Ultimate space simulation software

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
User avatar
longname
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 170
Joined: 13 Apr 2017
Location: ∞/The Multiverse/The Universe/Local Cluster/The Milky Way/Orion Arm/Sol System/Earth-Moon/Earth/UK

Gameplay concept

19 Apr 2019 06:38

Stellarator wrote:
longname wrote:
SpaceEngineer wrote:
For example, a small probe can be made on the ship within 10 minutes, but a colony on the planet is built for many months or years (of real time).

A space game on the scale of entire galaxies that doesn't have timewarp sounds rather boring. I mean, I won't be buying a game based upon SpaceEngine if it takes literal years just to build some colonies to upgrade.

In all honesty, taking months of real time to fully establish a interstellar colony doesn't sound all that unreasonable. Bear in mind that this is a space-simulator, not just a space-game like Dangerous: Elite. Besides, you will have plenty of other things to do in the mean time, such as establishing other colonies, building interplanetary infrastructure, making interstellar trade routes, exploring stuff, researching tech-trees, etc. As long as the wait times are balanced with other activities like those aforementioned and even some optional stuff like combat, it should be a good experience. I would also expect terra-forming to take a long tome as well, since physically changing a planets surface is a arduous and immense task.

If SpaceEngineer makes his game a reality, then there should at least be ways to create multiple 'universes' or 'time bubbles' so you can timewarp whilst playing multiplayer and be able to sync with others later when you want to play in real-time, like with the DarkMultiPlayer mod for KSP. Otherwise, a game like this where you literally just wait for months to do a single task unable to fast forward either by time warp or using a cryogenic technology to undergo suspended animation won't interest much people except the most patient. I'm just hoping either of the two fast forward techniques makes it into the game.
Oh, and by the way, i don't want a game like Elite: Dangerous, which is basically a glorified walking simulator. But in space.
[dah<500,26>dah<180,14>dah<180,21>dah<500,19>dah<180,26>dah<500,21>]
 
User avatar
Speedademon
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 46
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Location: Korea, Republic of

Gameplay concept

19 Apr 2019 06:39

Building a colony won't be done by just clicking one button. You'll have to design layout for each infrastructure. Think of how modern city building games(Cities: skyline for example) work. 
You'll have to explore the universe with your mothership and find a suitable planet/position by sending scout probes/shuttles. After choosing a suitable position, you'll start by flattening area, and building basic life support/communication/resource management infra. Next step would be building landing pads for the landing of much heavier shuttles which is essential for frequent colony resupply.
3D printer and mining/transporting building materials would be an important part of building and expanding the colony.
As the colony grows, you'll carry brave colonists by colonist warp ships/shuttles.
Hi I like fraid chikin
 
User avatar
Stellarator
World Builder
World Builder
Posts: 886
Joined: 10 Jul 2018
Location: Sagittarius A*

Gameplay concept

19 Apr 2019 23:55

longname wrote:
Source of the post Otherwise, a game like this where you literally just wait for months to do a single task unable to fast forward either by time warp or using a cryogenic technology to undergo suspended animation won't interest much people except the most patient.

There are many games that are like this, who have a die-hard fanbase. I'm not saying that SE will be one of those games, but it is something to consider. Just because a game does not correlate with your specific idea of fun does not mean it will be a total failure with gamers.
longname wrote:
Source of the post Oh, and by the way, i don't want a game like Elite: Dangerous, which is basically a glorified walking simulator. But in space.

I don't think SE will be a Elite:Dangerous copy-cat nor did I say so at any point. I do however think that SpaceEngineer would do well to borrow a few concepts from that game that are popular with gamers and simulationists. Thing's like trading, establishing space-ports, ship customization and stuff like that. And yes, even combat. I know that the latter is a touchy subject among the fanbase here, but it could be possible for it to happen only among consenting players, and it would hardly be very extensive since you can't have an interstellar war if you are going to be limited by the speed of light. These battles would be interplanetary or in low orbit at best. Look at it this way, a little excitement from these skirmishes might alleviate any boredom you feel with space colonization :P.

Speedademon wrote:
Source of the post Building a colony won't be done by just clicking one button. You'll have to design layout for each infrastructure. Think of how modern city building games(Cities: skyline for example) work.

Yes, exactly.

Speedademon wrote:
Source of the post You'll have to explore the universe with your mothership and find a suitable planet/position by sending scout probes/shuttles. After choosing a suitable position, you'll start by flattening area, and building basic life support/communication/resource management infra. Next step would be building landing pads for the landing of much heavier shuttles which is essential for frequent colony resupply.

