. Murphy's Escort Contracts already has a basic version of NPC torus drive and drive-syncing, and the rest is "just" changes to AI, system population, and some special effects.
Really?.. weird viewing effects, distance-based speed changes, NPC "interesting objects" decisions, etc, etc, etc, and all? :shock:
Ah, okay, not absolutely everything that's been discussed in this thread. The viewing effects would have to be in the core game. Distance-based speed changes would be nightmarish but I think I can see a way to do it with trunk (provided compatibility with any other OXP was not a requirement). NPC "interesting objects" decisions would be a pain to code with the current AI state machine, but not impossible.

Re: TAF and game build configurations

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:56 am
by Commander McLane
Rese249er wrote:
Diziet Sma wrote:
...Core game-engine stuff. It couldn't be done simply with an OXP.
Oh. I wouldn't know...
Rese249er wrote:
I'm a pilot, not a coder!
If you don't know anything about the subject at hand, it may sometimes be wiser to refrain from commenting about it … :wink:

Also, it may sometimes make sense to read the discussion before participating in it. It was explicitly made clear that everything was about totally altering Oolite itself, not OXPs. (And it also was explicitly made clear that all of it was pure conjecture, not actual plans, before anyone misunderstands this as well.)

Re: TAF and game build configurations

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 2:33 pm
by Switeck
El Viejo wrote:
cim wrote:
... my instinct is to bring everything closer in so the torus drive is less necessary so that collisions between "interesting things" happen accidentally...
Hmm... this idea also makes me a little uneasy. Please remember there are some players out here (a very small minority, no doubt) who don't find the so-called boring bits particularly boring - it's all part of the immersion for some of us. But I'm only a dumb pilot... I know too little about the technicalities.
Giving NPC ships a torus drive or reducing the distances would result in a big change in how Oolite fights play out.

With NPC torus drives, the run from the witchpoint to planet or station would have lots of NPC traders "pile up" at the first mass-lock. They would probably do this quickly enough to overwhelm a small group of pirates. Once the first pirate blockade is broken, the mass of traders would only increase, since additional traders will be able to catch up much more quickly...so the second pirate blockade would need to be even bigger to pose a challenge.

Reducing the distances means anything fleeing one fight is more likely to stumble into another, at least if fleeing along inhabited routes, like along the space-lanes. This too can serve to pull together pirate groups and traders, creating bigger furballs.

So either change will likely result in more pirates in a small area at least some of the time, probably making the lifespan of a new player even shorter than it currently is.