Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SafariJohn]

The mention of small defense platforms reminds me of one idea for space mines I've seen - instead of being tiny, sneaky things they're huge, well-armored, and equipped with flak guns to defend themselves.

[David]

I like how you approached the design by thinking the player approaches - form follows function eh?

I feel like this is basically "the Starsector design philosophy". Figure out desired player experience first, then make the game fit that.

Will there be major variations on stations? One may have an XXL cannon in the middle (but very slow turn rate?), while another may have several overlapping directional shields? To differentiate them.
...
That said - I imagined the stations to be WAY larger, like, a third of a station spanning the entire battle map from left to right with us fighting our way into it, with frigates/fighters going inside and blowing up the core or something.

I can't respond to every point, but the giant cannon and station size are things I thought about while writing the post. First, giant cannons: certainly the thought occurs, but we gotta be really careful about introducing elements that break the bounds of existing systems. It either introduces additional complexity to stable systems, thus creating more work, or it's a special case (also more work). ... Come to think of it, the paragraph about choosing when to indulge covers this pretty well.

That said, mods are allowed to get way crazier with content because they don't have to support the same level of stability/balance (nor are they building, you know, the whole foundation of the game).

Same deal for stations that take up a significant portion of the map - this would involve turning Starsector's tactical battles into something more akin to tower defense or an RTS. Or, at least, it would radically change how ship AI has to think about the battlefield on a fundamental level, which would involve re-writing ... a lot of stuff. Again, I could see a mod pushing the limits here though I fully expect it'd run into AI and performance issues.

(Do we never indulge in crazy stuff? Of course not! Just gotta be reaalllly considered about making that choice, is all.)

Those Battlestations are sick. I can't wait to see what the modding community does! 

Thanks; same!

You know, I almost always ended up using marines to disable the weapon systems on stations. Lets not do that .

(... I probably should have used that trick more often. IIRC, mostly I abused missile-boats.)

Can a station have both rotating and counter-rotating segments?

Yes, it's possible to set a rotation for an individual module. You can do ... interesting things.

(explodey module, station counter-rotation stuff)

You can, in fact, set a module to always - or never - detach upon death. I'm pretty sure there's a reduced explosion hullmod too; pretty sure the armour pieces use it? And, as mentioned, rotation can be set per-module. So everything you mention here should be possible!

Can we assume there will be some associated benefits to taking down a planets station such as raiding privileges?

Campaign layer effects? Can't quite comment yet! (But we've discussed lots of Fun Stuff

Stations also get a unique hull system which provides all of their weapons with a huge range boost so you can’t sit at max range and plink the station to death.

So far, the Remnant battlestation manages this by having Gunnery Implants 3 on top of Targeting Supercomputer.  Without it, beam Paragon with max range and max ECM will outrange the battlestation (except maybe Gauss Cannons, which Paragon can shrug off, and fighters, which get mowed down) and can leisurely pick off modules one-by-one.

If the new battlestations do not automatically get Gunnery Implants 3, then station-killer Paragon might make a triumphant return, unless something changes, like bigger range bonus on Targeting Supercomputer or other change.

*narrows eyes, submits report to HEGNAVINT*

[Chaos Blade]

Interesting article, as always, though discussing stations by themselves might be a bit counterproductive, I mean odds are all stations will have attendant fleets for defense or even some sort of short range parasyte craft, a type of design that only stations could operate, u sing fighter mechanics, bascially, but far, far larger than fighters (so that we won't be able to operate off a flight deck) I am talking about a dedicated defense system, bascially, but unlike the station, mobile.

or like others have suggested having some sort of "armed sats" with a lot of firepower and weapons and a very limied mobility to serve as a further line of defense.

Still, some of those ideas would add a lot of clutter to the battle, not sure if with the current command system adding too much complexity would be desireable

[Thaago]

Interesting article, as always, though discussing stations by themselves might be a bit counterproductive, I mean odds are all stations will have attendant fleets for defense or even some sort of short range parasyte craft, a type of design that only stations could operate, u sing fighter mechanics, bascially, but far, far larger than fighters (so that we won't be able to operate off a flight deck) I am talking about a dedicated defense system, bascially, but unlike the station, mobile.

or like others have suggested having some sort of "armed sats" with a lot of firepower and weapons and a very limied mobility to serve as a further line of defense.

Still, some of those ideas would add a lot of clutter to the battle, not sure if with the current command system adding too much complexity would be desireable

Attendant fleets can really up the challenge. The worst surprise spanking I've had (recently) was when two enemy Astrals decided to hide behind/to the side of a station (in Nex, so its close to the top of the screen). That... did not go well. At all.

[Machine]

I suppose mods will still be able to set a layer of decor modules underneath a station, even if it is no longer going to be used in the base game, right?
also regarding those deco modules (which I guess didn't have collision), would they be drawn below everything? even other ships passing over them?.

