Jump to content

Survey: Stargate Technology  

84 members have voted

  1. 1. Stargate connection technique:

    • Dialing gates individually
    • fixed gate-to-gate connection


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Cybrex said:

I'd prefer fixed gates.

 

That said, I would be ok with dialing but only if it took time (Like a few hours) to dial up a new gate. That way it forces you to commit for a length of time.

 

 

this

 

If you can redial within seconds to any gate you have been already at least once, it would just be too OP imho. With fixed connections you have more gates, true, but it

would add tactical elements in placing those gates.

 

Do you want to make a traderoute? place 2 gates for the 2 hubs

 

Do you want a safe planet for your org, but still be able to be in the "main" system quickly? Build a gate in some random system somewhere and from there a second gate (which is hidden) to your homeplanet

 

and more

 

With redialing you get some balancing problems too:

- do you have to visit the gate at least once so you'll be able to dial to it?

- what about RDMS and gate ownership?

- how long would redialing take?

- what if more ppl want to dial to the same gate?

- someone might use this to block certain gates with alt accs/neutral orgs - no reinforcements for the defenders and no chance of getting help at all (which would be a viable tactic to me, just throwing ideas)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

English (Translator used)

 

That one can select several gates does not mean that there is only one gate in the system, one can as many buildings as one has means. Hiding gates in the gorge of a large spaceship will be difficult because it must be in space, otherwise you have the space ship in the mountain.
The interplay of several organizations is most likely unavoidable.


 

Quote

 

German (orginal)

 

Das man mehrere Gates anwählen kann heißt nicht das es nur ein Gate im System gibt, man kann so viele Bauen wie man Mittel hat. Verstecken von Gates in Göße eines großen Raumschiffs wird wohl schwierig, da es im All sein muß, sonst hat man das Raumschiff im Berg.

Das Zusammenspiel mehrerer Organisationen ist sehr wahrscheinlich unumgänglich.

 


 

Die Waldfee

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, huschhusch said:

English (Translator used)

 

That one can select several gates does not mean that there is only one gate in the system, one can as many buildings as one has means. Hiding gates in the gorge of a large spaceship will be difficult because it must be in space, otherwise you have the space ship in the mountain.
The interplay of several organizations is most likely unavoidable.


 

Die Waldfee

 

 

That's entirely not the point - and I never assumed there would only be one gate per system.

Hiding a gate isn't easy, but certainly doable. And if you can just redial your gate to any other gate, it's likely that people can and will block each other, intentional or unintentional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

English (Translator used)

 

The owner of the gate can block each one by the right system (RDMS), whether with free selection or fixed assignment.

 

Quote

German (orginal)

 

Der Besitzer des Gates kann durch das Rechtesystem (RDMS) jeden blocken, ob nun mit freier Anwahl oder fester Zuordnung.

 

 

Die Waldfee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lethys said:

- someone might use this to block certain gates with alt accs/neutral orgs - no reinforcements for the defenders and no chance of getting help at all (which would be a viable tactic to me, just throwing ideas)

 

15 minutes ago, huschhusch said:

English (Translator used)

 

The owner of the gate can block each one by the right system (RDMS), whether with free selection or fixed assignment.

 

Die Waldfee

 

as I said: people are patient and may use spais/alts/orgs to use the RDMS against the defending org. I'm not saying this is easy, as you obviously need RDMS control, but it can and will happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, as we know how to avert this problem. I'm just throwing ideas here because I fear that inexperienced ppl will just start a whining rampage and that's not good for the game.

 

Ps: nice "discussion"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

English (Translator used)

 

Your word in God's ear. The mimim fraction will come.

 

Quote

German (orginal)

 

Dein Wort in Gottes Gehörgang. Die mimim-Fraktion wird kommen.

 

 

Die Waldfee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Reptoks said:

The dialing gate means each gate has the same level of service, while the fixed gate is the opposite.

Just imagine that if you destroy the fixed gates that leads to a "trading & business" solar system, a cool conflict will be made ... but if we using the dialing ones, it will be less catchy because "hey, we still have the another gate"

 

i think a two front conflict with an space and stargate attack could be a nice scenario too.

they can prevent that with making the gates really really expensive.

 

On 7.9.2017 at 6:38 PM, Ben Fargo said:

That is reasonable, but I would prefer to not be able to turn them on or off.  If they do not use wormholes, then I wonder what they could use.  It could be something we have not even imagined, but I like science fiction better when we can at least speculate how things work.