And limit my control over a portion of space by building my bases only in those far and few between Earth-like planets? I think not. This reeks of a cliche space-opera sci-fi trope. A more prudent and realistic  plan of colonization would be to establish artificial habitats and megastructures in low orbit, Lagrange points or in interplanetary space, built from mined asteroids.
Futurum Fusionem
 
A-L-E-X
Star Engineer
Star Engineer
Posts: 2421
Joined: 06 Mar 2017

Gameplay concept

22 Apr 2019 15:44

I do like the idea of multiple universes where we can play around with the characteristics of each universe (like constants, forces, etc.) to see what the result is, but that might be a bit beyond the scope of SE, although if anyone can do it, Vlad would be the person who could!
 
User avatar
default0.0player
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 30
Joined: 27 May 2019

Gameplay concept

27 May 2019 06:14

The gameplay can be a space trading and combat simulator. Game mechanic like[url=https://pioneerspacesim.net/] Pioneer[/url] would be great. With the advantage of the SE's unique warp drive(instead of Star Wars-ish hyperdrive)
 
User avatar
DoctorOfSpace
Star Engineer
Star Engineer
Posts: 1302
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: SpaceX Mars Colony
Contact:

Gameplay concept

27 May 2019 19:54

default0.0player wrote:
Source of the post With the advantage of the SE's unique warp drive

I think SE currently has the most realistic FTL mechanic of any game currently out there.
CPU: Intel Core i7-5960X 4.0GHz 8-Core Processor - RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 - GPU: EVGA GeForce RTX 3090 FTW3 ULTRA GAMING 24GB
Quando omni flunkus, moritati
 
Muckytuja
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 06 Jun 2019

Gameplay concept

06 Jun 2019 12:18

Hello!
Now that SE has a release date, may we know any new info about the planned game play features? Will there be any game play at all when 1.0 comes out? Or do we have to get the planetarium and the "game" separately?
Thank You. 
 
User avatar
default0.0player
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 30
Joined: 27 May 2019

Gameplay concept

07 Jun 2019 01:04

What about controlling multiple ships simultaneously, two ways.
1. Hire crew and let them to control other ships, you send commands.
2. Switch ships on the fly.

You can put these two together, if you are piloting a ship, other ships controlled by the "CPU player", if you switch ship to another, the current ship will be controlled by CPU
 
User avatar
default0.0player
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 30
Joined: 27 May 2019

Gameplay concept

07 Jun 2019 05:12

longname wrote:
Stellarator wrote:
longname wrote:
A space game on the scale of entire galaxies that doesn't have timewarp sounds rather boring. I mean, I won't be buying a game based upon SpaceEngine if it takes literal years just to build some colonies to upgrade.

In all honesty, taking months of real time to fully establish a interstellar colony doesn't sound all that unreasonable. Bear in mind that this is a space-simulator, not just a space-game like Dangerous: Elite. Besides, you will have plenty of other things to do in the mean time, such as establishing other colonies, building interplanetary infrastructure, making interstellar trade routes, exploring stuff, researching tech-trees, etc. As long as the wait times are balanced with other activities like those aforementioned and even some optional stuff like combat, it should be a good experience. I would also expect terra-forming to take a long tome as well, since physically changing a planets surface is a arduous and immense task.

If SpaceEngineer makes his game a reality, then there should at least be ways to create multiple 'universes' or 'time bubbles' so you can timewarp whilst playing multiplayer and be able to sync with others later when you want to play in real-time, like with the DarkMultiPlayer mod for KSP. Otherwise, a game like this where you literally just wait for months to do a single task unable to fast forward either by time warp or using a cryogenic technology to undergo suspended animation won't interest much people except the most patient. I'm just hoping either of the two fast forward techniques makes it into the game.
Oh, and by the way, i don't want a game like Elite: Dangerous, which is basically a glorified walking simulator. But in space.

Elite:Dangerous is a space opera, which use WWII warbird flight dyanmics in outer space.
Pioneerspacesim is better, which use newtonian dynamics and timelapse. Means the physics time is accurate, but the gameplay time is shortened.
For,example you use a sublight engine to travel from planet A to B which takes 5 hours to accelerate, 5days to "coast" and 5 hours to decelerate. You can use time lapse to complete this travel in less than 5 minutes in your computer, but the in-game flight time is still 5days and 10 hours.
 
