Tonnage %

Trachmyr · #1 April 17th, 2001, 02:40 AM

Mr. Junkie,

I too am a programmer (or I once was), and I do not think it would be that difficult, it would only require a subroutine to determine the componet size/HP/Cost when it reads "%" in the string... I agree it won't be simple, but I doubt it would be hard either. I fully am aware that once restrictions are working, this would only be a way to reduce work on the modders side (The side I'm on

), but it can still be useful... Engines are a prime example, even now if you use "engines per move", you must be careful not to generate "Range Check errors" due to having alot of movement to move your big ships. However, if they get the restrictions fully working (Not just ship size over/under XXX... but only for "name" ship type (or xxx tons)), I would be satisfied.

Marty Ward · #2 April 17th, 2001, 02:52 AM

Why should a dreadnaughts engine be physically larger that an escorts? The physical size of the engine on an aircraft carrier is not much larger than on a cruiser. The power is different but both ships have approximately the same cruising speed.
What I find strange is each engine gives the same tactical movement to any size ship.

Trachmyr · #3 April 17th, 2001, 03:01 AM

Why? Well because (in space), speed is a simple matter of trust/mass... the greater the thrust to mass ratio, the greater the acceleration (as there is no real topspeed in space (well almost, there is drag caused by the ether in space (dust,ect.))... thus a dreadnought would need 6.6666666 times the thrust of an escort to have the same "speed", and we should assume that since you're using the best tech, it would translate to 6.6666666 times the size.

In the example you gave (carrier vs. cruiser), your not just talking about acceleration but top speed... which has less to do with mass/thrust ration and more to due with hydrodynamics...

Suicide Junkie · #4 April 17th, 2001, 03:01 AM

Well, deciding whether to use the % or absolute tonnage from the text files would be a problem. You'd have to rework the code that reads the text files. It expects a fixed sequence of entries.
(The thing can't handle double blank lines without choking, I'm not sure how easy it would be to change)

You'd also have to repeatedly recalculate the actual size of the component when changing the ship designs, and make sure it works right.

By using the "custom group" restrictions, you just have to check each component on the ship to see if it is in a custom group forbidden to the ship, and do that only when you normally update the "warnings" box in the ship design screen.
Then all you have to worry about is the AI's design process, whatever the process is that is used to check it for validity.

Instead of using an "engines per move" trick, and using 30 engines on a baseship, you could have a "Baseship Engine" that weighs 100KT and gives 2 movement, and an "Escort Engine" that weighs 5kT and gives 1 movement.
The baseship would only be able to use "baseship engines" with the custom group "10", while the escort can only use "escort engines" with a custom group "2".

[This message has been edited by suicide_junkie (edited 17 April 2001).]

Trachmyr · #5 April 17th, 2001, 03:06 AM

Mr. Junkie I agree with you, I know how a itsy bitsy change can lead to hundreds of lines of code... Restrictions would be much easier to implement since they already work within the frame of the original code. It wouldn't be hard, but it would be time-consuming (and lead to a few bugs to be squashed). The only thing I'm worried about is that the custom Groups might not get implemented for a long time (if at all).

[This message has been edited by Trachmyr (edited 17 April 2001).]

Suicide Junkie · #6 April 17th, 2001, 03:16 AM

All we can do is email MM lots with requests for custom group restrictions.

Squeaky wheel & all that...

Marty Ward · #7 April 17th, 2001, 04:23 AM

The fact that the same size engine moves a large vessel the same as a smaller vessel on the system map is not the problem, at least in my opinion. After all we are talking about basically strategic movement in one month turns and fleet movement where all vessels cruise at the same rate of speed, not max speed. It may take each one a little longer to accelerate but in a month ...
I think the problem effects the tactical/battle portion of the game more. I would like to see them differentiate between the engines and their effect on different size ships in this area, where maneuver, change of direction and acceleration are more important. This would be especially nice if they were to expand the size of combat map.