Why should a battle in one system be identical to a battle in another? Why not terrain?



Lasers and missiles lose damage in systems in nebulae. Kinetic and missiles lose efficacy in systems with black holes and strong gravity wells. And maybe skip having a terrain that makes missiles the best choice.

Nice Idea!

As I said in another thread:

Well actually this goes back to another idea in another discussion. The "terrain"-idea was discussed here: http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/...n-Star-Systems

and here: http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/...-effect-system

and here: http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/...-AND-star-type



while I proposed the idea and some additional suggestions on "terrain" and battle improvement here:

http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/...ion-pack/page6



Here you will find a full list of suggestions so far: http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/...far-Discussion



You will find several similar ideas in the Design-section of the Forum.

Looks like someone knows what they're talking about...! lol

We had endless discussions and suggestions about these things. We honestly hope they will be implemented in the expansionopack! If you like, join the discussion with more ideas and participate in the polls (if there), so we get more attention from the Devs. lol

GenericKen wrote:
Why should a battle in one system be identical to a battle in another? Why not terrain?



Lasers and missiles lose damage in systems in nebulae. Kinetic and missiles lose efficacy in systems with black holes and strong gravity wells. And maybe skip having a terrain that makes missiles the best choice.

Usually because, to the extent of my knowledge of physics and space, we're not having battle in those kinds of systems. We're fighting over habitable systems in these games, and I don't know planets that support life can form in a nebula, or in the same system as a black hole. Now, should we get systems with these features to go to (and a reason to really want them), this could make some sense.



To comment on the "terrain" though, I don't think a black hole would really effect a battle that much. As long as you stayed away from the event horizon, all your weapons should act just fine. If you're close enough to the black hole that your weapons are being affected...you probably have bigger issues to worry about than shooting at your enemy.

FinalStrigon wrote:
Usually because, to the extent of my knowledge of physics and space, we're not having battle in those kinds of systems. We're fighting over habitable systems in these games, and I don't know planets that support life can form in a nebula, or in the same system as a black hole. Now, should we get systems with these features to go to (and a reason to really want them), this could make some sense.



To comment on the "terrain" though, I don't think a black hole would really effect a battle that much. As long as you stayed away from the event horizon, all your weapons should act just fine. If you're close enough to the black hole that your weapons are being affected...you probably have bigger issues to worry about than shooting at your enemy.

That is a valid point. Perhaps we talk about more realistic "terrain" (even though you can't talk of terrain in space!). Like Habitats on Asteroids would clearly leed to a fight in or around an asteroid field. Sure the big ships would stay outside, but when your fleet consists only of small ships, they could outflank the enemy or hide, getting extra defense but loosing accuracy and so on. Thats what this discussions should be about: How to produce a realistic "battleground" for spacefight. Since I am just speculating, having just few understanding of real space battle, there are however many members in this forum with actual knowledge of science fiction and real science alike.

Codename_Veers wrote:
That is a valid point. Perhaps we talk about more realistic "terrain" (even though you can't talk of terrain in space!). Like Habitats on Asteroids would clearly leed to a fight in or around an asteroid field. Sure the big ships would stay outside, but when your fleet consists only of small ships, they could outflank the enemy or hide, getting extra defense but loosing accuracy and so on. Thats what this discussions should be about: How to produce a realistic "battleground" for spacefight. Since I am just speculating, having just few understanding of real space battle, there are however many members in this forum with actual knowledge of science fiction and real science alike.

Well, there's no real such thing as "knowledge of science fiction." As we have no idea what kind of technology is going to be used in the future, or what kind of technology it is in the game, debating what can and can't be done is a moot point. Besides, we still have no idea what "real" space battle would be like. We have an idea, based on the tech we have today and our understanding of physics, but we have no way of knowing if in the future technology might be made to make some impossibilities possible.



I doubt we'd want to get too detailed with terrain, though, to mention asteroid belts and what not, seeing as those are technically "planets" that can be colonized. And taking things down to that small a level might be a move towards a more SoaSE-like battle system. I'd say we're better off sticking to qualities a system might have. Maybe if it had a lot of asteroid belts, any fleet in the system gets the same bonuses and penalties. Same if the system were a nebula, or wormholes, and so on. Going down to a hull-by-hull set of bonuses/penalties just seems too complicated for as simple a battle system as we have now.