I wanted to use them to add large struts for some megastructures, and if neutral entities were possible custom background stuff in missions

[Schwartz]

It's always interesting to see the progression. I definitely agree with the end result. An overarching colour theme works better than little blots of blue, yellow and red. The arms and independent shields are a cool idea. It's all very combat-focused - I assume that's what stations do? But some more protruding girders, docking ports, clamps, maybe even bulky modules that are largely cargo etc. would be nice if the stations actually service ships. Maybe there could be both - stations that are more utilitarian and therefore easier to handle, and pure combat fortresses.

[Histidine]

Alex's Twitter has a time-lapse of the level 2 station in action

[nomadic_leader]

Pedantry ahead:

Outsides look nice, but the insides aren't so compelling, and the graphics for them look less well developed

1. It looks like the main habitat areas are in the inside, since that's where all the little windows are. But shouldn't the hab areas be as far from the center of rotation as possible to reduce Coriolis effect?

2. Not a physicist/engineer here, but wouldn't having asymmetrical distribution of bastions and other mass-intensive protrusions  (as seen in the final versions of the graphics) throw the center of mass away from the center of the wheel and cause various subtle but undesirable outcomes?

Please nobody respond with "oh so you want realism and it's a 2d space game!" because that's not an interesting or original response. Scientifically sound analyses and convoluted technobabble justifications only please!

[icepick37]

It's fascinating to see this stuff under the hood, thanks for sharing!

[intrinsic_parity]

1. It looks like the main habitat areas are in the inside, since that's where all the little windows are. But shouldn't the hab areas be as far from the center of rotation as possible to reduce Coriolis effect?

2. Not a physicist/engineer here, but wouldn't having asymmetrical distribution of bastions and other mass-intensive protrusions  (as seen in the final versions of the graphics) throw the center of mass away from the center of the wheel and cause various subtle but undesirable outcomes?

1. The Coriolis effect would get stronger as you get further from the center of rotation. I don't think that phenomenon is what you were thinking of though. The reason to have habitats further from the center of gravity would be to maximize the centripetal force which could be used as a sort of artificial gravity. Being towards the edge of the station however would make you more exposed to external threats so it would make sense for a military station to have habitation towards the center. If any sort of sci-fi artificial gravity existed, then there would be no reason to put habitants anywhere other than the safest location on the station (ie the center).

2. Having an offset center of mass would mostly mean that centripetal forces would not be uniform around the hub structure. This could presumably be designed for structurally but it would be strange for occupants since they would feel heavier in some places on the station. Again, 'hand wavy' artificial gravity could presumably compensate for this.

[Linnis]

Hey David. What do you imagine stations as? Do they primarily handle planet defenses or are they more like a commerce hub, or perhaps a "gateway"?

In my mind all those satellite things orbiting a planet are its defense platforms preventing people coming and going, and shooting at the planet from orbit sort of things. Will there be other more "military" or "civilian" immobile things we have to deal with?

Maybe an military stations where its a box shaped things with lots of hangars and big 360 turning guns?

Are the rotating cylinder stations the extent of stations we will fight?

[Embolism]

Pedantry ahead:

Outsides look nice, but the insides aren't so compelling, and the graphics for them look less well developed

1. It looks like the main habitat areas are in the inside, since that's where all the little windows are. But shouldn't the hab areas be as far from the center of rotation as possible to reduce Coriolis effect?

2. Not a physicist/engineer here, but wouldn't having asymmetrical distribution of bastions and other mass-intensive protrusions  (as seen in the final versions of the graphics) throw the center of mass away from the center of the wheel and cause various subtle but undesirable outcomes?

Please nobody respond with "oh so you want realism and it's a 2d space game!" because that's not an interesting or original response. Scientifically sound analyses and convoluted technobabble justifications only please!

If you want to argue these then you should really first be arguing the far more important effect of ships being built like seafaring vessels rather than rockets, which means every time a ship goes to Burn speed its occupants would be squashed like pancakes against the back wall. Not that being squashed like pancakes against the floor is much better but at least its the same direction of force as surface gravity.

Since ships (if you want to justify it) don't kill their occupants when they go to Burn speed, they must have some way of nullifying the effects of lethal acceleration. If such technology exists then the comparatively miniscule force of a spinning space station and whatever "negative effects" that causes would be child's play to negate.

[David]

... I mean odds are all stations will have attendant fleets for defense or even some sort of short range parasyte craft, a type of design that only stations could operate ...

or like others have suggested having some sort of "armed sats" with a lot of firepower and weapons and a very limied mobility to serve as a further line of defense.

Still, some of those ideas would add a lot of clutter to the battle, not sure if with the current command system adding too much complexity would be desireable

I don't imagine we'd add a new class of fighter just for stations, though we certainly have for faction differentiation. And yeah, as mentioned in the blog post, we did consider defense platforms. Might try out more with them and see if they add to the whole set of systems.