User avatar
samthesuperhero
Observer
Observer
Posts: 6
Joined: 21 Jun 2019
Location: Moscow

Gameplay concept

21 Jun 2019 07:14

1. I would think about:
- introducing reality based ship design and building game mechanics. here KSP can inspire, but not copy-cat, - just I mean to have balanced (between realistic and usable) ship design mechanics. of course SE have to introduce science-fiction like engines, fuels, materials, energy sources, etc. bcs if basing only on existing prototypes no way to fly farther than Mars :))
- some consumable resources - mostly as materials for ships, and as energy sources
- what I would really like is maybe it's possible to create this mechanics on the edge between modding and in-game design? so some synthesis of "in game modding", so that people will be able to introduce their own ship parts for many functionalities, like design engines, design hull plates, tanks, cockpits details, etc. etc. - so that players can freely "buy" these parts from the cloud database.
In this way you can for instance set some physics / chemistry, etc. "laws" defining the basic concepts of technology (like materials for construction, like "fuels" and energy generation) - and some standards like standard docking sizes, standard sockets for parts, so that all community created parts are compatible.
If SE then will require to calculate aerodynamics, mass parameters, control coefficients, etc. then it can be done at server side. (as I see it)

2. If I'm saying about physics, I think only 3 things must be real :)
- mechanics (dynamics) of ships and ship parts in acting against each other (mass, momentums of inertia, Newton laws, etc.)
- strength of parts, and the design as a whole, I mean which stress the design can hold until being destructed
- aerodynamic forces (hydrodynamic??)

Latter can be "real" as we know only to some extent...
Now in 0.990 its already there. But I played, and see from the first glance that there is a problem with damping momentums. Rotation speed oscillations converge too slow. It is never like this especially with heavy aircraft bcs the period of its angular oscilation is usually much longer than control reaction.. So would be great if some effort will be put in aerodynamics.
What's with processes going over 1 Mach speed? Flow picture (and forces!) dramatically change (1 Mach is different depending on many parameters..)
Heating by the high-speed flow?
[size=100]Then - what we know about aerodynamics in high density environments (like high pressure atmospheres). Here we already come to some science fiction area when it will be enough to invent some "physics-like" laws.[/size]
 
User avatar
ettore_bilbo
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 193
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Location: Italy

Gameplay concept

21 Jun 2019 07:57

samthesuperhero wrote:
Source of the post of course SE have to introduce science-fiction like engines, fuels, materials, energy sources, etc. bcs if basing only on existing prototypes no way to fly farther than Mars

but SE ships have warp drive!
 
Alex_universe
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 30 Oct 2019

Gameplay concept

24 Mar 2020 04:45

hi all, im trying to discover how to do a properly encounter burn. In order to make a synck orbit i used to increase my apogee (if iss it´s behind me) or decrease (if it´s before me) but how much? i guess the first thing it is to discover the angular distance between both. its something about join argument of periapsis with longitude of ascending node? it gives me the longitude of periapsis. I have a programed calculator that ask me for the period of station, dlng (orbiter 2010 term, wich means angular distance) and number of hours until encounter and gives me a result expressed in a period to reach.
Does anybody have a formule? i nkow how to do a Homann transfer but this dont consider the angular distance.
This is how i do it (orbiter 2010 way):



My askings are: How to know our angular distance? and how to calculate the encounter burn in order to synck orbits
 
JoshoftheCosh
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 13 Jan 2021

Gameplay concept

13 Jan 2021 02:00

Hi, 

New here. Not sure if this gameplay is still in development. I thought it would be interesting if players were limited to the solar system.
That is, no FTL or warp drives...at least to begin with. Grounded in reality. Similar to the show 'The Expanse.' The solar system is pretty large after all. You could base the engines off of the shows 'Epstein Drive'
https://expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Epstein_Drive
There are plenty of rocks, planets, moons, comets etc that could be explored, mined and battled over. You could have factions that control specific sections of the solar systems, with some of the further reaches of the system being more lucrative. you could have comets enter the system that people can fight over. 

This is not to say that players could not send ships into interstellar space, it would just be an...investment. Perhaps later, in the lore of the game, FTL travel is invented or Warp drives, or possible a worm hole opens up linking two or more star systems. 

The Solar System could have an in game (Perhaps player driven) economy. Missions such as Bounty hunting, policing remote locations, deliveries, shuttling human cargo, science missions, exploration, mining etc could drive the economy.

Random to bug in 2 years later, but I've just been watching "The Expanse' and the idea of a game based around that style of universe and within this engine...just got me excited. 
 
JoshoftheCosh
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 13 Jan 2021

Gameplay concept

13 Jan 2021 03:04

Some further ideas:

Structures:
As far as structures go, you could prepopulate the Solar System with structures, shipyards and mining stations on large asteroids, scientific stations orbiting planets/moons, gateway stations, lunar station, an enormous and advanced international space station/space elevator around earth. You could even have abandoned stations. Each station would have it's own particular focus....e.g scientific, militaristic, corporation, exploration etc. They would each also be tied to a specific faction. Adding to this, they would also contribute particular items to the in game economy. 

