Cornflakes
-
Posts
384 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cornflakes
-
-
I have posted on this before, but I will discuss it here to bring up an unknown that is a bigger issue. I would like to see 2 types of BPs. Both should be doable with the tag system discussed.
Taken from eve they are BPO and BPC. The Original has unlimited rights, make as many as you want. The Copy has a limited number of runs you can make from that copy. 1, 10, 100. Whatever you set. After that number is made it is gone.
So maybe I would set a royalties system on the BPO, every use from it you pay me xxx credits. Or I could sell you it out right for a large sum (in eve this typically cost the value of the ship it made, where a copy was less than 1/10, but it could be anything). Where as the copy would likely be a set price to buy it. Even if we dont get 2 distinct blueprint types it should be doable in the tag system. A BPO wouldnt have a use limit where a copy would.
The bigger problem I have is how can you create the blueprints in the first place. If I make a ship from scratch it is assumed I can make any blueprint I want. But what if I didnt start the ship from scratch. Can I make my own blueprint of a ship I made from someone elses blueprint? If so that destroyes the market. Some people suggested that blueprints can only be made from the VR creation, but what about ships I make in the real world. Or VR creations that are then modified, as the larger ships will constantly be upgraded.
If we then say only the creator can make the blueprint, what if my corp has a standard hull they give out for others to design on. There has to be a way for them to hand over blueprint creation rights. While it shouldnt be hard to do this, just another right you can give or sell, but it has to be put into the game.
Depending on the features of the RDMS you dont need separate objects for blueprints.
A BPC would just be a license to access a BP x times.
RDMS access could manage all of that.
All that would be needed from the game's side would be a "use unlimited" and "use once" power for blueprint access.
The RDMS could handle the rest.
As a thought would it be interesting if RDMS tags could be attached to objects.
Where posession of the object would give the player the rights the tag includes
Dunno what it would be useful for, but better have an useless idea than no idea but an use for one :V
-
Hopefully not far.
In a game where social interaction is the game... Not engaging in social gameplay should not be a successful method of play.
Social interaction should improve the game, and not be a hard limiter
- Toecutter and Anaximander
-
2
-
Perhaps you can lease a contract for a certain amount ordered, because a person might want 1 ship while an organisation may need 20. My royalty system sounded less hassling. The devs' function can make things more... negotiative, more PM spam for a person to lower their price. :/
And blueprints will be probably "Saved" into a person's brain, because cerebral implants or whatever sci-fi mumno jumbo
And your system makes that easier... how?
You still have to define which ships you are going to give them and have to give them access rights and collect your fees from them.
And all that with a quick and easy to use interface.
You outlined /nothing/ on how to handle that.
With the RDMS you may be able to set up a pool of identical right groups for different ships.
And leasing one away or leasing twenty away would just be typing a number in the "take x from pool" menu.
identical effort for both scenarios
-
There's a devblog on that? O_o how did I miss it? Can you give me a link?
https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2015/05/21/rights-duties-management-system/
-
2)Multiplication. […]and whenever new ship is built from BP, previous self-destructs.
Hellooo griefing.
Steal blueprint, start building a copy, stuff disintegrates.
Why so a weird way of doing that?
you build the ship outlined in the blueprint, blueprint self destroys afterwards.
Same "only one production run", less grieding potential.
And less lore weirdness: whythefark should my ship self deatroy when a copy gets built? What physical mechanism enforces that? Why cant i remove that mechanism? I built the copy, why are there physical effectors in it that i cant influence?
-
Erm... why not use the RDMS which is already going to be in the game?
The original blueprint owner has all the initial rights.
Exchanging royalities for a blueprint would be a general contract which exchanges blueprint read/execute access for a duty in an arbitary form, recurring payment, access to something, having to sing once a day for the blueprint owner...
A change in royalities would be a change in the duties, which the owner of the blueprint can do through the RDMS interface.
No arbitary npcs or timers required, no fixed currency required
-
There are torpedoes fired from aircraft and choppers and missiles fired from ships, so "fired from a seagoing vessel" cant be the definition of "torpedo".
Wikipedia and merriam webster both give me roughly the same definition of a torpedo being am elongated projectile intended for underwater use
Spacecraft rarely are underwater so they wont have much use for torpedoes.
-
Pretty much. In the simplest of senses, torpedoes and missiles are essentially the same, save for the fact that they are meant to be fired in different mediums. Missiles are fired through air, and as such, they have fins to change direction and such. Torpedoes are fired in a vacuum, and as such, they require small thrusters in every direction to change their bearing.
That is literally the first time i heard that definition.
The one i usually hear/know is that missles are the smaller ones, fired by and/or used against smaller vehicles, and torpedoes being the generally larger and more sluggish variant
-
-
No, orion and plasma core rockets are different from nswr's.
Gas/plasma core rockets typically arent intended to expell their nuclear fuel and the fuel doesnt come in direct contact with the reaction mass.
Orion drives directly throw out nukes and have no/very small amounts of propellant.
They also dont work or look in any way like a normal rocket.
An NSWR superficially looks like a normal chemical rocket (fuel injection, reaction chamber, somewhat normal nozzle) and just directly dumps the fission fuel into its propellant and has it undergo fast, nuke-like fission.
because it doesnt directly have to contain the reaction it can reach far higher temperatures than a solid or gas core rocket, leading to higher exhaust velocity and efficiency.
