Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How is/are Dual Universe, Companies, Groups of players, etc, supposed to manage air traffic?

 

Start from: "5:00" of this video: CRASH

 

As you can see, from this video, we see a scene where one ship collides with another and easily tears apart with utmost no effort.

How are we going to manage a ton of players flying in one area where, if they collide then the ship included in their collision will be destroyed.

 

What if I just want to leave the planet and some troll flies by and crashes into my slow ship and I'm knocked out of air and grounded in less than a second? What will I do If I'm speeding in the middle of nowhere and someone who's texting and driving isn't watching where they're going and I get hit, and I'm stuck floating in space? Will I have Insurance? Is there a teleport or taxi service?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, Check out my YouTube Channel: MaxedMASKED

 

(Watch, Like, Subscribe, Share, and Grin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly JC has stated in an AMA that it is unlikely for there to be collision *damage*. While technically doable, there are multiple reasons not to implement it.

 

As for the air traffic question: How about air traffic controllers? But I don't think air traffic controllers are the way forward. That is much like having a traffic warden at every intersection waving cars down. It is not sustainable for very large numbers of craft. That said, they will work for low amount of traffic.

 

So what are the alternatives? How do we handle flying cars today? The answer is we don't, because the skies have not been mapped to handle any kind of traffic (and seeing how some people drive, it would not be advisable giving them a flying car).

 

But the skies are huge and space is full of...space. This kind of problem will become apparent in or around cities and space stations. In these places constructs could be placed to demarcate sky lanes.

 

Edit:

Skip to around 9:56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that my org will have a way to control traffic flow within our TCU areas. So as long as people follow the paths set out, then it wont be too bad traffic flow wise. Now in common areas I am sure there will be chaos untill someone makes a roadway and we see if those hover cars follow the road instead of going every which way. people will figure it out. i dont think it will be too bad. We could even build a wall area the inner city so hover cars cant drive through it and you have to walk into the area. Flying ships will most likely have landing pads on top of buildings to keep the ground floor clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't enforce it, people won't do it. Gl stopping speeding or people just taking straight paths.

 

And no, there won't be collisions so you don't have to worry about that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly JC has stated in an AMA that it is unlikely for there to be ship collisions. While technically doable, there are multiple reasons not to implement it.

 

They HAVE collisions. They don't have collision DAMAGE. Don't make it sound as if ships will ghost through one another. That's how missinformation starts. Be specific. :|

 

 

Also, JC doesn't want the resource hog of the Space Engineeers model. I have proposed the mechanic of G Tolerance + Structrual integrity, which uses their ALREADY established model of inertia / momentum, which takes into account your collision ONLY when the Newtons behind an accelreation exceed a ratio of G / m3  1(Ultimate Tensile Strength). You exceed your ship's ratio on G your voxels average G tolerance dictates? You take collision damage that ONLY takes into account ONE on ONE collsions. The Space Engineers model JC wants toa avoid, takes into account EACH and EVERY voxel that connected on a collision. MY system, pretty much works only for the firtsst second of a collsion and only applies damage if the G / m3 ratio is exceeded.

 

 

And before the "that can't happen" they do use F / m2 for the Aerodynamic profiles of ships. Both Tensile Stregth and Pressure, are Pascals (unit of pressure).

 

 

They do got the means to add collison damage - if I thought it up, the people in NQ already came to that conclusion as well. The only real question is "will they make the game idiot-proof by removing collision damage? " .

 

 

And I can't really blame NQ for not wanting to add such a challenging thing as G Tolerance. I mean, how will peopel; build 15000 k,m/s ships  by strapping a 1000 MN thrsuter of a wooden spaceship? Do you think the average bloke in this forum can undetstand what's wrong with 1000 MN thruster of a wooden boat? 80% of them are like "I don't see the problem, why would 1000 Mega-Newtons be a bad idea ona wooden spaceboat?".

 

 

And here's the sad reality of things I can see coming.

 

10000 Videos on youtube of people landing ships with a NOSE DIVE, will just kill the game's popularity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They HAVE collisions. They don't have collision DAMAGE. Don't make it sound as if ships will ghost through one another. That's how missinformation starts. Be specific. :|

 

The pedantry is strong with this one. I have updated my post, though if people take what they read in a random post over JC's own words (in the same post), there is really no helping there.

 

Edit: And I really do want to see what happens to wooden spaceships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, don't get confused. That was Space Engineers, a totally unrelated game. Their whole shtick is about fully modeled physics based collision damage. It's got nothing to do with DU as a model or even as a comparison between models. In the video you linked, the creator was not even talking about damage, but about trailers' use of in-game footage. In fact, it won't even be possible to split a ship in half. The voxels and elements would still be magically attached to each other (though probably not useful any more).

As far as collision damage in DU, see the above posts, that about covers it. Until NQ announces something in the future, that's what we've got to go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pedantry is strong with this one. I have updated my post, though if people take what they read in a random post over JC's own words (in the same post), there is really no helping there.

 

Edit: And I really do want to see what happens to wooden spaceships

It pops, like a baloon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is how it will be handled:

 

Jimmy is flying around like a responsible person in the appropriate lanes.

Tommy is being a brain-dead frog and is flying into every possible structure.

Tommy is then mugged detained and banned from the corporation.

Everyone is happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Space Engineers is a really bad game to use for examples in Dual Universe. The Engine is quite bad the developers spend 99% of their time fighting with its limitations. The game is alsoi quite a diff type of game it's a mechanics crash simulator where Empyrion is more your exploring / RPG style space game. Both with the Sandbox voxel building. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...