Jump to content
Woodsman

Am I alone in thinking that Stargate Probes are a bad idea?

Recommended Posts

I'm actually curious right now whether the point of control is at the origin or the destination.  In other words, if I have permission to use this jumpgate can I jump to any gate regardless of what the owner wants, or do I have to have permission from the destination end?  This is an important consideration, because if I can't controll who comes through my gate I will have to put up giant insta-kill cannons around my gate in a new system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think you will need authentication codes for both gates sending and recieving and also the "address" of the recieving

"Stargates should be "point to point" links not "point to points". The entire meaning behind a stargate is something like travelling through an alternate space or a wormhole. To have access to multiple locations, you may need more than one stargate in the same area. As for authentication codes, I think the RDMS will handle that. You won't be able to use a Stargate unless you have the permission level. The Aether and its allies should drop some in different points in Dual Universe for everyone to use. To secure your stargates, you could put the access level to members of your organisation only, by giving them the tags to access it.

It will be wonderful to have "point to points" stargates: travelling long distances will be a whole lot easier and safer. 

 

This is all in speculation. If you or anyone else has proof that it will be different, feel free to correct my mistakes.

"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Then secure your stargate by making open to public use. Just the first one, of course. You don't have to give everything to the public. Once you allow other organisations to use it, the person that destroys your stargate becomes the community's enemy too. Except, of course you are the kind that starts trouble, in that case, you had the trouble coming."

 

While reading this I thought you may be going somewhere else with this.   Open gates to the public then after some time while they become dependent on them stop the free service and force them to pay.  haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While reading this I thought you may be going somewhere else with this.   Open gates to the public then after some time while they become dependent on them stop the free service and force them to pay.  haha

"It's a brand new Wild West. No rules apply on how to run your money-making shenanigans. Feel as free as you want!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Stargates should be "point to point" links not "point to points". The entire meaning behind a stargate is something like travelling through an alternate space or a wormhole. To have access to multiple locations, you may need more than one stargate in the same area. As for authentication codes, I think the RDMS will handle that. You won't be able to use a Stargate unless you have the permission level. . .

"

 

I think its more that while a stargate is active its a point to point transfer but it can be linked to another stargate within its range though I agree that the RDMS system will probably handle the ability to use a gate or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two assumptions that have been in this thread that I disagree with. The first is that choke points can't exist in space without stargates. That's like saying that they can't exist on planets without roads. Stargates (and roads) obviously contribute to the creation of choke points but they are only one small piece of the puzzle. Choke points on land are created primarily by natural geographical features. Others are created by artificial features - I.e. cities, bridges, roads, mines, houses, etc.

 

If you expect stargates to be the only type of choke point in space then you are setting your sights far too low. There are a plethora of natural features that could be added to space to create choke points and interesting terrain. Some examples:

 

- black holes - anything within a certain distance of the hole needs to maintain a minimum speed/mass ratio or else it is pulled in. This distance and ratio can be determined by the size of the hole but could be really large, potentially encompassing multiple nearby star systems.

 

- a region of space that is dense in tiny rock formations, ships passing through take damage. Maybe the amount of damage taken can be reduced by having dedicated scanners that detect them, and/or by traveling slowly.

 

- nebulae / molecular clouds, the effects of these could vary depending on the type, but sensors and visibility could be drastically reduced in effectiveness.

 

- ionised regions of space could have adverse effects on certain types of electronic equipment and/or DPUs

 

- fresh supernovas could make large regions of space completely impassable for scifi-ey reasons

 

- black holes eating stars spew out streams of plasma. Exaggerate the effect so that there are streams of plasma flying through space (maybe I'm getting carried away with that one...)

 

Now imagine these in all shapes and sizes (any of these can be on the scale of a battlefield, on the scale of multiple star systems or anything in between), many overlapping and interacting with one another. Now you have real terrain in space and real choke points. And these are just a few things I came up with while sitting on the train to work, I'm sure there are plenty of other things people could come up with both real and imagined. Then throw in artificial structures - colonies/cities/settlements, stargates, trade routes - the things the players will make. These create strategic points of contention to be fought over. And what you build and where is all the more important when the environment is alive with features.

 

The other point I saw made is that "free" travel somehow makes the greater force always win, while stargates-only travel makes things more strategic. I'm convinced I've misunderstood this because it is blatantly obvious that, if anything, the opposite is true. Needing to actually travel to an enemy site opens up all kinds of interesting strategic options and difficult decisions. It allows for interceptions, ambushes, diversionary tactics, splitting or concentrating forces, misdirection, and lots of other exciting possibilities. Stargate-only travel on the other hand means you know exactly where the enemy is going to be. So you put everything you've got there and slog it out.

 

If it was "free" instantaneous travel that was being referred to then I completely agree. That would completely remove all interesting and strategic options. What I'm talking about is real travel that takes time and effort and can be intercepted, not instantaneous travel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In the long run, the months-long trips may be shortened to mere days or even minutes. Although, that might take several extension packs down Dual Universe's life line. Not to mention, as the game progresses, so will the technology. Star-gates are not a bad idea, quite the opposite, they are important and needful. I have no idea how the extension packs may come in the future, even less what they might contain. But suffice, it to say that until we reach the level of incredibly fast travel in Dual Universe, Star-gates are the best options for celerity. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In the long run, the months-long trips may be shortened to mere days or even minutes. Although, that might take several extension packs down Dual Universe's life line. Not to mention, as the game progresses, so will the technology. Star-gates are not a bad idea, quite the opposite, they are important and needful. I have no idea how the extension packs may come in the future, even less what they might contain. But suffice, it to say that until we reach the level of incredibly fast travel in Dual Universe, Star-gates are the best options for celerity. "

Was that in response to my post? I've already stated in this thread that stargates are necessary and given reasons as to why I think so. As for reducing the months- or weeks-long trips between systems, I wouldn't want that to happen and I don't see it happening under any reasonable foreseeable circumstances. What I would like is for the months/weeks long trips to be both viable and purposeful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was that in response to my post? I've already stated in this thread that stargates are necessary and given reasons as to why I think so. As for reducing the months- or weeks-long trips between systems, I wouldn't want that to happen and I don't see it happening under any reasonable foreseeable circumstances. What I would like is for the months/weeks long trips to be both viable and purposeful.

"I understand, but it wasn't in response to your post. It was a post on a previous page that I just didn't quote."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two assumptions that have been in this thread that I disagree with. The first is that choke points can't exist in space without stargates. That's like saying that they can't exist on planets without roads. Stargates (and roads) obviously contribute to the creation of choke points but they are only one small piece of the puzzle. Choke points on land are created primarily by natural geographical features. Others are created by artificial features - I.e. cities, bridges, roads, mines, houses, etc.

 

If you expect stargates to be the only type of choke point in space then you are setting your sights far too low. There are a plethora of natural features that could be added to space to create choke points and interesting terrain. Some examples:

 

- black holes - anything within a certain distance of the hole needs to maintain a minimum speed/mass ratio or else it is pulled in. This distance and ratio can be determined by the size of the hole but could be really large, potentially encompassing multiple nearby star systems.

 

- a region of space that is dense in tiny rock formations, ships passing through take damage. Maybe the amount of damage taken can be reduced by having dedicated scanners that detect them, and/or by traveling slowly.

 

- nebulae / molecular clouds, the effects of these could vary depending on the type, but sensors and visibility could be drastically reduced in effectiveness.

 

- ionised regions of space could have adverse effects on certain types of electronic equipment and/or DPUs

 

- fresh supernovas could make large regions of space completely impassable for scifi-ey reasons

 

- black holes eating stars spew out streams of plasma. Exaggerate the effect so that there are streams of plasma flying through space (maybe I'm getting carried away with that one...)