Its a kind of gas core rocket where they went past reasonable and just went straight to meltdown with the "containment vessel" being the propellant
-
A tracked tank with afterburner thrusters would be awesome.
if only robocraft worked on my computer, stupid broken anti cheat software :V
-
Why not both? A NSWR is essentially a nuclear explosion in your exhaust stream.
Nuke them while you are flying away :V
-
-
And what would prevent you from mounting thrusters on a tracked tank?
-
Tracks have the problems on the other end of the gravity scale
But yeah, vehicles would have different flight ceilings.
They would always have some movement abilities as their lift rises steeply at very low heights
-
That superconducting levitation needs a strong magnet on the other side, doesnt "just work".
Would work for vehicles on prepared tracks but nowhere else.
But yeah, flux pinned superconductors are cool
With my simple lift calculation heavier vehicles would naturally stay closer to the ground as there the hover engines would be much more powerful
I dont know how to include mass and local gravity into the calculation while still including a flight ceiling for vehicles.
i thought about it, but everything i thought about made them too powerful
-
If interstellar travel is limited to stargates only, how would you ever get out of the first solar system? Are you advocating for pre-made stargates? I would be strongly against that.
Furthermore, what is the point in a continuous single shard universe if you can't actually go to the space in between star systems? You may as well forget the continuous part and make separate shards for each system like in Eve.
Well, i've been suggesting for a while now that stargates could act as "catapults" for ships.
You dont require an arrival gate to get anywhere, but a jump without artival gate needs larger amounts of energy and complex calculations and high scanning effort of the star system you want to jump to.
So you can get to new star systems with a departure gate only, but it needs time to calculate the jump, larger generators and possibly a more complex gate than gate to gate jumps.
-
On the "how high can hoverdrives fly" topic:
Maybe they provide [blargh blargh directed gravity technobabble] upwards thrust that decreases with 1/h^k with h as the height measured from the terrain straight below it and k being some balancing constant ~2
That would decrease very fast with increasing height, faster than the gravitational pull (whichs 1/r^2 being measured from the center of the planet) and would enable a large variety of hovercraft.
Large, heavy tank like vehicles which can only hover a few cm off the ground, over lighter speeder equivalents to "helicopter" like craft with light frames and oversized hover engines.
Of course the usual variations of larger drives and MOAR POWAAAH apply
-
Elminating free-form travel would also impinge on the free nature of a sandbox game. Imagine if you couldn't leave a village's gravel path in MC. It's far too limiting.
I think nobody is suggesting forcing the players onto fixed paths only.
But interstellar/strategic movement needs limitations for good gameplay.
Choke points make stories and cause people to think outside the box.
When they have to find alternative routes, make treaties, sabotage blockades etc
-
Is a fact you just made a technicality over what Cold Fusion is?
If it's not Thermonuclear and it doesn't waste energy instead of generating, it's Cold Fusion. This is a fact.
What you stated in your previous reply is considered trolling, an attempt to infuriate by commenting platitudes in a thread to prolong a conversation to the point of exasperation of the opposite party. I tried politely to end this "game" of yours, by stating you won, you exasperated me.
Fusing two Hydrogens won't lead to any step of Helium-2, because 2 protons, don't make a Helium. Manipulating quarks to shift a hydrogen - a proton - from a UUD configuration to a UDD quark configuration would lead into fusion of Hydrgeon with its reconfigured self, given that energy would be produced instead of being spent, that would be categorised as Cold Fusion.
No, you are describing the first step of the proton proton chain of solar fusion.
Which is very hot fusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton–proton_chain_reaction
And a nucleus with two protons /is/ per definition helium because atoms are categorised by their number of protons.
Helium2 is a highly unstable isotope of helium without any neutrons.
Its still helium.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope
Cold fusion isnt "without wasting energy", cold fusion is a fusion reaction that happens at much lower reactant temperatures than solar fusion.
It makes no statement about efficiency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion
I'll stop being annoying when you stop spouting nonsense as fact.
Especially things you could check with 2 minutes of googling.
-
-
-
That's not really an answer.
You asked "what is freeform travel? Is it like in eve where they move from star to star without jumpgates"
I answer: "roughly, but you may not move instantly between stars"
Where is that not an answer?
-
There's no warping space, it's space-time. Read, between, the lines. I give up.
This thread got way off topic."Read between the lines" is no correct answer to "your stephen hawking text doesnt answer my question"
And warping space or warping space-time is semantics, nothing else.
And the paper still doesnt answer why drives would need weak points, heck, not even what they are
Contracted Blueprints, Royalties & Fixed Currency Circulation
in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
Posted
There are still better ways than to destroy the one ship that you are allowed to build.
Take for example the system the game from the depths uses.
As long as the object isnt manually removed from the game its blueprint always stays intact and the player can repair it back to full health.
The blueprint could give you the right to create and maintain one such ghost.
To "free" the ghost you have to destroy its current body.
Number limitations, repair capabilities, no grief potential.
And you can steal everything, and if its with social engineering.
Repair crews need build access to the blueprint, especially the ones aboard of larger ships.
How do you keep them from, even accidentally, creating a new instance of your ship and destroying it thus?
the ability to sabotage ships should be there, yes, but that should include proper actions to damage or take over objects and not a build action somewhere afar from the sabotaged object.
And what about stealing ships? With your one time blueprint variation its completely pointless, because the original owner can destroy your price with the press of a button.
Regardless of him having prepared proper self destruct devices that a boarding party could work around but with a "magic" ability that the attacker can do nothing against.