Oolite Bulletins

Simon B wrote:

... here's what you've been waiting for.

I really like it, as the original model just looks much too fat to me. This one goes more with what I'd expect the CM3 to be built like. Furthermore, it appears to me that the model does go well along with Griffs current version, which is another good thing.

I have somy difficulty to imagine what you wrote about the Thargoid ship...I do like the model you provided, though. Guess I'll have to wait until I see it in space!

Concerning the Elite-Cougar, should I attempt to scan those not-so-good images and hope that the magnification of scanning allows to see enough of it to allow it being added, too? I've always thought that model was too interesting to be that rare in the original (only one encounter per game, and most people never met it).

Screet

Screet wrote:

I really like it, as the original model just looks much too fat to me.

In all fairness, it does have a significant cargo hold. You can't just stuff all of these metric tonnes under the floor pannels..

-Oz

ovvldc wrote:

Screet wrote:

I really like it, as the original model just looks much too fat to me.

In all fairness, it does have a significant cargo hold. You can't just stuff all of these metric tonnes under the floor pannels..

That's true, but the original is the size of a boa which can carry much more cargo.

Screet

A very simple technobabble reason for the strange size:cargo ratios can be made up.

Any technology that can curve space in the way nescessary for any kind of trans-light travel, can also curve space via subspace compression.

The ships are bigger on the inside than out - and the more technologically advanced, the more extreme this ratio can get.

Problem solved. As far as I know there's nothing in any background story that contradicts that.

Boa Class Cruiser


Almost there - I'll try get the new models into the neolite-concepts archive tomorrow, for the day after I'll be gone for a week. At the end of that the OXP should have all these models running - touch wood.

Cool lasers and clear skies: take care.

Simon B wrote:

Boa Class Cruiser

Now my favourite built-in ship looks like it felt flying it! Looking at the model, it's no wonder anymore that I did just run over every tiny pirate ship.

Screet

A minor detail, Simon: you seem set on staying inside the lines of the original model. This makes all your ships slightly smaller than the original. It would be reasonable to build out from the lines as much as you carve in from them, keeping the volume about the same. Of course, this could be done by scaling, but not uniformly – the Boa Cruiser would have to be scaled up slightly in width and height but not length.

The disproportionate size of the cobra3 is an endless discussion topic.

To me, it looks like the model was designed to just-fit inside the docking slit - making that chore a bit more of a challenge. The dimensions are exactly double the cm1 and cargo also exactly double - which suggests to me that the original designer did not think the math through (the vol should be, at least, 8x).

There are other admitted mistakes of inattention in the game ... the Anaconda cargo cap is one.

That stuff can now be "fixed" just by scaling the model to twice the cm2 volume. In fact, this would represent a rare opportunity to alter the things which tend to rankle. The way the cm3 size keeps coming up may be an indication that some downscaling should be considered.

However - models are scaled to what makes the game more interesting. So we should be careful about rescaling. There has been lots of opportunity for he original folk to change the scale and they have chosen not to do so.

Instead, the idea of being able to widen the cargo bay was introduced to imply that there is lots of empty space in the CM3. It is spoken of as a matter of cutting girders - perhaps the cm3 was over-designed? A reasonable response to the cm2 disaster (do you want to see a model of this ship?)

Perhaps the model could be scaled (against the cm1) so it's volume is consistent with a 35T cap?

There are also tech level issues to consider - fast but low-tech ships require bigger engines. Engine size would fairly scale with the square of max speed. (Linearly with volume, and they'd get proportionally smaller with tech level.) The original authors didn't think it through that far though.

It may be appropriate to provide a rescaled oxp... setting consistet sizes (at least, not too inconsistent) against tech level, speed and mass.

Prices are also somewhat inconsistent - however, we don't know what market forces are like - adders are very cheap, but then - who seriously wants one ... and for how long.

(thinking of reworking the adder model and setting the current one at mk2 - the people who said it is too cool are probably right.)

Stats, including shipyard, should vary with political and economic conditions - poor, low-tech worlds will be keen to buy starships for eg. which will affect the market price... more so for rich low tech.

However, this would allow speculation on starships ... buy an adder on high-price world and sell it on a low-price world - eating the loss because you can use the money in the bank to buy a big ship and fly it back for sale.

This may make a reasonable addition to the game ... or an intreguing mission - some planetary govt is prepared to pay top dollar for an anaconda ... you gotta go get it.

Other game conveniences are:

The docking sequence can be used to get out of a fight. Technically, anyone shooting at you can still do so while you are "asleep".