Player and NPC Factions:
I feel this engine could be the basis for an interesting ecosystem of factions and economy. Players can create and join factions. This would enable factions to exert control over many parts of the solar system at once. E.g. A group of players from one faction may be mining gas on Jupiter, while other players from the same faction are near the moon. They could communicate to attack other factions or achieve goals.

As player factions grow, they can combine their wealth to purchase and construct stations of their own. These would provide a port/home base for the faction and also another station for neutral players and NPC's to dock at and repair. This would fund the factions pockets further. Perhaps NPC and player factions could generate the missions mentioned above. These faction stations could be linked so that resources delivered to one would be available to all other. (This would enable a player near mars to access the gas mined from Jupiter). This sharing of resources amongst faction stations could be instant, to take out some of the wait time or they may have to be physically delivered, either by a faction member, an NPC cargo or enlisting the services of another player, through jobs. 

Ship Control:
I personally believe that having a personal avatar in this game would be unnecessary/unrealistic. One reason for this is that the ships would need to be managed by multiple crew. Perhaps instead, each player controls 1 ship or more. Each ship would require a certain number of particularly trained crew members. E.g. Pilot, Engineer, captain etc. These would fill 'Crew slots.'

Crew Slots
Perhaps one of the in game economies would be people. That is, similar to games like XCOM, where you would need to hire crew members and add them to your ship. These could be hired at stations. They would almost be like playing cards. If these crew members survive for extended periods they could level up, and unlock new skills/abilities. You would have to continue paying them and their contracts would eventually run out and need to be renewed. If you chose not to rehire the crew members or you could not afford them, they will go back into the in game 'crew' economy. Where another player may be able to pick them up, although now at a slightly hire price...as they are more experienced. 

Captains: Maybe the player has a consistent character (card in their ship) which is the captain. This always belongs to the player, essentially the players avatar. This would enable some carry over if you died. If your ship was blown up, maybe all the crew die. However, the captain carries over into the respawned ship. A new crew then needs to be hired for that ship. I remember getting quite attached to the team members I bought in XCOM, it was tragic to see them get shot and die. 

Weapon/Technology Slots
Alongside crew slots, would be weapon/tech slots. This would depend on what type of ship/what role you wish to play in the Solar System. You would purchase and fill these slots with different technology. The higher your level, the better technology you can add. Or perhaps the technology is tied to your crew. For example, In order to install a more efficient/faster engine, you would need to have an engineering crew member above a certain level. This would provide incentive for maintaining crew member contracts and trying not to lose them in battle. Want to operate that advanced Martian missile system, well you'll need a well trained Martian weapons expert or someone who has that specialized training. You may need to risk travelling to mars to get that crew member or perhaps trade with someone else.

Solar System
Space Engine is HUGE in scope...and well done Mr SpaceEngineer...bloody brilliant job. 
I feel trying to build engaging multiplayer gameplay in something so large would be difficult, especially in real time.

If you focus the gameplay in the Solar System to start with you would limit that scope, in a positive way. The Solar System is pretty massive already anyways. The more 'adventurous' factions could eventually stock a large ship with crew members and resources and shoot a ship off into interstellar space. If not, the galaxy could be slowly opened up as the game progresses using wormholes, FTL drives and other thingos. Perhaps at that point, the Solar System would become a starting players location. 

Credit to you, and thanks if you read these posts. 
 
User avatar
longname
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 170
Joined: 13 Apr 2017
Location: ∞/The Multiverse/The Universe/Local Cluster/The Milky Way/Orion Arm/Sol System/Earth-Moon/Earth/UK

Gameplay concept

15 Jan 2021 08:29

It's been a year and a half since I first spilled my thoughts into this. It's a fairly ambitious project and would be impressive if pulled off, but it has the biggest woe (I believe) in gaming: always online. There's no real reason for multiplayer, the inability to fast forward and the lack of singleplayer, unless the goal is to stretch gameplay out as much as humanly possible while leaving players vulnerable to griefers/gankers in the days the player might be away leaving probes to explore. Imagine Elite: Dangerous, but you can't do anything for 3/4ths of the time you're in supercruise while NPCs and players are trying to get your shiny metal aft because your character is asleep or busy doing chores, but supercruise takes days rather than hours and it isn't the character, it's you tending to biological needs.

I like the idea of this game with timewarp, singleplayer and optional multiplayer - sort of like KSP with the Dark Multiplayer mod. It'd be easier to make time for this game, most of your playtime wouldn't be AFK and it'd feel more like the game's respecting the fact it can't just be your whole life. Keep at it and refine your grand idea for a game, because right now it's closer to a timewasting device than a game.
[dah<500,26>dah<180,14>dah<180,21>dah<500,19>dah<180,26>dah<500,21>]
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest