Oolite Bulletins

spara wrote:

automated sensors planted by pirates outside the lane to alert the raiding party to intercept.

Like Pirate Centres?

Norby wrote:

spara wrote:

automated sensors planted by pirates outside the lane to alert the raiding party to intercept.

Like Pirate Centres?

Yeah. I had those in mind . However I would not extend the scanner ranges and would distribute the drones randomly on a cylinder around the lane. There would be holes in the net so the pirates would not not always attack when you leave the lane. With the possible exception of the witchspace buoy perhaps. And not use pirate centers, just a couple/few pirate groups with special AI waiting for call.

This should definitely be tested. Maybe I'll find some spare time somewhere. Or did you, Norby, create something at that time to test the idea?

spara wrote:

The police patrol the lane so it's sort of safe assuming there's some danger lurking outside the lane.

As I see it, the police patrol the lane so that there is a path for the traders to follow: go this way and we will protect you, anywhere else and we won't be able to or will refuse (by drawing police from the lane you'd be making their defence of traders inefficient). That should attract most of the traders, and indeed most of the pirates.

Rather than being on the lane as such, pirates might be better placed at trying to overlap the lane with their mass-locks. Like ambush predators on the edge of a migration path - they want the prey on the weak but not be trampled by the strong. As things stand, on player scanner = inducing a mass-lock, so the pirates couldn't be positioned too wide else you could often just pass straight through.

Maybe pirates aren't just waiting for you to travel down the lane, they're also waiting for you to leave it.

Imagine if once the player has left the lane, the nearest pirate pack moves to intercept. They dont have torus of course but couldn't this be simulated as an exception without too much processing strain? Then what? Well I think that would work better if it wasn't constantly happening, so you've then broken free but only after a serious fight perhaps proportional to the danger of the system.

One pirate pack not enough? How about the nearest two pirate packs or three but at the same time - I think that would keep me on lane
An individual has been seperated from the herd, the predators begin to close in for the kill... The lane is a rather sparsely populated for this analogy to work particularly well however.

Astrobe wrote:

Now, if the risk is to high for the reward, it can be fixed. For instance, award some shield regen boost while the weapons are offline.

Very true but where one choice is something that I'd rather wasn't in the game in the first place (i.e. crawl-by mass-locks) then, for me at least, it's not much of a choice in such instances.

To be fair, I've yet to try your particular oxp but whilst choosing a level of risk is a nice game element, even the 'low risk' option should still be fun else I think it is to the detriment of the game as a whole.

Perhaps multiple stations per planet could a solution against masslocking traffic jams.
3 to 8 stations around a planet depending on planet size, evenly distributed each has it's own spacelane and witchpoint, the systemplanet acts kinda like an airport with multiple runways. The systems traffic control sends you to the least busy spacelane?

also interstation traffic around the planet, almost equal markets with minimal differences to give beginning traders a way to make some credits.

spara wrote:

did you, Norby, create something at that time to test the idea?

It is still a plan, feel free to continue it.

cbr wrote:

3 to 8 stations around a planet depending on planet size, evenly distributed each has it's own spacelane and witchpoint

Imho the single witchpoint is a feature of Oolite so more could be in an OXP only. More parallel lanes are possible, could solve the jams but also reduce the police density due to the wider covered area.

Better GalCop actions could help to keep traders on lanes: clean ships send a long-range distress signal in red alert, a reply message show the time when the nearest Vipers can arrive to help using full synchronised torus. The main station should send out new ships for help also. In advanced systems a small GalCop outpost could be at the half of the main lane which send Vipers also.

Lurking pirates in exchange could use visual tracking to detect and pursuit off-lane ships from 4x scanner range, this is where a trader appear as a moving dot. Moreover could attack on-lane ships also if no GalCop ship in sight and retreat off-lane when one arrive. Vipers should not follow them but stay on the lane.

A warning message should be displayed before the player leave the lane to keep within.
Another should say at off-lane attacks that no help will arrive.

Alternatively, if the only goal is to avoid masslocks then use visual contact (1-4x scanner range depending on ship size, calculated by the core game) to predict if a ship will enter into scanner soon. In this case give a message with the remaining distance and where should turn to avoid it, as a well-known voice say: "turn right".
Just before masslock Torus drive could auto slow down to Injector speed which give a last chance to turn.
Send a message when the prediction is clear again after enough turn and remove the speed limit.