 

Now imagine these in all shapes and sizes (any of these can be on the scale of a battlefield, on the scale of multiple star systems or anything in between), many overlapping and interacting with one another. Now you have real terrain in space and real choke points. And these are just a few things I came up with while sitting on the train to work, I'm sure there are plenty of other things people could come up with both real and imagined. Then throw in artificial structures - colonies/cities/settlements, stargates, trade routes - the things the players will make. These create strategic points of contention to be fought over. And what you build and where is all the more important when the environment is alive with features.

 

I believe in the most recent dev interview with GrayStillPlays, JC Baillie said that large scale space phenomena such as black holes and nebulae would not be included in the game, at least at launch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in the most recent dev interview with GrayStillPlays, JC Baillie said that large scale space phenomena such as black holes and nebulae would not be included in the game, at least at launch.

 

He said they aren't working on anything like that right now, but it's a cool idea, so they'd love to think about it.  No time frames given so I guess it all depends on progress and funding, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said they aren't working on anything like that right now, but it's a cool idea, so they'd love to think about it.  No time frames given so I guess it all depends on progress and funding, etc.

yeah, and as the game is procedurally generated, they might adapt the code for a further distance from the arkship to dscover nebulas and stuff like that, and given how they strcuture the servers, those nebuals would be a neat background for players much further away from them. I mean, the blackness of space is cool, but nebulas are cool as well :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with NQ on Stargates.

 

1.  The vastness of empty space necessitates them. Travel at the speed of light is difficult, some would say impossible.  Travel at 70,000+ times the speed of light to get interstellar travel to be within months of real time is only plausible within a game.

 

2.  Travel AT the speed of light takes 11 REAL hours to get from one side of Pluto's orbit to the other.  Nyzaltar has already indicated that you will be able to travel at "multiples of the speed of light" with a FTL drive.  (just not multiples in the range of 70,000)  This will allow you to visit anywhere within the solar system. 

 

3.  Look at No Man's Sky.  There's nothing to do.  It's almost impossible to find other players.  Stargates are also a way for NQ to manage player density.  This will provide greater gameplay depth.

 

4.  I don't think most players even comprehend the SCALE of a single Solar System.  A single solar system should have plenty of "content" to keep the average player busy.

 

 

Ultimately its a great tool to manage player density.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[...]

 

 

and how would any of this create any navigational problems that would matter? 

unless they are artificially placed in ways that theres /always/ only a couple kilometers of space between those things they wont create any choke points that matter.

because interstellar distances are huge. plus minus a thousanth of a lightyear, a number one probably wouldnt waste a second thought on, is still the orbital radius of pluto, and i highly doubt that a whole solar systems cross section counts as "choke" point.

unless theres a method of preventing volumes the size of a solar system to use their FTL drives (which is a balancing nightmare waiting to happen) interstellar sized clouds and effects wont create any choke points.

(well, they could, but only if "free" FTL drives could only go along very specific routes between stars and your effects block those routes. but then, why bother with a "free" FTL drive when its again only jumpgates with a different name?)

 

and even if, why should i go sublight there when theres the remote possiblity that someone is waiting there?

 

 

- black holes - anything within a certain distance of the hole needs to maintain a minimum speed/mass ratio or else it is pulled in. This distance and ratio can be determined by the size of the hole but could be really large, potentially encompassing multiple nearby star systems.

 

erm... thats not how gravity works.

not even for black holes.

gravity doesnt work differently for black holes than it does for the stars they are born out of.

 

- a region of space that is dense in tiny rock formations, ships passing through take damage. Maybe the amount of damage taken can be reduced by having dedicated scanners that detect them, and/or by traveling slowly.

 

lets do a calculation how unlikely it is that such formations exist on scales that would matter to interstellar travel.

