SpaceSimCentral

Posted by: @cody
it was called SEXTANT - sweet!

Yes that's very cool! Incidentally a "realistic" space game with technology from the 1940s would be totally crazy IMHO - celestial navigation, plots, slide rules, analog computers and steam gauges!! Too bad it would be completely unplayable!

@Pinback thanks! For sure all this flight planning stuff can get a bit complicated - even with the automation - but at least that gives some logic to the map.
Incidentally the related gameplay will need very careful balancing because these routes can take quite some play-time to navigate. So I'll have to make sure it's possible to stay busy in one place for long enough times, and provide some activities along the way too - besides flight control that is! To begin with I think that the "patrol" tasks will be always active. That would mean acquiring signatures and trajectories for the surrounding traffic, checking them vs the declared flight plans, perform some control interceptions when compatible with the fuel budget etc etc... All these actions would be rewarded with some form of career point of course.

Did I see in the video that you would be able to call on a tanker if you run out of fuel and will that be restricted to certain areas of the galaxy?.

Posted by: @pinback
Did I see in the video that you would be able to call on a tanker if you run out of fuel and will that be restricted to certain areas of the galaxy?.

Areas with traffic should be safe, with nearby ships either being able to come to the rescue directly (that will be one of the player's missions) or at least carrying distress calls to other systems that can send some support. On the other hand venturing away from these civilized places will mean that you're pretty much on your own I'm afraid. And in all instances going bingo fuel will certainly always be very bad :/

Its been mentioned already and sorry I been absent from your posts lately, but you have done an amazing job on this solar map @d-c-elington. The smoothness in which you seem to navigate in and out and to objects. Will you allow the player to just screw up and put in a destination they can't get too because of fuel restraints and allow them to attempt the trip?
But again A+ job on this solar map.... you have a lot of QA work too do inspecting all those dots haha

Thanks D1, and really there's nothing to be sorry about!! Posted by: @sscadmin
Will you allow the player to just screw up and put in a destination they can't get too because of fuel restraints and allow them to attempt the trip?

The flight planner operates on a simplified model of the ship but which includes fuel consumption. So if the player dials in a location that can't be reached because of fuel, the routines will simply fail to devise a working path. The real danger will come from forgetting to account for a return trip in advance actually.
The next question could be "what if I don't use the flight planner?". Indeed direct controls and instruments are available and so a trained captain can use them in a tactical emergency or to perform basic orbital maneuvers ("raising the orbit" for instance). For such cases a (currently missing) gauge will keep track of the remaining maneuvering capability under likely scenarios.
But generally speaking orbital mechanics are so tricky that precisely "going somewhere" is just plain impossible without the flight planner. And the jump mechanics are really tailored not to change that, on the contrary: jumping requires to reach a specific moving point in orbit, within a few hundreds meters and on a carefully chosen approach path!

Man... I have to check this site with a fine tooth comb, this is great stuff. I like the logic of your game-world, everything makes sense. The "look" of what I've seen on your videos is also mighty appealing. 
Recently I tried something that is based on real-life science, I thought it would appeal to me but the execution, UI, and look of the game turned me off badly. This on the other hand looks like it would be a sweet blend of some realism and fun... while being easy on the eyes.
You have my total attention D.C. 
Once again, great stuff!

Hi @gaius-konstantine thanks for your feedback, "blend of some realism and fun" is definitely the end goal!
Also as the project is slowly moving from simulator to game I'll certainly run some points by you guys here at SSC. We discussed many topics with Pinback and D1 but these should only start to take form in the months to come.

Posted by: @d-c-elington
Also as the project is slowly moving from simulator to game I'll certainly run some points by you guys here at SSC. We discussed many topics with Pinback and D1 but these should only start to take form in the months to come.

Can't wait to see that D.C. I'm sure we're going to be in for a treat. If there is any way I can offer you aid at any point, I will be glad to do so.