 

well you could shutdown the gate like in the series "Stargate SG-1" - they use wormholes too.

 

On 7.9.2017 at 6:06 PM, Lord_Void said:

However, I think they are going for a bit more of a "Lost Fleet" Hypernet style system, and I could support that. In my opinion, that system works better for this sort of game

 

looks like they have already a concept which is the fixed system i guess but a concept is just a concept. they have to see how effective both systems are.

 

                                                                                   

 

one of the things i dont understand is that this fixed gate system doesnt really fit in novaquarks "fairness" policy(like with the restricted mass production or the need for players to control large weapons). if an org has a stargate connection they have a BIG advantage in terms of trading, farming and expanding. other orgs may have no chance. you re able to destroy or capture carriers with goods but i see no way to stop gate-trading of other orgs.

 

a public dial system would ensure this fairness. the player still has to build the gate but its connected to the gate-network and everyone can dial. with this advantage comes a risk obviously. if you travel to a planet without law and order (or any other scenario) its your problem.

 

to make it risky to run a gate i would say that everyone can see the coordinates of that gate (for the dial system, its connected to a network) so there is no free use of the gate without attacks or something else.

 

with dialing you would be able to "block" another gate but i think there is a way to avoid that. like shutting down the wormhole from the destination gate.

 

                                                                                   

 

EDIT: Keep calm guys...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have people played any tactical games with stargates or maybe warp zones? Most of them are fixed stargates with a certain set range to reach  solar systems near them and when the stargates are all linked together it looks like a giant web highway! This is also a great tactical setup because if one path was blocked you could always enter the system from another direction to gain access. I love the tactical importance that fixed gates would bring to the game and understand some worries about it but I still think the dial up and stargate to any other stargate will be a tactical nightmare!

 

Hopefully they will make it where there are 2 types of owned stargates :

 

1. Public owned stargates: theses are stargates that will pop up like a quest or mission to the community  that a link was made with another system and now we have the ability to donate resources to build a neutral community stargate free to everyone! This stargate could still be attacked and destroyed but that might be a bad idea for that organization!

 

2. Private owned stargates: these are stargates owned by a organization and that organization has the ability/scripting to make that stargate useless to everyone but there organization by coding it! Private owned stargates will most likely have a big tactical play to it so most organizations will probably find cool ways to hide and defend there stargates from others!

 

Fixed stargates to me means you would cross the galaxy like a highway making a jump from solar system to solar system picking the shortest paths to make your journey! There doesn't need to be just one fixed stargate per system to the next solar system, but you will have to find one that will allow you access to make the journey. A fix stargates has a certain range to the next stargate which is usually the distance from one solar system to the next closes one, some might view this as a problem but tactically I think it adds to the tactical game as a big plus. 

 

The Dial-up stargate nightmare: Most likely this gate has no limits and anyone could simply jump from one side of the galaxy to the next opposite side of the galaxy instantly as long they have the codes? Defending against someone with a dial-up stargate good luck because all it takes is for some spy or disgruntle member of your organization to just steal or sale your stargate codes to your enemy. In a instance all of your enemies could just dial in to your home planets stargate and a massive armada is on its way to extinct you and your organization! There is no reason to hide dial-up stargates because we can have dozens of them and all it takes is just one and we can have our armada there in a instance!

 

Yes fixed stargates or not perfect and have there down sides also, but I personally think they are a better choice over dial-up stargates and is a game with so many organizations and players not to mention play styles cough cough pirates =) do you just want anyone to be able to dial-up and go anywhere in a instance as long as they have the codes?

 

Just saying and something to think about.   =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was already said that a stargate can connect to any other within a limited range.  The builder of a gate however is the owner and sets permissions on who can get in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Français :

Une idée que je n'ai pas vus : Que pensé vous d'un système avec Routeurs ?
Comme le WEB et ses Routeurs.

 

On a une Porte A à portée de B, et une Porte C a portée de B mais pas de A. Puisque les Portes servirait de Routeur, il serait possible d'aller de A vers C directement (sans sortir a B), le voyage serait juste un peu plus long que si on avait fait juste A vers B (exemple 75% de A>B + B>C)
Pour moi, il s'agit de la solution la plus intelligente (d'un point de vus technologique).