 

lets assume a modest 1 one-gram-pebble in every cubic kilometer of space. (1e-12kg/m³)

in a volume equivalent to a cube with 1 lightyear edge length (9.4607e15 m) (equal to a sphere with about two thirds of a lightyear radius)

makes 846e33kg of rubble in that volume.

our sun has a mass of ~2e30kg.

so that 1ly cube has the mass of 400000 suns. unlikely that it hasnt collapsed into a sun/black hole by the time of the game :V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

 

Of course they could create navigational problems that matter.  In fact they could create interesting navigational problems that can either be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on what is there, what you bring, what you do in the area (forests can create choke points on land but that doesn't mean you can't travel through them and use them to your advantage).  But to speculate down to the point that you are here is not worthwhile or meaningful because it all depends on a host of other factors.  It all depends on implementation and context.

 

erm... thats not how gravity works.

not even for black holes.

gravity doesnt work differently for black holes than it does for the stars they are born out of.

 

It might not be specifically how gravity works but it is close enough for the purpose of a game.  Gravitation is stronger between heavier masses that are closer together and you need to reach a particular velocity to escape a large body's gravitational pull.  The exact physics beyond that are not important.  This is not a simulation.  It is highly unlikely they'll be implementing real gravity physics.

 

lets do a calculation how unlikely it is that such formations exist on scales that would matter to interstellar travel.

 

lets assume a modest 1 one-gram-pebble in every cubic kilometer of space. (1e-12kg/m³)

in a volume equivalent to a cube with 1 lightyear edge length (9.4607e15 m) (equal to a sphere with about two thirds of a lightyear radius)

makes 846e33kg of rubble in that volume.

our sun has a mass of ~2e30kg.

so that 1ly cube has the mass of 400000 suns. unlikely that it hasnt collapsed into a sun/black hole by the time of the game :V

 

I'm sorry, did I give the impression that I was postulating that these formations actually exist?  I wasn't.  I was giving an idea for space terrain in a game.

 

Having said that haven't you just said that such a formation could exist?  Calculate the length of time such a formation would take to collapse into a single body... but not in this thread as it is not relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they could create navigational problems that matter.  In fact they could create interesting navigational problems that can either be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on what is there, what you bring, what you do in the area (forests can create choke points on land but that doesn't mean you can't travel through them and use them to your advantage).  But to speculate down to the point that you are here is not worthwhile or meaningful because it all depends on a host of other factors.  It all depends on implementation and context.

 

im not saying that those things arent navigational hazards, im saying they arent capable of consistently creating choke points where people have to get through to get fom A to B.

 

because at least three or more such structures have to form a canal thats existent and not too wide to be an effective choke point (without opening other balancing cans full of worms)

 

3D environments make much more unlikely that something is an actual choke point compared to the 2d surfaces of earth.

and even then those constrictions have to be small enough to matter for any interception/blockading gameplay.

 

 

Having said that haven't you just said that such a formation could exist?  Calculate the length of time such a formation would take to collapse into a single body... but not in this thread as it is not relevant.

 

anything thats physically allowed to exist could exist somewhere, its just very very unlikely to encounter it as its either never formed or collapsed long before humanity existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with NQ on Stargates.

 

1.  The vastness of empty space necessitates them. Travel at the speed of light is difficult, some would say impossible.  Travel at 70,000+ times the speed of light to get interstellar travel to be within months of real time is only plausible within a game.

 

2.  Travel AT the speed of light takes 11 REAL hours to get from one side of Pluto's orbit to the other.  Nyzaltar has already indicated that you will be able to travel at "multiples of the speed of light" with a FTL drive.  (just not multiples in the range of 70,000)  This will allow you to visit anywhere within the solar system. 

 

3.  Look at No Man's Sky.  There's nothing to do.  It's almost impossible to find other players.  Stargates are also a way for NQ to manage player density.  This will provide greater gameplay depth.