I don't know if it's an oxp or the core game that does this, but sometimes a clean ship tails me for some time then attacks me. Rather than probes, pirates could use scout ships to detect vulnerable ships.

As a counter-measure, I suggest to expand Broadcast comms oxp to let the player form mutual protection alliances. Maybe also combine that with the Torus synchronisation oxp.

Astrobe wrote:

I don't know if it's an oxp or the core game that does this, but sometimes a clean ship tails me for some time then attacks me. Rather than probes, pirates could use scout ships to detect vulnerable ships.

So the lane is a cylinder inside which good folks travel. And some daring pirates too. In safe systems fewer pirates and in more dangerous systems more. Around that "safe" cylinder is another, larger cylinder, which is basically empty. And outside that there is an even larger cylinder that is occupied by stalking pirates. Pirates who circle around and whose scanner range covers the empty corridor between the safe area and the pirate occupied area. If you wander to the in between area, there's quite a high change you cross a staking pirates scanner and will be attacked.

spara wrote:

So the lane is a cylinder inside which good folks travel. And some daring pirates too. In safe systems fewer pirates and in more dangerous systems more. Around that "safe" cylinder is another, larger cylinder, which is basically empty. And outside that there is an even larger cylinder that is occupied by stalking pirates. Pirates who circle around and whose scanner range covers the empty corridor between the safe area and the pirate occupied area. If you wander to the in between area, there's quite a high change you cross a staking pirates scanner and will be attacked.

It would be nice if, now and then, other traders were prepared to lend the player a hand - based on an odds calculation, of course, so a player attacked by a pirate pack shouldn't expect much assistance from a passing lone Cobra I, but a large convoy might intervene. Perhaps there could be an element of the player's reputation in there too, so a player who helps others is more likely to be helped.

This would provide an added incentive to stay on the lane, as well as increasing the interactivity of the ooniverse. It would also mean that the space outside of the lane need not be swarming with pirates - but any off-lane pirate encounter would be pretty much guaranteed to be against heavy odds.

On-lane pirate encounters, in safer systems at least, could be usually against lone pirates. These single ships, however, could sometimes be acting as scouts, and might be able to send a "Got one!" message to their pals lurking beyond the lane. This would give the player an opportunity, if they can despatch the scout quickly enough, to make a break for it before the rest of the mob arrives. Of course, a lone pirate could just be a lone pirate: it would be important to vary these encounters.

I played a game with acceleration gates as spara suggested. Within the gate-lane all ships traveled at the same speed which was about 4 or 5 times greater than the Torus speed for that game. Pirates had disruptor missiles that could take a gate offline anywhere along the lane. The gate would take a few minutes to become active again giving pirates the ability to attack the player or other traders. The player could try to spool up the Torus drive (no mass-lock) but if a pirate shot you with a disruptor missile it would knock out your Torus drive for a a minute or so.
It seems to me like most people who avoid the lane do so because its the faster to get to the station that way. I think making the lane the fastest way to travel (most of the time) is a good way to encourage players to stay on the lane. If someone wants to explore off-lane the only penalty is that it takes longer to get around.
I am not sure how this really fits in with Oolite, but I thought I'd bring it up for people to think about.

Disembodied wrote:

On-lane pirate encounters, in safer systems at least, could be usually against lone pirates. These single ships, however, could sometimes be acting as scouts, and might be able to send a "Got one!" message to their pals lurking beyond the lane. This would give the player an opportunity, if they can despatch the scout quickly enough, to make a break for it before the rest of the mob arrives. Of course, a lone pirate could just be a lone pirate: it would be important to vary these encounters.

I like this idea but if run as a lone wolf I tend to look for traders traveling off-lane in order to avoid the galcop and other traders.

Well, I've tried out the ship weighting idea and although it did help, the effect wasn't as significant as I'd hoped. The main reason for this being that the sheer distance required to clear the scanner is considerable.

When I was working on the rescaling experiment, adjusting the scanner was key to making the whole thing work as it sets the arena in which the player ship interacts.
With regards to both mass-locks and (to a lesser extent) 'lane integrity' I'd like to suggest a dynamic scanner with three range settings and effectively three modes of operation.

Each setting would need a trigger to enable switching to it, and potentially a state of affairs in which it is inoperable; indeed these two things could even be one and the same.