 

Pour les droit RDMS sur les Portes, je pense moi aussi qu'il ne devrait pas y en avoir. Cela trop déséquilibré. Si une organisation veut contrôler une Porte, elle devra poster une patrouille, rien ne l’y interdit est ça donne un peu plus de profondeur au gameplay.
Et si RDMS il doit y avoir, elles n’interdiront pas la fonction Routeur.

 

 

An idea I have not seen: What do you think of a system with Routers?

Like the WEB and its routers.

 

We have a Gate A within range of B, and a Gate C within range of B Gate but not an A. Since the Gateways would serve as a Router, it would be possible to go from A to C directly (without going out to B), the journey would be just a little longer than if we had just done A to B (example 75% of A>B + B>C)
For me, it is the most intelligent solution (from a technological point of view).

 

For the RDMS rights on the Doors, I too think that there should not be any. That too unbalanced. If an organization wants to control a Gate, it will have to post a patrol, nothing prohibits it, it gives a little more depth to the gameplay.
And if RDMS there should be, they will not disallow the Router function.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Meumera:

Your idea is basically a dialing-gate model, with an automation on the dialing. That's what a "gate bridge" is, on a network level. It's purpose is to break the range limit.

 

I don't see why it's unbalanced, as there are numerous ways to restrict a gate access. You can program your gate to refuse access to unfriendly gates for instance. And if not possible to control the access before transportation, you can stop it after: you can make a script to order your gate to close as soon as an unknown ship get through, preventing an entire fleet from getting through. An other solution is the stargate series one: put a way to make impossible to get in when the gate is activated.

 

The thing is, that a fixed gate is a well known system, that makes people afraid of any new, as usual... And that encourages à military gameplay on all level: because it's not possible to control the device, it moves the strategic control in the surroundings.

 

The dialing-gate gameplay invites to be interested into the technology behind it, that seems far more better to me. And it does not take away the military perspective, it just changes it. The contrary is not true.

 

Moreover, is a military who can't adapt to new grounds a good military? I don't think so...

 

On the other side, as Flow2606 and myself said, fixed gates make difficult for small or new orgs to use the gate potential, because they must use other's gates. And bulding their first gate, if fixed-gate, it will be quite useless. It's more worthy to get in a pre-existing network, like we connect a computer on the internet. So it allows new players to change the tide...

 

Hey, do you actually know that the internet was created by USA army to keep their communication working after a nuclear strike?

 

And why? because a classical com network, based on a hub center is easily destroyed in one strike...My, My, Poor large scale military strategy...

 

Finally, why a fixed-gate network is efficient in games? Because they are impossible to shut down and put in place by devs in a fair way (to make their game possible to play and interesting). As far as I saw, I have serious doubts that players will make a fair fixed-gates grid. They will rather make a big gate hub around their main fleet or capital planet or station, or one gate away, because it's the most efficient way to proceed with (expensive) fixed gates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sunrider44 said:

Finally, why a fixed-gate network is efficient in games? Because they are impossible to shut down and put in place by devs in a fair way (to make their game possible to play and interesting). As far as I saw, I have serious doubts that players will make a fair fixed-gates grid. They will rather make a big gate hub around their main fleet or capital planet or station, or one gate away, because it's the most efficient way to proceed with (expensive) fixed gates.

 

yepp why using a fixed system if the players will create gate hubs anyway? they will basicly work like the dialing system you just swap the gate. the gates will be expensive but in the end someone will setup something like this because its way more efficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Français :

Je n'ai rien contre le contrôle d'une Porte, au contraire, je comprends parfaitement les enjeux tactique et économique (si jamais j’en ai l’occasion, j’en profiterais (quoique, je suis trop gentil pour ça)).
Ce que je trouve déséquilibré est la manière de contrôlé les Portes.

 

Le système de droit RDMS est Passif.
Ceux qui on crée la porte on gagné, il on tous les pouvoirs et il est impossible de leurs les retirés (sauf en détruisant la Porte et en reconstruire une juste derrière).
Cela vas crée un système de premier arrivé, premier servi. Une fois qu’ils on leur porte, il on juste a sortir leurs transat, ce boire un coca pendant que la taxe est automatiquement collecté. Ils peuvent même faire une sieste puisqu’ils on interdit l’accès a leurs ennemies (Tactique et stratégie : 0).