Escape sequence can be used to survive a fight - technically you should still have to pilot your capsule home ... perhaps it will be overlooked as the villains, bounty-hunters, etc swoop in for the kill.

When you eject then becomes special - perhaps dumping cargo first would improve your odds?

However - this "rescue" is the point of the sequence.

When you wake up at the station - you still got your ship in the exact condition that it was last seen in. I figure the insurance company should be paying the resale value of your ship minus the cost of a new adder. You are now an adder. If the station has a shipyard, you can trade up with the insurance money.

More interesting involves invoking a mission screen - the mission is to buy a ship - either buy one here or book passage to another world - repeat until a ship is bought. (Special option to book a shuttle to the planet ... which ends the game.)

So far, no significant rescaling has been done. I should point out that the cm1 and cm3 are actually slightly larger than the standard model due to the way modification have been done. (select all upper panes and apply "bump" ;) )

I think these "features" are better in an oxp.

Ahruman wrote:

A minor detail, Simon: you seem set on staying inside the lines of the original model. This makes all your ships slightly smaller than the original. It would be reasonable to build out from the lines as much as you carve in from them, keeping the volume about the same. Of course, this could be done by scaling, but not uniformly – the Boa Cruiser would have to be scaled up slightly in width and height but not length.

I've been doing some of that. Especially with the freighters.
The anaconda and boa1 are both longer and wider to compensate for the lower profile. This also has the effect of providing a more reasonable set of proportions when viewed together.

Making Boa2 wider is neat though - thanks, give it a go. I should post bunches of the ships next to each other so you can see the proportions...

First may I say that the revamped cb3 you have made would do B&B proud.

Simon B wrote:

To me, it looks like the model was designed to just-fit inside the docking slit - making that chore a bit more of a challenge. The dimensions are exactly double the cm1 and cargo also exactly double - which suggests to me that the original designer did not think the math through (the vol should be, at least, 8x). ... Instead, the idea of being able to widen the cargo bay was introduced to imply that there is lots of empty space in the CM3. It is spoken of as a matter of cutting girders - perhaps the cm3 was over-designed? A reasonable response to the cm2 disaster (do you want to see a model of this ship?)

I agree with the thought on the docking challenge. With the cargo space vers ship volume, there is a 'real world argument' for it.

Firstly there is the issue of mass. Being double the volume means it's more than likely cubed the mass of the cm1. Also being faster and more agile than the cm1, would result in requiring far larger engines and thrusters to compensate. Secondly the cm3 is meant to be a 2 man craft, also requiring larger cabin and life support systems. Thirdly the cm3 has double the energy bank, so that would take double the space. Finally the shield generators would have to cover 6 times the volume so they would be bigger too. Still, I agree with you that the cm3 was more that likely over-designed.

As for seeing the model of the ill-fated Cobra Mk 2, yes please. After doing the manual I am planning to try my hand a writing a mission set featuring Uncle Bob Second Hand Shipyard. Some of the mission involve the recovery of the only functional Cobra Mk 2 in existence which may or may not legally owned by Uncle Bob.

Simon B wrote:

Stats, including shipyard, should vary with political and economic conditions... which will affect the market price... more so for rich low tech. However, this would allow speculation on starships.

Totally agree with these points. It actually reflects what happens with commercial aircraft and ships in the real world right now. As commercial vessels age, they are sold to poor nations who pay far more than what the craft could be sold for in richer nations.

Simon B wrote:

The docking sequence can be used to get out of a fight. Technically, anyone shooting at you can still do so while you are "asleep".

I don't think you should be able to dream you way out of a fight, that sounds too anti-health and safety for GalCop to allow. Being able to dream druing the condition yellows, as implemented as the 'Stardreamer' system in Elite Fronter etc would be good.

Simon B wrote:

Escape sequence can be used to survive a fight - technically you should still have to pilot your capsule home ... perhaps it will be overlooked as the villains, bounty-hunters, etc swoop in for the kill. When you eject then becomes special - perhaps dumping cargo first would improve your odds? However - this "rescue" is the point of the sequence.

I have seen it done in a few arcady style games but being in something so weak as an escape pod it may not be survivable in Oolite. If the pod was a mini star ship in its own right (complete with pulse laser but no witchdrive) then it may be a fun feature.

Simon B wrote:

When you wake up at the station - you still got your ship in the exact condition that it was last seen in. I figure the insurance company should be paying the resale value of your ship minus the cost of a new adder. You are now an adder. If the station has a shipyard, you can trade up with the insurance money.