 

4.  I don't think most players even comprehend the SCALE of a single Solar System.  A single solar system should have plenty of "content" to keep the average player busy.

 

 

Ultimately its a great tool to manage player density.

 

I agree with almost all of NQ's positions on stargates too.

 

1.  Actually, to travel 5 light years in 6 months you'd only need to achieve 10C; 20C for 3 months.  Solar systems don't have to be as far apart as 5LY either, they could be 1-2LY apart, or anything NQ decide.  (FYI with 70kC you'd go 5LY in about 38 minutes.)

 

2.  Yes and just to illustrate the point, light takes over 8 hours to get from one end of Neptune's orbit to the other.  At 10C that is 50 minutes, at 20C it's 25 minutes.

 

3.  Yes, I agree.  Though it is just one thing that can control population densities.  I've not played No Man's Sky but I'm guessing you can travel between solar systems extremely quickly (virtually instantaneously?).  That's a completely different type of game.  I don't think anyone wants that for DU.

 

4.  Absolutely.  In fact I'd go further and say people are underestimating the scale of a single planet - I'm sure there'll be some players who spend almost all of their time on land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not saying that those things arent navigational hazards, im saying they arent capable of consistently creating choke points where people have to get through to get fom A to B.

 

because at least three or more such structures have to form a canal thats existent and not too wide to be an effective choke point (without opening other balancing cans full of worms)

 

3D environments make much more unlikely that something is an actual choke point compared to the 2d surfaces of earth.

and even then those constrictions have to be small enough to matter for any interception/blockading gameplay.

 

Let's think about how narrow the narrowest part of a long canal has to be in order for it to be an effective choke point.  Let's say that your fleet is hiding in the surrounding terrain and needs to get to the central part of the canal in 10 minutes in order to effectively intercept an enemy fleet.  I'll use 10C as the top speed of the fleet as that seems like a reasonable number considering what JC has said and the numbers in my last post.  At 10C you can travel 12AU in 10 minutes.  So any canal that is less than around 25AU at it's narrowest point could be considered a choke point.  For comparison, Neptune is about 30AU from the sun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And 30 AU are very very very narrow over interstellar distances.

 

Thats about 0.0005 lightyears.

 

I dont think that any structures stretching over 5+ lightyears would somewhat consistently form 3D choke points.

 

 

Because its so incredibly unlikely that multiple such structures would come so close and not overlap some distance, forming even denser hazards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And 30 AU are very very very narrow over interstellar distances.

 

Thats about 0.0005 lightyears.

 

I dont think that any structures stretching over 5+ lightyears would somewhat consistently form 3D choke points.

 

 

Because its so incredibly unlikely that multiple such structures would come so close and not overlap some distance, forming even denser hazards

 

They could be all kinds of sizes and shapes, and there could be any kind of suitable equations governing how they are procedurally generated to create the desired effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, chokepoints are relative to the size, speed, and strength of the fleets that command them. You could say that a chokepoint has to be a "certain size" to really be a chokepoint, but in reality it simply depends upon the capability of a fleet, and the creativity of the person captaining that fleet. If someone were to have, say, a large AI fleet to go along with their player based one, they could create an "artificial chokepoint"; a wall of drones to drive the enemy fleet in a certain direction, which would push them into an ambush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, chokepoints are relative to the size, speed, and strength of the fleets that command them. You could say that a chokepoint has to be a "certain size" to really be a chokepoint, but in reality it simply depends upon the capability of a fleet, and the creativity of the person captaining that fleet. If someone were to have, say, a large AI fleet to go along with their player based one, they could create an "artificial chokepoint"; a wall of drones to drive the enemy fleet in a certain direction, which would push them into an ambush.

You're absolutely right. I was just giving an example of a particular type of choke point in 3D. And 10 minutes was just plucked out of the air but in reality, 1 hour or even more could be sufficient. When terrain is complex and mixed inventive leaders can utilise it to their advantage in any number of ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...