Oolite Bulletins

Diziet Sma wrote:

... what I really want is to be able to set waypoints on the long-range chart, and have the ANA factor those into a route.

Absolutely this! In effect, I've used the long-range destination marker as a waypoint for years!

Cody wrote:

Diziet Sma wrote:

... what I really want is to be able to set waypoints on the long-range chart, and have the ANA factor those into a route.

Absolutely this! In effect, I've used the long-range destination marker as a waypoint for years!

Exactly, and if the device also let you calculate a rough estimate of how long it would take to get to each place along your route...well, that's just a cherry on top (this would of course be when you are already enroute, not the one time you already get when deciding whether or not to take a mission).

Add me to the list of folks wishing for waypoints in ANA.

Limiting the number of possible equipments is a nice one. The means to achieve that is a tricky question as it will be a big change to the game. Without testing, it quite impossible to say if it's to better or worse, but for now it sounds like a good idea.

Here's one more random idea to ponder. Installed equipment could play a bigger role in maintenance overhaul (meaning bigger bill) and after maintenance, the game could present a breakdown of costs showing how much each particular equipment adds to the bill.

I don't know about a larger bill as I already have to be careful about my maintenance bill (if on a long distance courier mission, sometimes I can't fix it until it is more than 20k credits, though I've been trying to get them at navy stations, which helps a lot), but having a breakdown of what each piece is adding to the bill would be interesting.

Thargoid wrote:

My biggest concern here is that it will fundamentally change the game and the gameplay. That isn't to say it is a bad thing, but if this is done then Oolite 1.82 won't be the game that Oolite 1.80 is, and that could be quite a shock and possibly turn-off to many people (and it will take it a significant step away from Elite, where this didn't factor in).

Elite didn't have that much equipment, though - of the 30 items currently in Oolite, only about half were in Elite (exact number depending on version). A lot of the extras are the more powerful ones, too - fuel injectors, 2 shield boosters, scanner targeting enhancement. The gap between a base Cobra and an iron-ass Cobra is quite a bit bigger in Oolite than Elite, before you even consider the substantial list of available OXP equipment.

(Certainly pretty much any ship would be able to fit the Elite-only equipment regardless of configuration)

I would hope for relatively little complexity increase for a casual player from the basic changes. The time you actually start having to worry about the equipment space in a Cobra III - assuming no large equipment OXPs - would probably be about the time you finally have enough money for the Military Shield Enhancement (which together with the base shields and civilian booster makes a single side of your shields absorb enough damage to completely destroy most ships) and may need to reverse the "Enlarge Cargo Bay" you bought on the first day.

Some of the ideas in "extras" would increase potential complexity, though - but again, with suitable pricing it should be possible to delay the player seriously interacting with those bits until they're a little way into the game. Certainly I'd want to keep the early game about as simple as now.

Thargoid wrote:

For me it would be perhaps nicer to just have an "available space" rather like we already have, where equipment eats into it. In handwaviumland there would be nothing to stop me taking a large freighter like an Annie and filling its massive cargo hold with shield and energy generators. That way it couldn't carry much, but it would be a complete and almost invincible battering ram for combat usage.

I think that approach makes ships less distinctive - it makes all ships multi-role, just some are bigger than others. Freighters should be different to warships, light fighters should be different to in-system shuttles, in more than just what equipment they have right now.

Which isn't to say that there couldn't be an Anaconda warship modification - but I think that should probably be a different hull - and so a ship replacement - even if it looks quite similar on the outside, representing the need to basically gut the interior and start over to do that conversion, rather than just running a few cables, changing some wall brackets, and calling it good.

Thargoid wrote:

Oh, and also have equipment be able to be destroyed (as in strict mode) rather than just damaged. I coded it in Realistic Damage OXP and it seems like people quite like that judging again by the downloads, and it may be something that could be considered too?

Could be done - leave damaged equipment in the list and destroy it if it's hit again - though it would need to be turned off for certain items (and perhaps by default for OXP items)

Disembodied wrote:

with boxes gridded off which the player then fills by dragging and dropping icons of equipment.

