Oolite Bulletins

Well because of the sudden interest I might see if I have enough data left on my dongle tonight to download the newest source and have a play around with this tonight.

Just more of a general comment of having larger galaxies to play with

It would be neat if the current maps were kept the way they were exactly, but more could be added around it in all directions, representing a "frontier". That's an especially useful image since the planet descriptions will be limited to the short version for those who have the OXP that adds more flavour text.

Perhaps the Galactic Hyperdrive would behave a little differently? Perhaps no matter how far you go out on the "frontier" using the GH will put you in the original part of the next galaxy map (meaning the frontier is always something that has to be travelled to the hard way)?

And perhaps there would be a tech-limit or government change on Frontier worlds? For example, no Corporate States, more Anarchies?

Just spitballing here

That wouldn't be possible due to the way they are generated I'm afraid. Also I'm completely against changing the original 8 galaxies... They are gospel and to keep game continuity they need to remain that way.

However with designing a new set of galaxies there's nothing to say you couldn't have less or even more government types...

The names I would want to look into more as a priority though. After getting the main parts working!

Pleb wrote:

The names I would want to look into more as a priority though. After getting the main parts working!

Have you considered incorporating numbers? perhaps prefixed with a dash?

e.g. Soandso-42

The numbers could be replaced with random letters of course...

It's an idea but I need to make a new algorithm for developing the names first. The current one uses the seed and digrams with specific letters in to generate it. I'd like to continue using the seed to help keep it random but I think the digrams and letters need changing to incorporate the missing letters. It is possible though as I did this once before but only changed things slightly so names were similar but different. A new a algorithm would be better.

Pleb wrote:

That wouldn't be possible due to the way they are generated I'm afraid. Also I'm completely against changing the original 8 galaxies... They are gospel and to keep game continuity they need to remain that way.

No worries, just an idea. Would have been nice to explore beyond the edge of the current Galaxy 1 as an option

So I guess any other systems created have to be generated much like original 8 were, just with different parameters. I can see why that would be a problem. Kinda like trying to smash a square peg into a round hole to do what I suggested.

Still a larger "verse" would be interesting for sure. It's funny, but to this day I have not explored beyond Galaxy 1.

The biggest problem with something like this is making the next set different enough that people want to go visit them. Certainly making them up and running is the first step (most of what I've already accomplished before). The next step is making them different, which can be as subtle as name changing to as extreme as... well I haven't got that far yet haha!!

Pleb wrote:

The biggest problem with something like this is making the next set different enough that people want to go visit them.

Definitely. If it's just more planets and space stations, there's not a lot of point. If it's about exploration, then the players should genuinely not know what they might meet in the next star system. A lot of it would have to be empty - starts and planets, sure, but no ships or stations, so that when the player does meet Something, it's all the more impressive and exciting.

But without the stations, things like refuelling, saving, and so on become difficult. One option might be for the player to take part in a voyage of exploration into an uncharted sector, as a scout, along with a base ship/mobile station and some attendant NPCs. It would make things a bit more mission-y, but there could be tasks to complete, e.g.:

* Locating "witchspace frequencies" or similar handwave, to add new nearby systems to the chart and to permit jumping out to them;
* Jumping out to those new systems in advance of the main fleet, to take "sensor readings", drop probes into the atmosphere of planets, etc., before returning to the main fleet with the data (which, if the system is more than 3.5LY away, will mean sunskimming to refuel, assuming no fuel tank OXPs etc.);
* Setting up fuel processing stations, asteroid mines, etc.;
* Finding a source of some vital resource that's run out (water, minerals, potato salad) to keep the expedition on the road;
* Other, more exciting tasks, in a few special systems with more interesting things in them (like inhabitants - who may or may not be friendly, and may or may not have larger agendas of their own)

The base ship could act like a mobile main system station, allowing the player to save the game, repair/refuel, get new mini-missions and so on. It could also leave behind a breadcrumb trail of temporary/slowly assembling main stations, as the expedition progresses.

Certainly making them up and running is the first step (most of what I've already accomplished before).

Well, having them up and running could be seen as one Pull Request to master git repo. Making them more interesting could be step 2, especially if this got into master you could have more people helping out (Redspear? kanthoney?)

Pleb wrote:

It's an idea but I need to make a new algorithm for developing the names first. The current one uses the seed and digrams with specific letters in to generate it. I'd like to continue using the seed to help keep it random but I think the digrams and letters need changing to incorporate the missing letters. It is possible though as I did this once before but only changed things slightly so names were similar but different. A new a algorithm would be better.

Take a look at this:
http://www.jongware.com/galaxy1.html

Scroll down to see how Frontier First Encounters generated the names.

Zireael wrote:

Well, having them up and running could be seen as one Pull Request to master git repo.

Ehm, no. I would not want to pull into master an implementation that just adds more of the same. Someone needs to convince us that it's really worth it first and, to do that, a full implementation that demonstrates something justifiably impressive, new or worthwhile is needed.

For the record, the code and know-how for adding galaxies 9 and above has been around for many years now, plenty of years before Pleb started looking into it. It never made it in because it became immediately obvious that it does nothing for gameplay and, if anything, it even makes it worse. Remember, Bell and Braben could have put billions and trillions of galaxies in the original Elite (the one running on 20K memory) and they didn't because it made it obvious that mathematical tricks were used to generate them. They say that sometimes less is more and in my opinion this is a very good case in point.

Let's see something really new and exciting that enhances gameplay and then we can discuss about pull requests. As it stands now, I see this more as an exercise in programming rather than a potential feature.

Let's see something really new and exciting that enhances gameplay and then we can discuss about pull requests.

There were already some good ideas thrown around here.

[*] frontier worlds
[*] no X government planets in a chart
[*] different naming scheme
[*] uninhabited planets
[*] systems with no stations per se but "base ships" just to allow saving
[*] exploration

...
Any more?

Zireael wrote:

[*] frontier worlds

If you mean as in FEII/FFE, I don't see that as a good idea, as it happens - if you're going to have new charts, the planets should have new, unique, names.

No, frontier as in possibly having no government or no population as opposed to no stations.

another_commander wrote:

As it stands now, I see this more as an exercise in programming rather than a potential feature.

This is mainly how I see this, as I said before this is a casual project not a practical one. However if it evolved into something more practical then that would be different...

Pleb wrote:

This is mainly how I see this, as I said before this is a casual project not a practical one. However if it evolved into something more practical then that would be different...

Absolutely, and when that happens I would be more than glad to press the button for merging into master.