Topic: Opinion for Gaming

[Lieutenant_Q]

I love the idea of a 3D Environment.  If I were to put together a wishlist of what I wanted to see, the biggest thing is that I would like to get rid of as many menus as possible.  I'd like to run the entire campaign in the 3D Tactical screen.  There could still be a "Dyna Map" for a strategic overlay, but to move from "hex to hex" you would point your ship in the direction you needed to go, and accelerate to Warp Seven.  It may be an issue server side, and that may stop it from being implemented, but I'd love the ability to launch an ambush, or be ambushed while traveling to a destination.  (And this might just be a problem with a 3D environment despite space being 3D, every battle scene in Star Trek might as well have been 2D, the z-axis only was a couple hundred Kilometers long)  I'd love to see resupply needing to park in orbit of (or dock with) a Star Base.  If you need repairs you need to fly to a Fleet Repair Dock.  If you're looking to purchase a new ship, you can pull up the Base and see all the "Captain-less" ships waiting for you to pick them.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Well Q, you would be surprised.   The galactic map will have a hex overlay but not the click from hex to hex.  The hex overlay is for recording of locations.  The ships move and you can direct by mouse click to direction.  The menu system is different, and the plan is to use shipyards etc.  I think you will be pleased.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

Pardon me folks.  The focus for the last couple of years has been getting SFC playable for vista/win 7 so we can get the community back to playing. We're pretty much there now so what's happening? Oh were just letting that slide and moving on to SFC 4? Focus please!  Or just say you're chasing dreams at your own leisure and cut the remaining hopeful loose, because you're just spit-balling here and enough time has gone by. Be realistic with us and yourselves. I'm tired of hoping and making what likely appears to be miniscule contributions to the cause.

[[UFP]Exeter]

The CE edition project was finished and waiting for the powers that be to get the iso etc.  I aided on that effort.   SFC4, well I am not the lead developer and it is not a pipe dream.  Coding has already started.

These discussions, specifically this thread, allows me to get ideas and preferences.  At this time I am soliciting new ideas to put in the design.  Then the design will be frozen and other ideas will be considered for a future update.

This is a dream that I have been actively working on for over a year by myself.  I have done proof of concept, testing 3rd pary libraries, do a design etc.   I also ran some tests between C++ and C#, using wrappers to verify performance.  And researched in tons of books.  All to be able to code this.   The entire time I was working with Strat on CE I was also doing this.  Talking to Fray about this over the last year, we agreed to use what I have done as the basis for SFC4.

[Javora]

Strat does have a point, a refit of the CE game would be legal as it was already a legal license to base on the SFB code.

A new game would not.

I could have sworn I suggested that in another thread...

Anyway, part of me wonders how close you can make a non CE refit SFC 4 look like SFC OP in look and feel without violating previous work?  Or put another way, someone claiming that you violated previous work.  Realistically it's not just ADB you have to worry about, I think even Erik Bethke might even have a claim here.  Don't get me wrong I think this is a wonderful idea, I just don't want anyone being punished for doing such a great deed.

3D battlefield?  So would that mean I would actually have a use for my old joystick sitting in the corner of the room for the last ten years??!?  lol.

[[UFP]Exeter]

I did evaluate a refit of CE and I do not think it would be worth it.  In my opinion I would replace the graphics, I would replace the network, I would replace the missions with a scripting language and of course replace the physics and add real collision detection.

Maybe see what strat has to say. 

[Strat]

Any major changes/additions to CE would be double the effort. It takes too much time to learn their code, undo mistakes, insert new code, and change fundamental existing aspects of the game, both technical and gameplay. This includes fixing the NAT/firewall issues, and updating the graphics abilities.

The most you can expect from CE be SFC:EAW/OP with no bugs. Perhaps a few minor additions or improvements such as various race balancing. In its essence, it would not stop being SFC EAW/OP. Kinda like when Khoromag took over bug fixing for Taldren...

Exeter's illustration with remodeling the car was accurate. If you want really a racear, it would have have to be SFC 4. As for CE, all it would ever be is a restored classic.

[RazalYllib]

SFC4 should be a ground up project - if you are going to take the time to do something of this magnitude, do it bigger and badder than anything else.