FinalStrigon wrote:
Well, there's no real such thing as "knowledge of science fiction." As we have no idea what kind of technology is going to be used in the future, or what kind of technology it is in the game, debating what can and can't be done is a moot point. Besides, we still have no idea what "real" space battle would be like. We have an idea, based on the tech we have today and our understanding of physics, but we have no way of knowing if in the future technology might be made to make some impossibilities possible.



I doubt we'd want to get too detailed with terrain, though, to mention asteroid belts and what not, seeing as those are technically "planets" that can be colonized. And taking things down to that small a level might be a move towards a more SoaSE-like battle system. I'd say we're better off sticking to qualities a system might have. Maybe if it had a lot of asteroid belts, any fleet in the system gets the same bonuses and penalties. Same if the system were a nebula, or wormholes, and so on. Going down to a hull-by-hull set of bonuses/penalties just seems too complicated for as simple a battle system as we have now.

What I actually meant is the knwoledge of science-fiction-history, meaning the scenarios and technical advancements of sci-fi books, movies and games. Compare it to "Warp-Engine". It is a fictional advancement from what, Star Trek? The main Techs of the Tech Tree are highly science-fictional (since that is what the game is about!) and thus more narrative than realistic. But many of the techs are based on physical understanding of what "could be possible" (hard sci-fi).

So this way we have two theories we can rely on:



1. Science-Fiction Theories: Using knowledge out of sci-fi ressources to design the ES-Universe (not so realistic but really fun!)

2. Actual Science Theories: Using our basic understandment of physics to shape our sci-fi setting more realistic.



Since we cannot actually design a real sci-fi setting with absolute certain sourroundings, fluff and rules, we have to rely on both ways, to create a fascinating game.

My point: You either decide for low- or hard- sci-fi. Low Sci fi more like Star Wars with no respect for physical rules at all or Hard-Sci-fi with as much realistic basics as possible.



I myself prefere hard-sci-fi, but anyways it is not absolutely important to be so accurate in a GAME. It should make fun. So we should focus on designing acceptable sourroundings, backrounds and "terrains" to obtain as much fun and as much realism as possible. You can hear the fleet shooting anyways in game, what is usually impossible in space because of the vacuum.

True, true, you have a point.



I'd say more, but at this point I think we're starting to take the thread into off-topic waters. ^^;;

Sure, nothing against a good discussion. We could move it to PM if you like. Otherwise I would propose if the DEVs are considering it, we should make suggestions about battlefield modiefieres and scenarios. (But perhaps in the other threads?)

Up to you. I'd be fine with continuing in PMs, but a forum discussion thread may be best. Like I said, I'm not the most knowledgeable on the physics of space, or the technicalities of many sci-fi universes, so alone I might not be able to contribute much.

Hm, actually I am more into literature and media science or cultural studies. I fear it would end up in an bombardement of some scientific jibberjabber about how media, literature and culture is dealing with the topic, while a physician or astronom wouldn't understand what the f*** I am talking about.

It always depends on the point of view. So my suggestion: Let's call it even and start designing some realistic/scientific and unrealistic/fictional "terrain" for Spacebattles.



I am pretty sure that most of the Spacebattles would be handled in usual freespace standoffs, but there sure as hell would be some in awesome environments.



I.e.: The Black whole or X-ray Problem: Yes, it would affekt bove fleets however it should affekt something special. I mean like "black whole" is affecting any lightsource, so every Laserbeam-damage would be reduced by half. The malus counts for both fleets, but weekens the fleet focused on beamweapons.



My proposal-list for battlefield ambience are:



- Gravitation (Suns, Planets, Black Wholes...): - X on Kinetics/Beam accuratcy

- External Influence (Rays, waves...): - X on Missiles/Defence

- Environment (Asteroids, Nebulas...): - X on Weaponaccuraty/Defences



also managable mali: constant damage (like Dreadnaughts in an Asteroidfield, or all ships in the way of a Sun-Emission), Disfunction of battlecards (can't use hacking near a sun or Nebula...)