Oolite 2.0 or II

An area for discussing new ideas and additions to Oolite.

Moderators: another_commander, winston

User avatar
Redspear
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 2644
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Oolite 2.0 or II

Post by Redspear »

Milo wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:08 pm
I don’t want a main station or witchpoint beacon replaced by or merged with a BMM. But, as long as it’s an optional oxp, my preference need not interfere with yours.
Well, it was an example on my part, not a recommendation or even a preference. In fact, optional is my preference which is why I suggested oxp config compatability, the rest was just referencing well known positions as potential options within that framework to illustrate possible options within that framework.

However, without wishing to debate pure semantics, agreed: optional is key. After all, even if one does install 'conflicting' oxps then whether or not there is a 'problem' is a often a subjective matter.
User avatar
Cholmondely
Archivist
Archivist
Posts: 5005
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:00 am
Location: The Delightful Domains of His Most Britannic Majesty (industrial? agricultural? mainly anything?)
Contact:

Re: Oolite 2.0 or II

Post by Cholmondely »

Redspear wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:19 pm
Terris is an example of a game that I wouldn't like oolite to emulate. They're very different games of course but I'm thinking in particular with regards to difficulty.

Suppose there are three different game states with regards to difficulty:

1. Easy with little or no practice needed beyond familiarisation with the controls
2. Challenging without practice but easy with sufficient practice
3. Challenging even with significant practice.

Many 'arcade ' games progress through these three stages with the boundaries of each depending on the player but the order bring very much 1, 2, 3.
Oolite by contrast goes something like: 2, 3 (first trip to a more dangerous system or with a sensitive cargo), 2 (half-decent equipment), 1 (iron-assed), 2 (missions), 1 (comfortable)

The up and down element of Oolite's difficulty is something I quite like - I just don't like that it 'finishes' with a '1'.

When difficulty drops there can be a sense of accomplishment "Done it!" that I don't get from tetris - where the only change of pace is for it to steadily increase.

At the risk of repeating myself, I favour an approach where there is a sense of achievement that the player has some time to 'bask in'. But not where there is nothing left to achieve. So rather than 'finishing' on a long, drawn-out 1 (or even a 3 a la Tetris) I think that a 'long 1' interspersed with the odd 2 or three might be the way to go.

After a period of easy "pootling about":
"Commander we have a mission for you that many of my advisors tell me is impossible. Frankly we need it to be possible because our situation is desperate and being one of the few Elite pilots known to us we're all hoping you're the man/woman/lobster/thing for the job".

Randomised Elite missions? It's the best I've got :mrgreen:
Just reading through this - and have read bits and pieces elsewhere on this thread.

This (to me) seems to be concerned with the "end-game". And I've never gotten that far, myself! But to me there seem to exist various fixes for this concern within the galaxy of the Oolite oxp's.
1) Load up Xeptatl's Sword, the mission to end all missions, culminating in a battle royal against the Thargoids. And then retire!
2) Start loading tougher and tougher ships into your game (but don't take one yourself). See "red tag" & ubership for two partial lists.
3) Devise a meta-oxp which does (2) for you, drip feeding tougher ships into the game as one progresses through the Elite ranks, emulating the improvement of technology. It could encompass
3a) the weakening of GalCop (with fewer and fewer vipers, say), the transmogrification of democracies etc. into anarchies, the rise of the Comoonin and the dictatorships, et cetera, et cetera.
- and of course the concomitant effects on trade (getting much more dangerous and accompanied by a corresponding increase in profit margins).
3b) the emboldening of the Thargoids (add in tougher ones over time)
3c) the increase in piracy (tougher pirates, weakening of trade, battles between protected trade convoys and pirate flotillas with them getting ever better ships)

And, by the way, I also stumbled across this: Idea: option to retire your commander and scoreboard (2014)

And, even further, "by the way", are there any other oxp's which need a red tag?
Comments wanted:
Missing OXPs? What do you think is missing?
Lore: The economics of ship building How many built for Aronar?
Lore: The Space Traders Flight Training Manual: Cowell & MgRath Do you agree with Redspear?
User avatar
Redspear
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 2644
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Oolite 2.0 or II

Post by Redspear »

Cholmondely wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 am
This (to me) seems to be concerned with the "end-game"
Yep.
Cholmondely wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 am
And I've never gotten that far, myself! But to me there seem to exist various fixes for this concern within the galaxy of the Oolite oxp's.
All of your suggestions however are contrary to this:
Terris is an example of a game that I wouldn't like oolite to emulate. They're very different games of course but I'm thinking in particular with regards to difficulty.

Suppose there are three different game states with regards to difficulty:

1. Easy with little or no practice needed beyond familiarisation with the controls
2. Challenging without practice but easy with sufficient practice
3. Challenging even with significant practice.

Many 'arcade ' games progress through these three stages with the boundaries of each depending on the player but the order bring very much 1, 2, 3.
Oolite by contrast goes something like: 2, 3 (first trip to a more dangerous system or with a sensitive cargo), 2 (half-decent equipment), 1 (iron-assed), 2 (missions), 1 (comfortable)

The up and down element of Oolite's difficulty is something I quite like - I just don't like that it 'finishes' with a '1'.
That's fine of course but none of them solve the 'concern' I presented.
Your first suggestion is effectively an end-boss and the others are all tetris like (ever increasing difficulty) if I'm understanding them correctly.

However, ideas can be useful, so don't let me stop you.
User avatar
Cholmondely
Archivist
Archivist
Posts: 5005
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:00 am
Location: The Delightful Domains of His Most Britannic Majesty (industrial? agricultural? mainly anything?)
Contact:

Re: Oolite 2.0 or II

Post by Cholmondely »

Redspear wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 5:27 pm
Your first suggestion is effectively an end-boss and the others are all tetris like (ever increasing difficulty) if I'm understanding them correctly.
Not quite. XS is, yes. But for the others, the idea is that they are introduced when the player has the ability/equipment to cope with them, so that the end is not a long-drawn out "1", but that there are occasional überships (they are occasional, yes?) and that the universe is generally more dangerous (but easily manageable by an Elite-ranked player).

But of course, this is all tweakable, no? So those wishing a "3" can so choose, and those wishing a "1", ditto.
Comments wanted:
Missing OXPs? What do you think is missing?
Lore: The economics of ship building How many built for Aronar?
Lore: The Space Traders Flight Training Manual: Cowell & MgRath Do you agree with Redspear?
User avatar
Redspear
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 2644
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Oolite 2.0 or II

Post by Redspear »

Cholmondely wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 6:02 pm
Not quite. XS is, yes. But for the others, the idea is that they are introduced when the player has the ability/equipment to cope with them, so that the end is not a long-drawn out "1", but that there are occasional überships (they are occasional, yes?)
Fair point but then the more you add, the higher their frequency.
Post Reply