As for the insurance idea. It could be implemented in two ways. The standard flat rate insurance would put you in a Adder. If you wanted full replacement cover then you have to pay a higher premium that is 10-15% of the replacement cost of the ship.

Anyway fly fast and don't kiss any stations. <grin.>

OK ... reality check:

(The standard model shot above is not to scale with the neolite models. I wanted to show you how the scale to each other.)

I should warn people that I have been a bit relaxed about the scale of those wire-frames I've been putting around models - the boa-cruiser one, for eg, is actually hidden by the neolite model if I put it to scale.

(This is an accident - the model I used for sight-lines actually had the wrong proportions!)

The purpose of those wire-frames is to show the similarity of the ships to the standard ones. That only works if you can see them. The solid models shown alongside the neolite versions in some of the pictures are to scale though. Compare dimensions in the table below - they are WxHxL.

Redux[1] Ships - Neolite Ships I stand corrected over the cobra3 - it is thinner! Now I think about it, I do recall rescaling the result to bring the wingspan under 130m.

One of the things I need to decide is the final scale for the models - the raw dimensions, even with the volume included does not provide a good picture - you need to see them in the game. eg. If you gave a cm3 an escort role, it's disparity would be jarringly obvious the second you see it alongside a boa.

Some of these stats were a big surprise! I always figured the cruiser as a bigger ship than the regular boa! It's dimentions are identical, and it is more pointy - so it is smaller - yeah - that tracks.

I could keep the cruiser as a smaller-sleeker version it's a whole tech level up from the regular boa, cargo cap is 175 vs the boas 125 ... so it must have efficient high-tech engines as well as a lower overall hull mass.

The Nealite boa is a lot smaller than the standard one. That is due to the cut-away belly more than anything. OTOH the neolite Anaconda is much more imposing.

The cruiser is about the right size - I could swap those over? But look what happens to that skiff!

BTW: do we want a skiff for the cruiser too? The lines are there - look at the hexagon around the front window.

The relative scales of the big freighters lend weight to the argument that the Anaconda was supposed to be about the same as the others ... I think it should be IMPOSING - and I cheated - the anaconda in the shot is not the one in the OXP. The oxp version has the same volume as the redux... I was being more careful back then. This one is as big as I can get it but still fit into a docking slit - I'll probably have to recenter the model to stop it hitting the edges.

The view position on that model is high - so you'd want to aim above the target to dock - which will be interesting as the view will rotate about the view position (is seems - confirm?).

All the fighters got thinner - this was a consequence of the decision to interpret the models as approximations of winged designs. Most models have more removed than added - the Gecko and Sidewinder are extreme cases. These stats suggest that the Gecko needs to be scaled up to bring the height to about 10m (note - 2m of that height is the tail-fin, introduced specifically to pull the height of the back end up.) The rear crossection is a bit under a half - making it that much harder to hit.

However - I want to see how it plays out in the game - IMO it looks quite at home with those other ships.

I still think the reduced cobra is what we should go with. This is probably the biggest decision and I leave it all up to you :)

I have updated the neolite-concepts archive to include the other models. Caution - is a 5 MiB download.

___________________
[1] I'm guessing that "redux" refers to the skins rather than the models, but that's what they are called in the plist... have the models been tweaked since Elite?

KZ9999 wrote:

I agree with the thought on the docking challenge. With the cargo space vers ship volume, there is a 'real world argument' for it.

Firstly there is the issue of mass. Being double the volume means it's more than likely cubed the mass of the cm1.

Only Isometrically - the ship is hollow, the hull panels can be the same thickness, with extra support struts. You do need more supports a-la elephant sized ants. The mass of the full ship is that of the empty plus cargo - which only doubles.

So we are looking at something somewhat under cubing the mass.

Faster at the same tech - scales the mass of the engines by the ratio of squares of the speeds (about) which is 49/16 - about triple. Agility is the use of thrust - the vents are further apart, improving yaw (which doesn't exist) but the bigger frame allows larger moment-arms, so you'd get increased agility without the increased engine size - not a factor.

Secondly the cm3 is meant to be a 2 man craft, also requiring larger cabin and life support systems.

The cabin in the standard model cm1 is about the same size as a small house - how much room do you need?!

Thirdly the cm3 has double the energy bank, so that would take double the space. Finally the shield generators would have to cover 6 times the volume so they would be bigger too. Still, I agree with you that the cm3 was more that likely over-designed.

It is very difficult to justify such a huge difference in real-world terms - even suggesting that this is fine and the high capacity freighters are just too small fails to account for the low tech of the freighters. (Though i'ts better - maybe the warping of the cargo bay requires very big machinery - which only a big ship can carry? And you need big engines to push it around ... I'm still having trouble buying it. Lets face it, the cm3 scale is an artistic rather than a physical decision.)

