Difference between revisions of "User:Josh/Musings"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Some | + | Some of my more private musings. This is not FO canon by any stretch of the imagination, they're just ideas and thoughts I have or have had in the course of my time with FO that I didn't want to necessarily put up for public discussion. Also, it helps keeps track of these ideas so I don't forget. |
| − | Also, | + | |
| + | == A Living Battlefield == | ||
| + | Battle fields in FO are set in solar systems, where the system's star at the located at the center of up to 10 orbiting satellites in 10 separate orbital zones. Space however, is fairly vacuous in real life, punctuated occasionally by a stray meteoroid. I personally fear combat could get stale as a result of the constant sameness of the battlefield, but somehow I think it's also a minor point. I'll jot some ideas down anyways: | ||
| + | ==== Space Terrain ==== | ||
| + | As a rule, this is "stuff" in space that is predictable | ||
| − | + | <ul><li> Nebulae or dust clouds that are propagated throughout certain star systems, and alter how ships normally behave. | |
| + | </li><li> Planetary orbital zones that defenders can exploit for a tactical advantage. | ||
| + | </li><ul><li> Ships in orbit around a planet might get some kind of blanket bonus, like defense or stealth. | ||
| + | </li><li> Planets could obstruct line of sight, or be used by ships to perform a [http://wiki.uqm.stack.nl/Leyland_Gravity_Whip gravity whip] maneuver. | ||
| + | </li><li> If planetary positions changes predictably over the course of a battle, attacks could also be planned around the alignment of the planets, so as to allow fleets to safely and quickly hop from orbit to orbit. | ||
| + | </li></ul> | ||
| + | <li> Asteroid belts that provide a similar bonus to planets, but pose additional or different considerations. | ||
| + | </li><li> Empty space, the default terrain that makes up the majority of most battlefields | ||
| + | </li><li> Unusual star systems like black holes that normally have no planets to hide in. | ||
| + | </li><li> Star Lanes entry points that allow retreat and reinforcements. | ||
| + | </li></ul> | ||
| − | + | ==== Anomalies ==== | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | <ul><li> Occurrence of dangerous solar storms that can be predicted and timed to coincide with fleet movements. | |
| − | + | </li><li> | |
| − | + | </li></ul> | |
| − | + | == Other Ideas == | |
| + | ==== Ammunition ==== | ||
| − | + | right now it's meant to keep long range weapons in check, in order to prevent the phenomena of "shoot & scoot" and acts as a subset of the supply mechanic of FO. I was wondering if it's definition could be expanded to include all weapons or all vessels actually, so that waging war for extended periods would cause fleets to naturally suffer from attrition. I believe that's what is desired effect of the supply mechanic is? Renaming planet supply to command & control and renaming ammo to supply might help... The kinds of language we use to describe what supply does helps us think about it differently, similarly to why "trade" isn't just called "money" or "credits"; Whatever name is given is both aesthetically and conceptually important. | |
| − | + | ==== Special Weapons Traits ==== | |
| + | |||
| + | I don't know what level of combat complexity is actually desired for FO, but it seems to me there are a few items which happen to be near and dear to the hearts of FO gamers. These are damage, range (as per FO design), and Cost & Mass | ||
Notice I didn't put something like accuracy there. That's not to say that I think accuracy should never be added, but I believe there are other qualities that are more desired and interesting to have in weapons that should be considered first before additional complexity is tacked on, and this is what I would call special traits. | Notice I didn't put something like accuracy there. That's not to say that I think accuracy should never be added, but I believe there are other qualities that are more desired and interesting to have in weapons that should be considered first before additional complexity is tacked on, and this is what I would call special traits. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 43: | ||
There seems to be a tacit agreement in the community that quite a bit of depth in FO's combat engine is desired, but also some technologies and ship armaments in particular should NOT be made obsolescent by every new technology an empire churns out (which would make the combat engine rather shallow). | There seems to be a tacit agreement in the community that quite a bit of depth in FO's combat engine is desired, but also some technologies and ship armaments in particular should NOT be made obsolescent by every new technology an empire churns out (which would make the combat engine rather shallow). | ||
| − | The most straightforward way to do this seems to be to assign unique, special values or rules to certain weapons | + | The most straightforward way to do this seems to be to assign unique, special values or rules to certain weapons to ensure all devices get equal face-time in FO. It's possible that with this method some devices may never go out of favor at all. I also predict the inclusion of such a system will be a significant programming hurtle that might preclude the addition of more complex elements to the combat system. |
Perhaps this is a trite concern. | Perhaps this is a trite concern. | ||
What would constitute such a trait however could be discussed, and as I have previously posited these don't have to be good traits, and if it was desired, traits could be a device used to help simulate limited, imperfect weapons as well. | What would constitute such a trait however could be discussed, and as I have previously posited these don't have to be good traits, and if it was desired, traits could be a device used to help simulate limited, imperfect weapons as well. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==== "Prettification" ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Prettification" (a highly technical art term) of some of the meter icons is something that I might want to do. Generally all of FO must undergo "prettification", but for now I'll settle for a couple meter icons... | ||
| + | |||
| + | In particular it occurred to me I wanted to tweak the meter icons for fuel and trade. I would "prettify" the fuel icon to look more like energy cells than oil barrels, which of course I was responsible for making them look that way in the first place. I'm convinced that trade icon could be made better somehow. I'll wait until it's purpose is more well defined before taking action. | ||
| + | For instance, I already prettified the mineral icon and I am happy with it. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Maybe it's just that I feel the icons need to look more slick. They're not bad, but I feel they | ||
| + | need to be better looking if the rest of FO's graphics are also going to be more slick. The quality | ||
| + | of each needs to match the other, in other words. | ||
Revision as of 23:50, 1 January 2010
Some of my more private musings. This is not FO canon by any stretch of the imagination, they're just ideas and thoughts I have or have had in the course of my time with FO that I didn't want to necessarily put up for public discussion. Also, it helps keeps track of these ideas so I don't forget.