With the current state of tech, things can be done that was not possible back in the day; Improved, responsive AI - possibly one that learns (?), retro-grade maneuvering, "cruise control" speed options on hotkeys, player scripted power distribution schemes on hotkeys, larger number of weapon groups, customizable interface elements...the list is HUGE of what is possible in these times.  That does not include the eye candy options possible now- larger poly models, bump maps, volumetric lighting/fog (nebula battles in thick fog), ability to randomly generate more varied terrain to skirmish around...etc....this list is also huge.

Bandwidth is also more plentiful and that should permit more players per encounter.
More players per encounter is a must have.
If more players can participate in a single encounter (within the limits of Command Rating), this will incentivize them to play more and word of mouth of the incredible times they are having in these large fleet encounters, this will naturally increase the player base.

I can only hope that the SFB roots are not abandoned...I feel very strongly that any dev would be remiss in their duty if they should forget the lesson of Craptavision SFC3.

I do understand there is legal issues with the mechanics of SFB as an IP....Deals can be made and the "setting" of the SFU as expressed in SFB can be transparently ported to a different nomenclature without loss of playability so there would be zero issue with any potential Star Trek IP claim down the road.  There is already precident, Mirak=Kzin. 

All things considered it really does not matter what the background of the race that built the ship you happen to be piloting, all that matters is the loadout of its systems and the skill of the pilot. 

[knightstorm]

And true there are a dime a dozen 3D games, but look at them?  They are arcade style, no real physics.  Ships move the same except maybe in speed.  I really believe if we put in proper Newtonian physics, it will make a big difference.  A fighter would run circles around a battleship.  Does less damage when a fighter hits the shields of a battleship.  And the fighter is harder to hit.  A battleship would slow to turn.  SFC3, the physics was close enough that there appeared to be some realism.   Id the 3D does not work, then we have to change it. 

A 3D game, even one with realistic physics just doesn't have the same appeal to me that a 2D game does.  I always liked the 2D perspective of the SFC games as I felt it was a reminder of their board game roots.  Also, you have to remember that the ships aren't flying through each other.  They're flying over each other.  I do think that Star bases should be hittable due to their size.

One area where I do think the game needs major improvement is determining how to have territory change hands.  The current dv hex flipping method is stupid, tedious, and rewards whichever side has the most nutcases.  I think certain missions should have more value based on difficulty, and that a successful base assault should automatically flip the hex to neutral since you're essentially destroying the enemy presence in that hex.  I might also call for greater dv shifts for pvp missions except for the fact that some players who suck as badly as I do might object to giving that type of advantage to the killing machines.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Good to see so much activity and input.

The issue with SFB:  SFC4 is a new came.  Licenses that were approved for EAW/OP etc do not apply.  Therefore we cannot use it.  So, unless Fry or somebody from Dyna or XenoCorp gets an agreement we cannot use it under any circumstance.  Now, I played SFB when it first came out many many years ago.  have not touched it since.  So anything I design is based on my own experience and not copying them.  If it looks the same, too bad, that is not copyright infringement.  And to maintain this I will be the only one to design and see the code for the necessary game mechanics.  This protects us from even coincidentally infringing on copyright.  Given how they acted toward me in the past when I inquired, I my specifically mention we do not use any SFB material, the game is not based on it and we do not endorse them.

I am not abandoning SFB but we cannot use their material directly without permission.  However we own the code for EAW so if we use anything from the actual codebase, that is legal.

2D vs 3D:  This may be under discussion forever.  Unless something occurs to prove 3D does not work, it will be 3D.   The structure to do this 3D is already built and tested.

As far as tech, I am planning on requiring at least 2 cores and a DX11 compatible GPU.   I hope to require DX11 also, but for now DX9x with a DX11 compatible GPU will do.  This is because we will use the GPU for collision calculations.

I agree with a better method to change territory.

We are utilizing a modern network engine and planning on improved bandwidth.

Every third party library we re sing is open license and supplies the source code, so we will always be able to modify and upgrade.

[Javora]

Also, you have to remember that the ships aren't flying through each other.  They're flying over each other.  I do think that Star bases should be hittable due to their size.

