Multi Star Real Map, NEED HELP

[Atrocities]

My thought was for making this map was to change the rules of the game to better match RL space travel. Combat would remain the same with multiple movements. But, traveling from one solor system to the other would take several turns. I guess the best example of this would be Rebellion. If anyone is familar with that game, and believe I was, then you would understand what I am trying to do here.

Imagine a game map with 10 galaxies with each galaxy having 20 systems, and each system having up to 10 solor systems with each solor system having up to 12 planets. the core of the Galaxies would be connected to each other and each of the systems connected to the core.

Games would truly become epic, and the maps would look more RL in nature. The grid map would work well with this set up, and with each solor system being represented by a star, they too would look real. Hell you can even leave some systems has black holes, organic infestation, etc and still have excellent game play.

I just want a galaxy that would best use the 20 races with a good chance that they would not come into contact with each other for 200 + turns.

All other tech could be modded to benefit this idea. Too bad Aaron did not set the map editor up with a few automated features such as REPEAT, COPY, or mass create according to X parameters.

[Captain Kwok]

You know what kind of map would be interesting and a challenge to make? A top-down 2D map representation of 3D space.

It would make exploration a bit more fun, plus put on emphasis on key systems that may connect between two planes.

I don't personally have lots of time to make such a monster, but if someone ever wanted to make a map like this from scratch, I wouldn't mind seeing the results.

[PvK]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"Hmm, ok. Well you could make a mod where you didn't buy multiple engines, but you bought different sizes of engine, and the max number of engines per ship was always one."

In that situation the abilities might actually stack. different abilities. The only solution would be to make them all the same family, then put some items of a different family between each one. The strategic engines, perhaps.

---

I guess I wasn't clear. They might stack with different name (I wouldn't expect them to), but that'd never happen. I meant that all ship sizes would only be able to mount one long-range engine component. Max engines := 1. You'd just probably want to put a larger engine on a larger ship, if you want to include pseudo-Newtonian movement. If you don't want pNm, then it's just Long-Range Engine I standard movement := 2, Combat Movement := -1, etc, or whatever.

PvK

[Phoenix-D]

That would work for strategic, but I don't think afterburners, etc count as engines.

EDIT: just tested it. They don't.

Large fighter in Proportions. Max 6 engines. Added 7 small quantums, error. Added 7 Afterburners, no error. Added so many afterburners the fighter was too big, still no engine error.

Phoenix-D

[ 27 April 2002: Message edited by: Phoenix-D ]

[capnq]

quote:

---

You know what kind of map would be interesting and a challenge to make? A top-down 2D map representation of 3D space.

---

I can see a potential problem: stellar manipulation tech. Warp point creation uses the 2D distance between systems to decide how far away you can link from.

I tend to think of the current 2D display to be a flat projection anyway, especially on maps that have warp lines crossing each other.

[ 28 April 2002: Message edited by: capnq ]

[PvK]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
That would work for strategic, but I don't think afterburners, etc count as engines.

EDIT: just tested it. They don't.

Large fighter in Proportions. Max 6 engines. Added 7 small quantums, error. Added 7 Afterburners, no error. Added so many afterburners the fighter was too big, still no engine error.

---

Ok, but adding extra afterburners also has no effect, so all you're doing is creating redundant components.

However (and maybe this is what you meant) the problem could be, depending on how they add, is that even with different named engines, all Combat Movement components might just use the highest value, in which case the -1 combat move to offset the +2 standard movement might vanish when a +X combat move component was added.

Seems like it's about time to test that out, rather than wondering, though. I'm trying to get Proportions 2.2 released at present - anyone feel like testing these stat/tactical engine ideas?

PvK

[Fyron]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Captain Kwok:
You know what kind of map would be interesting and a challenge to make? A top-down 2D map representation of 3D space.

---

Actually, somebody already did that. I forget who it was though. He took a large grid map, and connected the systems on the right edge to those on the left, so that the new warp lines were covered by the pre-existing ones between adjacent systems. He did the same for top to bottom.

[Skulky]

But it still isn't really 3D, however that would open up some new things, like never being on an edge.

[ 29 April 2002: Message edited by: Skulky ]

[PvK]

Anyone play the space conquest game Imperium of circa 1991 (I had it on Atari ST)? It had a 3D map... ouch, I had a terrible time gaining any sense of how the systems were oriented. About the time I managed to get a few scouts to look at neighboring systems, I was bulldozed and conquered by massive AI armadas. The game didn't really seem finished and balanced, but it had some neat aspects to it, such as characters that could be assigned to ship and planet leadership, with different skills and degrees of loyalty, to whom you could reward with pay, medals, promotions, and/or the rare drug that would prolong lifespans (if you could spare any).

PvK

[Klebdog]

I haven't read this entire thread, but I do remember a very cool 2D/3D map from another game I use to play before I found SE. It was called "Ascendency" and you could rotate the map around and get a feel for the galaxy that way. It was pretty cool and the game was very addictive.