Contents
A Living Battlefield
Battle fields in FO are set in solar systems, where the system's star at the located at the center of up to 10 orbiting satellites in 10 separate orbital zones. Space however, is fairly vacuous in real life, punctuated occasionally by a stray meteoroid. I personally fear combat could get stale as a result of the constant sameness of the battlefield, but somehow I think it's also a minor point. I'll jot some ideas down anyways:
Space Terrain
As a rule, this is "stuff" in space that is predictable
- Nebulae or dust clouds that are propagated throughout certain star systems, and alter how ships normally behave.
- Planetary orbital zones that defenders can exploit for a tactical advantage.
- Ships in orbit around a planet might get some kind of blanket bonus, like defense or stealth.
- Planets could obstruct line of sight, or be used by ships to perform a gravity whip maneuver.
- If planetary positions changes predictably over the course of a battle, attacks could also be planned around the alignment of the planets, so as to allow fleets to safely and quickly hop from orbit to orbit.
- Asteroid belts that provide a similar bonus to planets, but pose additional or different considerations.
- Empty space, the default terrain that makes up the majority of most battlefields
- Unusual star systems like black holes that normally have no planets to hide in.
- Star Lanes entry points that allow retreat and reinforcements.
Anomalies
- Occurrence of dangerous solar storms that can be predicted and timed to coincide with fleet movements.
Other Ideas
Ammunition
right now it's meant to keep long range weapons in check, in order to prevent the phenomena of "shoot & scoot" and acts as a subset of the supply mechanic of FO. I was wondering if it's definition could be expanded to include all weapons or all vessels actually, so that waging war for extended periods would cause fleets to naturally suffer from attrition. I believe that's what is desired effect of the supply mechanic is? Renaming planet supply to command & control and renaming ammo to supply might help... The kinds of language we use to describe what supply does helps us think about it differently, similarly to why "trade" isn't just called "money" or "credits"; Whatever name is given is both aesthetically and conceptually important.
Special Weapons Traits
I don't know what level of combat complexity is actually desired for FO, but it seems to me there are a few items which happen to be near and dear to the hearts of FO gamers. These are damage, range (as per FO design), and Cost & Mass
Notice I didn't put something like accuracy there. That's not to say that I think accuracy should never be added, but I believe there are other qualities that are more desired and interesting to have in weapons that should be considered first before additional complexity is tacked on, and this is what I would call special traits. Notice I didn't say special abilities either, because it's conceivable that weapons could be made to possess either negative or positive abilities. To say 'abilities' would lead to mean something exclusively positive, and is not a fair presentation of the idea that I'm trying to convey.
There seems to be a tacit agreement in the community that quite a bit of depth in FO's combat engine is desired, but also some technologies and ship armaments in particular should NOT be made obsolescent by every new technology an empire churns out (which would make the combat engine rather shallow).
The most straightforward way to do this seems to be to assign unique, special values or rules to certain weapons to ensure all devices get equal face-time in FO. It's possible that with this method some devices may never go out of favor at all. I also predict the inclusion of such a system will be a significant programming hurtle that might preclude the addition of more complex elements to the combat system.
Perhaps this is a trite concern.
What would constitute such a trait however could be discussed, and as I have previously posited these don't have to be good traits, and if it was desired, traits could be a device used to help simulate limited, imperfect weapons as well.
"Prettification"
"Prettification" (a highly technical art term) of some of the meter icons is something that I might want to do. Generally all of FO must undergo "prettification", but for now I'll settle for a couple meter icons...
In particular it occurred to me I wanted to tweak the meter icons for fuel and trade. I would "prettify" the fuel icon to look more like energy cells than oil barrels, which of course I was responsible for making them look that way in the first place. I'm convinced that trade icon could be made better somehow. I'll wait until it's purpose is more well defined before taking action. For instance, I already prettified the mineral icon and I am happy with it.
Maybe it's just that I feel the icons need to look more slick. They're not bad, but I feel they need to be better looking if the rest of FO's graphics are also going to be more slick. The quality of each needs to match the other, in other words.