Posted by: @gaius-konstantine
the logic

That's why IMHO dumbing the physics down too much is also dismissing some interesting opportunities. Specific rules and constraints are a very powerful way to provide structure as things are getting shaped around them .
For instance in this game mass does really matter so fleets of freighters transporting "heavy-duty industrial machinery" from system to system do not make sense: the cost would far exceed building the equipment at the destination. And as a consequence all carried goods should likely be extremely expensive or difficult to manufacture, starting with "people"! This in turn requires to think about the forms space-based illegal activities could take etc etc...
Frankly I don't know what I'll effectively manage to code into actual gameplay!! But to me it's very interesting to try and elaborate on these "emerging properties" anyway!

Posted by: @d-c-elington
That's why IMHO dumbing the physics down too much is also dismissing some interesting opportunities. Specific rules and constraints are a very powerful way to provide structure as things are getting shaped around them .
For instance in this game mass does really matter so fleets of freighters transporting "heavy-duty industrial machinery" from system to system do not make sense: the cost would far exceed building the equipment at the destination. And as a consequence all carried goods should likely be extremely expensive or difficult to manufacture, starting with "people"! This in turn requires to think about the forms space-based illegal activities could take etc etc...

That is something close to my opinion on many space based games in general. I can concede that perhaps an outpost or recently established colony that wasn't self-sustaining would require some sort of freighter based support, but as you say, the cost would mean that the destination is being "subsidized" to a degree. (Perhaps even some type of resource that isn't readily available would also justify the use of freighters). 
Taking it one step further. In many games, ships are prohibitively expensive and require tremendous resources to build. (This is very pronounced in some space based 4X games). This in my mind makes the idea of piracy kind of silly or redundant. Why would anyone with those kind of resources available, need to risk them on piracy? So perhaps space based illegal activities could be ideologically motivated or even be some kind of other threat entirely. The mechanics would stay the same, but the package around the mechanics (lore) would be more realistic and believable.

Posted by: @gaius-konstantine
This in my mind makes the idea of piracy kind of silly or redundant. Why would anyone with those kind of resources available, need to risk them on piracy?

Why indeed!

@gaius-konstantine & @Cody
I do agree that the traditional piracy scheme would make little sense in the game, both from the economic and practical standpoints! (About the latter: the closer one gets to another ship the higher the danger from weaponry of lower and lower tech, until finally even an unarmed vessel can be deadly tens of kms away because of its engine's exhaust plume alone).
So on the piracy subject I was thinking that extortion may fit better. Due to their operating costs armed ships should be quite rare, and in remote places a single one of them could ransom the locals for "protection money" without firing a single shot as long as it is unopposed. Since there are no FTL comms calls for help would take quite some time to get answered, and the impossibility of a centralized banking system would require a "bitcoin style" currency and make dirty money in-effect untraceable. But in any case these operations would be available to powerful organizations or rogue states only, and in isolated regions. They would require a safe resupply base to begin with.

Posted by: @d-c-elington
So on the piracy subject I was thinking that extortion may fit better. Due to their operating costs armed ships should be quite rare, and in remote places a single one of them could ransom the locals for "protection money" without firing a single shot as long as it is unopposed. Since there are no FTL comms calls for help would take quite some time to get answered

As long as their no planetary defences and "system defence boats" as Traveller called them, basically an engine with lots of missiles.
On the subject of piracy I can think of one situation where it may arise, that of the collapsed empire where colony worlds are left to fend for them selves. Those worlds which can retain a starflight capability could chose to go plundering lower tec worlds for resources as in the book Space Viking [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Viking[/url] it's a background scenario which rarely gets used in games. 