 

Alors qu’une patrouille qui surveille la Porte, s’est un système actif.
Il faut organiser des patrouilles, avoir des volontaires et la flotte suffisante. Cela peux même conduire a la création d’une classe de vaisseaux "Gardien" spéciaux, trop gros pour ce déplacé efficacement, mais avec une puissance de feu suffisante pour "encouragé" a payez la taxe. Sinon ils la payeront aussi, de leurs propres vaisseaux (KABOUM).
Et on n’est pas à l’ abri d’une attaque surprise. En détruisent les gardiens de la Porte les attaquent en prendront le contrôle. Et si ils veule la garder, ils devront s’organiser.
S’est bien plus intéressant d’un point de vus tactique et de gameplay.

 

 

I have nothing against the control of a Gate, on the contrary, I understand perfectly the tactical and economic stakes (if I ever have the opportunity, I would benefit (although, I'm too nice for that) .
What I find unbalanced is how to control the Doors.

 

The system RDMS right system is Passive.
Those who create the door are won, they have all the powers and it is impossible to remove them (except by destroying the Gate and rebuilding one behind).
This will create a first come, first served system. Once they are wearing them, they just take out their deck chair, drink a coca while the tax is automatically collected. They can even take a nap, since are denied access to their enemies (Tactics and Strategy 0).

 

While a patrol that monitors the Gate, has an Active system.
We have to organize patrols, volunteers and a sufficient fleet. This can even lead to the creation of a class of special "Guardian" ships, too big for this moved efficiently, but with sufficient firepower to "encouraged" to pay the fee. Otherwise they will also pay for it, from their own ships (KABOUM).
And we are not safe from a surprise attack. In destroying the gatekeepers, attack them will take control. And if they want to keep it, they will have to organize.
Is much more interesting from a point of view tactical and gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DaSchiz said:

I thought it was already said that a stargate can connect to any other within a limited range.  The builder of a gate however is the owner and sets permissions on who can get in.

 

You would be correct, it's in my FAQ thread somewhere, though this is just a theory discussion so no harm in it. :)

 

Also, for folks to get a better idea of what to expect with the gate system, I recommend reading The Lost Fleet book series. In fact, just read that period to get a good idea of a lot of features that NQ have discussed already (They have taken some inspiration from this series for gates/ftl/combat, plus it's pretty damn good.) 

 

https://www.amazon.com/The-Lost-Fleet-Dauntless/dp/B0016BXEGO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504971994&sr=8-1&keywords=the+lost+fleet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Meumera said:

 

I have nothing against the control of a Gate, on the contrary, I understand perfectly the tactical and economic stakes (if I ever have the opportunity, I would benefit (although, I'm too nice for that) .
What I find unbalanced is how to control the Doors.

 

The system RDMS right system is Passive.
Those who create the door are won, they have all the powers and it is impossible to remove them (except by destroying the Gate and rebuilding one behind).
This will create a first come, first served system. Once they are wearing them, they just take out their deck chair, drink a coca while the tax is automatically collected. They can even take a nap, since are denied access to their enemies (Tactics and Strategy 0).

 

While a patrol that monitors the Gate, has an Active system.
We have to organize patrols, volunteers and a sufficient fleet. This can even lead to the creation of a class of special "Guardian" ships, too big for this moved efficiently, but with sufficient firepower to "encouraged" to pay the fee. Otherwise they will also pay for it, from their own ships (KABOUM).
And we are not safe from a surprise attack. In destroying the gatekeepers, attack them will take control. And if they want to keep it, they will have to organize.
Is much more interesting from a point of view tactical and gameplay.

Who said you can only create one gate per system? It's never first come, first serve - if taxes are too high, build another gate yourself. Sure it's an investment but nothing (game mechanics wise) hinders you to do so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Meumera, as Lethys said, you forgot that you can build new gates in DU. So why take over a heavily defended gate when you can build another one to do a surprise attack? Or make the fee more competitive?

 

It does not depend on the gate system, but on the possibility to move or build new gates. As I said, strategy is different, but don't worry, you need patrols and warefare in a dialing-gate system too. And many opportunities to be a heros x). All dépends on the strategic equilibrium.

 

Stargate series developped a lot those dialing-gate concepts. With very funny ideas.

 

@Cybrex I don't know this novel. I see it's quite recent: 2008. How work gates in this Sci-Fi universe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sunrider44 said:

@Cybrex I don't know this novel. I see it's quite recent: 2008. How work gates in this Sci-Fi universe?

 

It's been a while since I read the series, but basically gates all connect to each other (sort of, within range) and in order to access the gate network, you needed a physical key on your ship. This is how they restricted access in the series.

 

So, one ship in your fleet will have the gate key and activate the gate, allowing it and the fleet to use it. If you or a ship in your fleet did not have a key, then no one could use the gate. This made it a strategic item that needed to be protected as it could be stolen by the enemy. Whether this works for DU, I don't know, but that's how it worked here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be neat if a given gate could "dial in" to s miner of gates, but only ones it has a connection set up with. Setting up that initial connection would take a good bit of time, and require some special access code / "frequency" being exchanged between both gates. Gate A has to enter Gate B's frequency into its registry, and Gate B must enter Gate A's. This way a given gate can act as a hub to several places (important and valuable if the owner wants to make a trade hub, or something), but gates can only be linked if both parties wish them to.

 

This could lead to some interesting politics. For instance, let's say my org owns and runs a major trading outpost, which is equipped with a star gate. Other star gate owners would very much like a connection to said trade hub, due to the obvious economic opportunities of quick access to such a place. To get that link though, they need to "make friends" with my org. This could mean taxes, required protecting services, required doctrines to follow, etc. If that org stops following the requirements, my org could revoke access.

 

It also leads to interesting espionage / sabotage opportunities. Let's say some big organisation is at war with mine. I might try to get someone to infiltrate the hostile organisation, and work their way up the ranks. If they successfully get high enough to access the start gate controls, they could link to MY gate, allowing for a brutal surprise invasion. If the fight goes south, I could revoke access from my end, and prevent them from getting to come through and retaliate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2p:

Gates should work like they do in something like Eve or the x series of games.
My reasoning is two-fold:
 

  1. It falls in-line with the lore we currently have if a gate was to be put on a pair of existing wormholes rather than something we create and destroy at will
  2. this would allow the number of gates in a system to be controlled by NQ so I don't jump in to a system that's swarming with gates.

 

Given the job of a Stargate I don't see the value of having hundreds of them in an area, even something like Elite controls exactly where you can jump to by spacing the stars in such a way that your ship can only reach the subset around you.
I also think that over time ... NQ is keen to bring more "emergent" gameplay opportunities so something like mapping the gate system and the security status / alliance of colonies on the ends of gate routes could be a nice new emergent career op.

It also allows for a more natural thought process that the further you travel the more jumps you'd have to do.
This could give ship builders another avenue of interstellar nav systems to build for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 11:47 AM, Cybrex said:

 

You would be correct, it's in my FAQ thread somewhere, though this is just a theory discussion so no harm in it. :)

 

Also, for folks to get a better idea of what to expect with the gate system, I recommend reading The Lost Fleet book series. In fact, just read that period to get a good idea of a lot of features that NQ have discussed already (They have taken some inspiration from this series for gates/ftl/combat, plus it's pretty damn good.) 

 

https://www.amazon.com/The-Lost-Fleet-Dauntless/dp/B0016BXEGO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504971994&sr=8-1&keywords=the+lost+fleet

 

OIC ...... oooooops.  Thnx :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I voted for a fixed one to one gate relationship system mainly due to not liking the idea of one gate being able to dial any of the other ones in the game. However upon reading further I do like the idea of a gate only being able to dial gates within its range and authority to connect to. I also did like the idea of bigger gates being able to have a greater dial range, thus reducing the need for multiple gates (just decommission old ones).

 

I also like the idea of multiple gates per system, and potentially destroying competition gates (gate grinding? o.O )

 

So I do like the DU/NQ proposal for them :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dialing gates would be my preferred option.

 

Restrictions:

 

You must have permissions to use the source gate.

You must have permissions to use the target gate.

You must be in range for the source gate.

You get a warning if the target gate doesn't have the range to reach back to the source gate.

 

i.e. if you use a gate with a 1000 ly range to connect to a gate with a 100ly range then you could be stuck on the other side.

You should at least be warned that this is the case.

 

Permissions could be split into who has permissions to dial out/who has permissions to dial in.

Again a warning should appear if the permissions are such that it would be a one way trip.

 

 

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...