I don't know that there's that much to gain over a simple "x of y equipment racks used" notice with "requires 3 equipment racks" in the equipment description.

cim wrote:

Disembodied wrote:

with boxes gridded off which the player then fills by dragging and dropping icons of equipment.

I don't know that there's that much to gain over a simple "x of y equipment racks used" notice with "requires 3 equipment racks" in the equipment description.

No, the more I think about it, the more I realise just how much work (not least artwork) this would require. I think it would be a nice feature, to be able to physically rearrange and customise the equipment layout in your ship, but it definitely loses out on the cost-benefit analysis!

Disembodied wrote:

No, the more I think about it, the more I realise just how much work (not least artwork) this would require. I think it would be a nice feature, to be able to physically rearrange and customise the equipment layout in your ship, but it definitely loses out on the cost-benefit analysis!

It would add a helluva lot of work to the job of creating a new ship, too.. shipset creators would go insane.

Diziet Sma wrote:

Disembodied wrote:

No, the more I think about it, the more I realise just how much work (not least artwork) this would require. I think it would be a nice feature, to be able to physically rearrange and customise the equipment layout in your ship, but it definitely loses out on the cost-benefit analysis!

It would add a helluva lot of work to the job of creating a new ship, too.. shipset creators would go insane.

That presumes they are sane to begin with... *GDR*

- Neelix

... I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!

My biggest concern here is that it will fundamentally change the game and the gameplay. That isn't to say it is a bad thing, but if this is done then Oolite 1.82 won't be the game that Oolite 1.80 is, and that could be quite a shock and possibly turn-off to many people (and it will take it a significant step away from Elite, where this didn't factor in).

Elite didn't have that much equipment, though - of the 30 items currently in Oolite, only about half were in Elite (exact number depending on version). A lot of the extras are the more powerful ones, too - fuel injectors, 2 shield boosters, scanner targeting enhancement. The gap between a base Cobra and an iron-ass Cobra is quite a bit bigger in Oolite than Elite, before you even consider the substantial list of available OXP equipment.

I think I will agree with cim here. Making the game more than "get iron-assed ASAP whatever the ship" gets +infinity votes from me.

How would the space required for equipment be decided?
I ask with a couple of my own OXPs in mind - The Tea Maker is (I think!) just like a coffee machine in terms of size, and presumably goes in the cockpit anyway, and the ExtraFuelTanks sort of don't take up any useable space as they are specifically designed to fit in those little useless voids, corners etc where nothing else will fit.

Well, it's obviously ultimately dependent on the OXP writer's decision and how they want to balance the OXP.

It's perhaps better to think of "equipment space" in terms of not just physical space, but also all the power couplings, circuit fuses, coolant pipes, cabling, ventilation, access panels, voids or ballast needed to avoid messing up the handling, internal armour so if your injectors get shot out while you're using them the explosion doesn't take out half your ship, etc. ... which we abstract to a single number for gameplay purposes because it's the job of the mechanics in the shipyard to worry about that, not the pilot. So if you want for game balance to make something take up more or less space than it might plausibly physically need, there's plenty of room to handwave it.

I'd probably say the Tea Maker either took up no or some trivial amount of space.

Fuel tanks are the sort of thing which game balance could justify taking up quite a lot of extra space, on the scale of a shield booster, perhaps. On the other hand, if you want to say that they're carefully fitted to avoid those problems and set the size very small, that's fine too.

cim wrote:

Fuel tanks are the sort of thing which game balance could justify taking up quite a lot of extra space, on the scale of a shield booster, perhaps. On the other hand, if you want to say that they're carefully fitted to avoid those problems and set the size very small, that's fine too.

Well, that's been the handwavium up till now Having said that they are a bit of a cheat game-changer, so perhaps some sort of penalty (other than the high price) might be appropriate.

Smivs wrote:

cim wrote:

Fuel tanks are the sort of thing which game balance could justify taking up quite a lot of extra space, on the scale of a shield booster, perhaps. On the other hand, if you want to say that they're carefully fitted to avoid those problems and set the size very small, that's fine too.

Having said that they are a bit of a cheat game-changer, so perhaps some sort of penalty (other than the high price) might be appropriate.

<grins> I'm sure you can guess what I'm thinking, Smivs

<nods>
0.5LY only?