Posted by: @pinback
Space Viking

Thanks for the reference Pinback that's an interesting setting indeed. It's just that I'd like the world to be a little less depressing to be honest! But on a smaller scale similar situations could arise in some of the independent systems, with specific political situations making them vulnerable to attacks from unsavory neighbors.
Also you have a valid point about defenses. Typically some civilian ships could be stripped of their interstellar capability (DeltaV budget) in exchange for military equipment (= more payload mass) and become orbital patrol vessels at a fraction of the cost of actual military vessels.
And so maybe the extortion business would more likely occur at some remote places along the routes between the main inhabited systems. In effect the path used by most ships at one given time can be predicted (it is dictated by the orbital configurations of the celestial bodies along the way), and it would likely be too expensive to have defenses everywhere. Space travel companies could also be the victims for these "safe passage tolls" then.

Posted by: @d-c-elington
And so maybe the extortion business would more likely occur at some remote places along the routes between the main inhabited systems. In effect the path used by most ships at one given time can be predicted (it is dictated by the orbital configurations of the celestial bodies along the way), and it would likely be too expensive to have defenses everywhere. Space travel companies could also be the victims for these "safe passage tolls" then.

Forgive me for playing devil's advocate, but would extortion really be more plausible than outright piracy? Here a rather large investment (the miscreant ship), would be risked in a racket where after a time, the authorities would be able to bring the hammer down more effectively as the ship's area of operations would be more narrowly defined than actual piracy.
In essence you need a "menace", yet at the same time it must make sense within the game-world. While you can certainly take liberties, (it is a game after all), this is an area where a small investment of your time in examining believable menaces could pay disproportionate benefits in the long run.

Posted by: @gaius-konstantine
Forgive me for playing devil's advocate

Isn't that the point with debating ideas?!
I do agree that extortion and piracy are very similar. But there's a difference that is greatly amplified by the underlying orbital mechanics: piracy requires to intercept and rendez-vous with the target (or close to) and then physically recover the stolen cargo. That is quite some maneuvering and very difficult with a "non-cooperative" target. On the other hand extortion only supposes a sufficient threat level (that can be set up at large distances) and simple exchanges over the comms.
Also provided the offenders don't have to face top-of-the-line opposition they could use refurbished vessels with low-tech weaponry. That would be enough to scare unarmed passenger ships and would remain quite cheap.
And so this leads to another specific aspect from the game's physics: a typical journey between two systems usually takes more than one month, up to three in the most remote places. So IMO the situation is quite similar to strategic naval warfare in the 16th century: "let's go take down that corsair that was spotted operating in the Caribbeans two months ago...". That would leave plenty of time for safe hit and run tactics. And there's even worse: the routes have "tides" with varying DeltaV requirements to complete them. That is a clever criminal would operate in areas and at times that would make them safe from incoming reinforcements... but that would be forgetting about the extraordinary capabilities of the player's ship of course! (especially after some significant upgrading).
Anyway I'm also playing devil's advocate here because generally speaking I'm expecting the ship's weapons to be used only as a last resort. So waves of pirate ships charging at the player's are completely out of the question for sure! 

Posted by: @d-c-elington
So waves of pirate ships charging at the player's are completely out of the question for sure! 

Music to my ears! Talking of music...

Posted by: @d-c-elington
Isn't that the point with debating ideas?!

Yes it is. Yet at the same time I am conscious of the fact that I've only been here a short time, I would hate to offend anyone unintentionally... hence that little disclaimer.
The additional information you provided in your post clarifies the matter well and does indeed make the "menace" plausible. Nicely done D.C.

@gaius-konstantine all comments are welcome really. Even if we can agree on the matter eventually, the very question itself indicates a point that needs at least some clarification. And if not that's an issue that needs fixing!
It's still very early in the game-world building process but that's also when I might make big mistakes if closing too many doors. For instance I was thinking that the NPC ships should be made persistent and provided with a detailed history (ownership, port logs etc). Of course that will make the coding more complicated and I may fail to implement the feature or put it to good use. But on the other hand spawning ships on-demand would really limit the possibilities I think so that's worth a try.