But as you say, keeping clarity to what's going on is a really important design goal behind all of this.

I suppose mods will still be able to set a layer of decor modules underneath a station ...

I imagine so; I'll leave it to Alex to confirm it as a mod-capable ability.

It's all very combat-focused - I assume that's what stations do? But some more protruding girders, docking ports, clamps, maybe even bulky modules that are largely cargo etc. would be nice if the stations actually service ships. Maybe there could be both - stations that are more utilitarian and therefore easier to handle, and pure combat fortresses.

For the purposes of what a player sees in tactical battles, we're keeping everything combat-focused. My though (as mentioned in the blog) is that the station is a spindle-type design so all the civilian modules are hidden "under" this ring of combat modules, so you can imagine that any amount of civilian station is beneath what you see in battle. From there, maybe I find a design for underlying decor modules that doesn't ruin visual clarity, maybe I don't.

Pedantry ahead:
...
Scientifically sound analyses and convoluted technobabble justifications only please!

Haha, well I think your two requests might be at odds and I won't endeavor to fulfill them, but it sounds like you might enjoy the site Atomic Rockets which covers hard-scifi concepts comprehensively. Or to put it another way, it's like the TV Tropes of hard science ficiton. Enjoy!

It's fascinating to see this stuff under the hood, thanks for sharing!

NP!

Hey David. What do you imagine stations as? Do they primarily handle planet defenses or are they more like a commerce hub, or perhaps a "gateway"?

In my mind all those satellite things orbiting a planet are its defense platforms preventing people coming and going, and shooting at the planet from orbit sort of things. Will there be other more "military" or "civilian" immobile things we have to deal with?

Maybe an military stations where its a box shaped things with lots of hangars and big 360 turning guns?

Are the rotating cylinder stations the extent of stations we will fight?

The orbital junk is just to show that space-faring civilization is getting up to all sorts of business around a planet. (Or it's space-ruins, like the Rust Belt from the Reynolds books!) So there could plausibly be defense platforms in there, or maybe not. Kinda depends on how we end up using these concepts in the game 

As mentioned, defense platforms are possible. Not sure if/how we'd handle them at this point.

I will say that these big round-style stations will be the core of station combat in the Domain; they exist in-game already as a symbol of both economic and military power, so they're going to get lots of meaning infused via participation in tactical combat (and, presumably, the campaign layer goings-on).  .... They also take a bloody long time to draw, so I'm not in a hurry to make like 20 of 'em. More on that in the next blog post!

Since ships (if you want to justify it) don't kill their occupants when they go to Burn speed, they must have some way of nullifying the effects of lethal acceleration. If such technology exists then the comparatively miniscule force of a spinning space station and whatever "negative effects" that causes would be child's play to negate.

Canonically, yeah, some kind of inertial dampening technology must exist for any of this to work on the scale/speed it does. I'll let other people get into details about what that might look like. 

[Blothorn]

The orbital junk is just to show that space-faring civilization is getting up to all sorts of business around a planet. (Or it's space-ruins, like the Rust Belt from the Reynolds books!) So there could plausibly be defense platforms in there, or maybe not. Kinda depends on how we end up using these concepts in the game 

As mentioned, defense platforms are possible. Not sure if/how we'd handle them at this point.

I will say that these big round-style stations will be the core of station combat in the Domain; they exist in-game already as a symbol of both economic and military power, so they're going to get lots of meaning infused via participation in tactical combat (and, presumably, the campaign layer goings-on).  .... They also take a bloody long time to draw, so I'm not in a hurry to make like 20 of 'em. More on that in the next blog post!

I think defense platforms are fairly limited by the role that mobility/range tradeoffs play in SS--with narrow exceptions, the smallest stationary platform useful in capital-tier combat can plausibly fit ATC and long-range weapons or TSC. The two uses I see for smaller defense platforms would be as a station-substitute for small-scale combat (e.g. a small colony that would surrender if a proper faction sent an occupation fleet but needs protection from raiders until it can either afford a proper station or catches the attention of a proper faction), and missile/launch bay platforms.

[Morgan Rue]

I think defense platforms are fairly limited by the role that mobility/range tradeoffs play in SS--with narrow exceptions, the smallest stationary platform useful in capital-tier combat can plausibly fit ATC and long-range weapons or TSC. The two uses I see for smaller defense platforms would be as a station-substitute for small-scale combat (e.g. a small colony that would surrender if a proper faction sent an occupation fleet but needs protection from raiders until it can either afford a proper station or catches the attention of a proper faction), and missile/launch bay platforms.

Consider the Mudskipper MKII. I'd say small defense platforms armed with Gauss Cannons or long range beam weapons would be reasonable. Even just something like a Tactical Laser Grid with ITU and Advanced Optics would be a reasonable annoyance to larger fleets if the platform is supporting other ships/stations.