• Setting #1: Default - as we currently have in game
  • this is triggered simply be exiting one of the other modes or by spending more than 5 seconds with torus drive active
  Setting #2: Long Range mode - double range scanner
  • activated when player speed = 0 and deactivated once speed increases (stationary for accurate scanning)
  Setting #3: Evasion mode - half range scanner
  • activated with player weapons offline and in the absence of scanner interference (see below)

How does this help?

Setting #1 would mean that almost always mass-locks would be triggered as in the standard game - you shouldn't be missing any of the action or even any of the peaceful shipping

Setting #2 potentially offers a degree of strategy to the player and, if simply granted as a greater value for any pirate scouts (such as others have suggested), offers a simple means of detecting if the player leaves the lane (without the pirates just spotting all the traders and being too busy to bother with the player).

Setting #3 potentilly cuts crawl-by mass-lock duration by half, or even more if the ship concerned is not positioned directly in front. It also makes steering around such a mass-lock much easier.

The interference element is there to stop players evading interesting masslocks (before they have revealed themselves as such) when they only wish to avoid the tedious ones.

Here are some suggestions for what might qualify as interference:

• Condition Red
  Police (we can't have criminals just torus-driving to safety now can we?)
  Pirates (any kind of mass-lock inducer would be very useful to a pirate)
  Bounty Hunters (...and likewise to a bounty-hunter)
  ECM (it makes the scanner wobble so that should probably count as interference too)

Police and ECM are obvious of course but to a clean player the others are not. Problem for a fugitive player is that interference will almost always mean combat, and so one more means of interference might be useful to keep the player guessing. What that condition might be I am less convinced of but a simple one might just be when the scanner is too busy (would need to be more than the typical number of escorts +1 however or it would be triggering very often).

I believe this would offer no issues with regards to altering the scan class of ships and potentially no issues with regards to escaping encounters that you really shouldn't. Player speed and mass-lock mechanics are also essentially unchanged (it would still be the case that on scanner = mass-lock).

The only change would be to the range of the scanner and the creation of a set of circustances in which that range could be altered.

Astrobe wrote:

let the player form mutual protection alliances. Maybe also combine that with the Torus synchronisation oxp.

Good idea. If traders on main lane join into alliance with the clean player and sync torus right when appear on scanner then just keep press "j" and you gather a fleet without much delay up to the station. Sounds to good solution to a simple masslock problem, with increasing protection against pirates down the route, I like it.

So just a question, coming from a mostly-uneducated person,


What impact, if any, does Elite: Dangerous play on Oolite, and particularly Oolite II? I'm not as familiar with the Elite titles, having only become aware of them when I downloaded Oolite, but in my brief glances it seems like Dangerous is basically a modern-version of the Elite series, and apart from a few matching names and vague models, it's totally different game play.

Does that threaten the existence of an Oolite II being a branch-off from Elite, since that niche is already covered? It seems like if we followed their footsteps and made an "in name only" version of Elite, everybody would just prefer to play Dangerous since it's got a lot more features. That would limit us then to a totally separate game, devoid of any Elite characteristics, OR we'd have to completely stick with Elite and run with the story line as it was in the earlier days.

Cmdr. Aiden Henessy wrote:

What impact, if any, does Elite: Dangerous play on Oolite, and particularly Oolite II?

None, I think. There isn't really an Elite series (or if there is, it doesn't begin with Elite). The original Elite game, of which Oolite is a remake, was followed by Frontier. Despite having a few Elite ships in there, Frontier was very much its own thing, with its own (IMO lame) storyline and setting - the whole tedious Federation and Empire stuff, no alien races, "realistic" Newtonian movement, etc. Elite: Dangerous is a descendant of Frontier, not Elite, with the same tedious top-down storyline, plus the added annoyance of multiplayer with all its attendant limitations and compromises.

Oolite 2.0, and even more so Oolite II, are just daydreams, really, but I don't think the existence of E:D rules anything in or out. I really don't care about storyline, myself - especially a bad storyline, like the one Frontier kicked off. Possibly the greatest thing about the original Elite, and about Oolite, is the game-in-the-head: the looser the background storyline is, the better.

Oolite's storyline, as given on the website, is I think just about perfect, and as much as anybody needs:

Among the seven trillion people who are - at least officially - Cooperative citizens, you are nobody. So far, anyway. You've got a ship, some weapons, and enough spare cash to get started - and one day, you might get the fame, wealth or glory you want. Perhaps one day, everyone might know your name. If, that is, you can survive that long.