I agree, it's something I liked in SFC as it assumes that the helm is competent enough to avoid hitting the other ship.  Now maybe if there was a button option where you try to crash into the other ship, but then the other ship should have a chance to avoid if they want to.  Star Bases on the other hand doesn't move as easy and should be hittable just like a planet.  I just hope this doesn't become an issue when people try to dock with their own Star Base.  lol

[Lieutenant_Q]

I like 3D, but from a Strategic Standpoint, there has to be a limit on the Z-Axis.  Otherwise you just have ships traveling up (or down) out of sensor range to deep strike and there is no semblance of battle lines or strategy.  Also one thing that is sorely lacking in SFC that needs to be put in is Long Range Sensors.  Unless you've got a cloak, ships need be able to be detected at much further out than 100.  Taking something from Star Trek V (I know, I know) the sensors from the Enterprise as the Bird Of Prey closed with them over Nimbus III.  At extreme range all it indicated was that the ship was Klingon, by having the symbol of the Klingon Empire, as it got closer it finally switched over to a more detailed image of the ship.

[Javora]

IIRC that is why probes were in SFC because long range sensors were too hard for them to program into the game.  But Lt. Q makes a good point with the Z-Axis, however using the SFC damage chart I can't think of too many weapons that can do damage beyond 100 range.  It's one of the things that people are going to have to figure out is how far are long range sensors are going to be able to detect something.  What sensors are going to be able to detect, type of ship, weapons systems, etc.

The other thing you have to figure is how the shields are going to wrap around the ship.

[[UFP]Exeter]

I agree on teh Z axis, and something will be done.  The limit may be determined by sensor range.  But remember space is 3D, if you re limited to the 2 dimensional thinking Khan they you will die also.

as for range SFB has an arbitrary ranges, something easy for players to handle manually.  In a computer we can be realistic.  And do some research the ranges are in 10s or thousand of km.

As for collisions, the game will not compensate for a terrible helmsman or an incompetent captain.  This will be tested in playability, and it can be changed.

Many things will be tested and if they do not work they can be changed.

[[UFP]Exeter]

An earlier post brought up inertia and inertial dampers.  Inertial dampers are to prevent the crew from flying all over.  And based on episodes that only works in controlled situations.  Something hits the ship and caused to to roll or jitter, the crew goes flying.  So the inertial dampers do no affect the ship.   Remember the early episodes of TOS, the crew holing on in fast acceleration?   No, there is inertia, be technology minimized the impact to the crew.

The effect of intertia is if the ship loses it drive 9impulse engines) the ship does not suddenly stop unless an external force is applied.  We also have momentum.   

[knightstorm]

This just occurred to me, but how are you going to prevent inertia from being abused?  Theoretically, you could take a ship with a poor power curve, turn off the weapons and accelerate to full speed, then cut power to the engines, and charge weapons while coasting.  I can also see a ship that's being chased doing a b5 style flip to deliver an alpha strike to the pursuing vessel without giving ground.

[[UFP]Exeter]

The other forces.  We assume there is no friction, but space is not an absolute vacuum.  Also there is gravity and with no thrust from the engines the ship more susceptible.  Also, without some type of thrust you will not be able to turn.  And firing weapons, esp torpedoes, there is some affect, the equal and opposite reaction.  Also this tctic would be effective against a small vessel but given the mass of a larger one.

And if this does not work we fix it.

[d4v1ks]

The other thing you have to figure is how the shields are going to wrap around the ship.

You could use a ellipsoid. As Exeter is already using the Irrlicht engine, and he can use ellipsoids in the collision detections, that could help. Also its a good approach to retrieve the id of the shield we are facing (simplifies the math needed).
That remembers me of this video...

Star Trek vs BSG HD

Just look how sweet the ellipsoid shields look, when they are hit, in the middle of the video animation.
Don't mind if SFC4 would look that way in the future, with respect to the graphics. =D

[Starfox1701]

Ellipsoids do have the advantage of requiring less memory to render and there fore creating a smaller work load in large battles.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Have not seen that video in a while, but still good.

Elipsoids are cool,  much better than sphere.  And some vector math would indicate what shield is hit.

That is the level of graphics I am shooting for, if not better.  But my skills are not in the modelling or graphics.  Even my 14 yo daughter is wy better than I am   But I can do the math, physics and coding.