It is too easy to get caught up in the scale of things. There are also issues, artistic, involving the impact of a vessel in the game due to it's shape - some shapes just look bigger than others...

eg. The gecko looks fatter in profile than it is due to the oval crossection and that the wing-fins mask some holes. This gives it a visual impact in the game bigger than it's physical dimentions would indicate.

And I am deliberately trying to use optical illusions in the design. The cone shapes are great for forced perspective for eg.

As for seeing the model of the ill-fated Cobra Mk 2, yes please. After doing the manual I am planning to try my hand a writing a mission set featuring Uncle Bob Second Hand Shipyard. Some of the mission involve the recovery of the only functional Cobra Mk 2 in existence which may or may not legally owned by Uncle Bob.

Hmmm... interesting - though a CM2 would have value as a classic - like the Ford Pinto.

I don't think you should be able to dream you way out of a fight, that sounds too anti-health and safety for GalCop to allow.

You cannot autodock if you are a fugitive - and it is otherwise unusual to get in a fight so close to a station ... the tiger oxp is good for that: "There he is: get him!"

I have seen it done in a few arcady style games but being in something so weak as an escape pod it may not be survivable in Oolite.

You'd only survive if the villains didn't spot you - though there is the possibility that they scoop you and you have to pay a ransom or they take you to the station for the bounty. Speaking of which - the insurance aught to make you pay the bounty yourself.... you are not paying regular premiums after all.

If the pod was a mini star ship in its own right (complete with pulse laser but no witchdrive) then it may be a fun feature. 8)

Boa Skiff

As for the insurance idea. It could be implemented in two ways. The standard flat rate insurance would put you in a Adder. If you wanted full replacement cover then you have to pay a higher premium that is 10-15% of the replacement cost of the ship.

I don't see that being too easy to do - you'd have to lose the cover with the ship - ike when you sell it on.

It works with the boa by setting escape-pod=yes, and putting the high-cost insurance in the ship price.

Disembodied wrote:

Simon B wrote:

Which fancy adder? The blue one in this thread is mine.

Frame provided a couple of links:

Oh that one ... the organic weapons example. Sure. It's also his avatar.

DaddyHoggy wrote:

It took a few seconds to ponder it and then I decided I love the new Cobby3!!! It's the classic ship and you've maintained the classic design and yet improved it. As part of the "replacement classic set" it's a winner - of course i'll still be wanting Griff's... :)

The plist asks for several versions - there's no reason to use exactly the same model for each, so long as they are all cobras - I have left lots of big flat spaces on the neo-cm3 for normal mapping along the lines of Griffs example.

Can anybody tell me while we're at it where exactly does the Cargo Bay extension go? Is it internal, external or a combo of the two?

The cargo bay extension is internal - IIRC: it involves cutting girders etc.

Would the ship's exterior reflect that all these extra things could be bolted on at a later date? i.e. the cargo bay extension, energy bomb (as per description in DW), aft, port and starboard lasers, fuel scoop. Surely there'd be something to indicate where these things might go? (bolt holes, recesses, etc...)

Remember the scale - these ships are BIG. You can think of the vents and grills I add in as places for extras - however, it is more likely that engineers just remove a panel. The joins would be invisible at the distances we are looking at them in the pics.

Fuel scoops are usually retractable - it's a bit of a fudge but avoids having to do a different model for the scooped version.

Also, is the plan to complete replace the original set with Simon's work? Or make it a semi-automatic oxp i.e. default "yes" to Simon's ships unless you set a flag in the config file and will strict mode give you the original ships too?

There are no firm plans to date.

The oxp I'm putting together for public use renames the current ships as "classic" models, with reduced occurrence, and replaces them with these models - originally with slightly ramped stats, but recently unchanged.

My idea was always that this should be thought of as a provisional step. In the front of my mind is that these must be plausible as a default build - with the classic ships as an oxp.

Lets not rush things - lets get the ships right first. Let them grow on people. Should anything like these end up as default, then Oolite will have finally departed from Elite in look-and-feel. That's a big move.

Both Neolite packages are updated tonight (22:47 Jan 26 NZDT)
The oxp is at:

OXP - 15MiB
OBJ files - 5MiB

The oxp still needs models for the escape capsule and the thargon. Newer models have not been tested - it's being transferred to my loptop too, so I can have a play.

I will be on Waiheke Island in the morning. See you in a week.