The two thousand star systems of the Cooperative once enjoyed a golden age of peace and prosperity, and perhaps the wealthiest of them can still pretend to. The trade ships that once safely travelled between planets now have to be well armed and escorted to fend off pirate attacks, from small-time criminals desperate for their next meal, to powerful robber barons extracting tithes from everyone who passes through their space.

The Cooperative's police force, concentrated near a few influential planets, can no longer maintain order. The mercenaries they hire for a few credits a kill are too few, too unreliable to do so either. And in the darkness between the stars, an old enemy lurks, fearless, perhaps waiting for order to collapse entirely.

Good luck, Commander.

This gives everybody loads of room to play, however they want to. Having someone else's fictional rules imposed from the get-go would be a serious turnoff.

Disembodied wrote:

Possibly the greatest thing about the original Elite, and about Oolite, is the game-in-the-head: the looser the background storyline is, the better... Having someone else's fictional rules imposed from the get-go would be a serious turnoff.

I would agree with that, however I find both elite and oolite suffer from a great deal of repetition which is only exacerbated by a lack of story.

Whilst we may not want to trade 'intellectual freedom' for some default storyline that will likely be rather bland in order to have mass appeal, it would be nice if there was more of a sence of consequence to the players actions. I'm not talking about toppling governments or saving the galaxy (oxp missions can cover that sort of thing), I do think there's more potential for simple game flavour elements.

For example, in elite consequence was largely represeted by credits and legal status, combat rating was just a 'score' for the player to register. In oolite courier reputation is another element that makes a difference and also adds to the player's story.

Perhaps ship comms could vary with your combat rating.

• "Fresh out of pilot school are we? Don't worry kid, we'll make it real quick..."
  "Watch this one boys, he's no stranger to combat."
  "You idiot! That's Commander [playername], with more kills than you've got credits! If we get out of this one I'm gonna kick your blue, bony butt all the way to Riedquat!"

Or what about station welcomes...

• "As an elite bounty hunter, you have been cleared for priority docking. Welcome to Quitiri commander."
  "Priority docking clearance granted for recognised courier Commander Jameson. Congratulations on completing another contract successfully."
  "Notorius smuggler Jameson, your docking has been delayed while GalCop authorities prepare for inspection of your vessel"

Even if the only changes were to the comms, the player's actions are now being recognised more obviously by the game and the 'story in the head' is represented a little more in the game.

Another idea would be to grant the player a reputation with each of the inhabitant types (e.g. birds, lizards, felines etc.) and perhaps be required to earn their trust before gaining access to full station facilites. e.g.

• No rep = can buy fuel
  Return visitor = can sell items
  return trader = can buy some items
  etc. etc.

Human colonials are by far the most numerous so such things might be important without dominating the game.
Again, the effect could simply be that of receiving more pleasant comms over time - simple, flavorful and with minimal interference to the gameplay as it stands.

Redspear wrote:

I find both elite and oolite suffer from a great deal of repetition which is only exacerbated by a lack of story.

Absolutely, yes! There is ample opportunity to enhance the player's own personal story, and certainly making the game more responsive to the player's reputation and recent actions would be a great boost to the game-in-the-head, without turning the player into the centre of attention. Player backstory is massively different from game backstory: there's huge scope for variety there. There's a very simple online Traveller character generator, and it's surprising just how easy it is to start to cook up character sketches in your mind from the results of a few die-rolls. I wouldn't suggest that this sort of thing be incorporated into Oolite, but certainly encouraging players to imagine themselves as something more than just a name would be a good idea.

All flavour elements depend on personal taste, though. Even something like [wiki]Randomshipnames OXP[/wiki] adds a certain slant to the image of the game, and the sorts of ship-names it cooks up won't be appropriate for everyone's personal idea of what the game-universe is like. Ultimately though that's unavoidable: there are built-in elements like system names and planet and species descriptions which already add some tinges of colour; the ship names and AI behaviours add another (clearly, the Oolite universe is not in the grand-baroque mould of e.g. Dune; it's much grubbier and blue-collar).

The primary source of the game-in-the-head is always going to be the player's head itself, but giving a few more little hooks and handles for players to catch on to, and develop how they please in their own minds, is a great idea.