Planned Folder for Pirate, Trading Guild, etc Ships.

[mrsinister]

updated first post with current game mechanic

 

[mrsinister]

well woot! for the new suggestion system.

 

[mrsinister]

Dang, I was hoping to see an update or label next to my suggestion or information as to the direction they are heading /or going with. So how about it Dev's ? permission blocks instead of folders? or a hybrid? or a custom faction / permission box xml config? I am curious to your thoughts / direction on this.... even a bit of info would work as well. But I haven't heard anything relating to my suggestion or even the updated suggestion info.

 

[CyberTao]

I personally would prefer the folder system over just checking a box. Then again, I also want the ability to manually adjust the spawn rates, and I don't think that would work with the ingame checkboxes all that well.

Wish stuff like this wasn't so back-burner.

 

[PizzaPress]

I think you'll definitely be able to set faction specific ships. Only question is when. I would like to see a large system of many procedural NPC factions, that interact in a realistic faction, and can be interacted with.
____________ _____________
[World map] [World map]
____________ _____________
When? :p

 

[mrsinister]

I personally would prefer the folder system over just checking a box. Then again, I also want the ability to manually adjust the spawn rates, and I don't think that would work with the ingame checkboxes all that well.

Wish stuff like this wasn't so back-burner.

yeah, I personally would like the folders. I have done a ton of ships (most aren't posted yet) and they are for specific factions (ie: pirate,trading guild,etc). Not sure about it being on the back-burner,lol maybe the mid-burner?, since they did update it with permission boxes, we really couldn't pick specific ships for pirates before, but why stop there? couldn't a few more lines of code to add the trading guild be all that hard?.....though maybe it's a test or a step in a certain direction they are trying.

 

[CyberTao]

since they did update it with permission boxes, we really couldn't pick specific ships for pirates before, but why stop there? couldn't a few more lines of code to add the trading guild be all that hard?.....though maybe it's a test or a step in a certain direction they are trying.

The thing is, I remember that being there for a while, and I once heard that trading guild used to use "other" BPs, but then bugged in one update and used the same as pirates, but that was probably just a rumour.

The focus seems to be adding in the core features currently, so new blocks and mechanics. More factions and AI features (since factions will be able to claim systems) would probably come hand-in-hand, and an AI overhaul is probably best done after all the main functions are added, so that it doesn't have to be continuously updated.

 

[jayman38]

At this point, it would be interesting to hear from the dev team about non-created folders. These are folders I heard about when I first got the game last summer, where the game doesn't make the folders when it is installed, but can make use of them if you create them.

 

[sgallaty]

This is a great idea, and really necessary. It's simple and straightforward and easily manipulable.

 

[SgtFlexxx]

I think folders would be a much better system than how it is now. It allows for more complexity such as selecting spawn rates and such (like someone else pointed out). If they tried to do that along with how it is now, it would simply be too complicated to adjust for each faction. Folders would be much more organized and would be much less clutter.

 

[mrsinister]

The thing is, I remember that being there for a while, and I once heard that trading guild used to use "other" BPs, but then bugged in one update and used the same as pirates, but that was probably just a rumour.

The focus seems to be adding in the core features currently, so new blocks and mechanics. More factions and AI features (since factions will be able to claim systems) would probably come hand-in-hand, and an AI overhaul is probably best done after all the main functions are added, so that it doesn't have to be continuously updated.

That is fine and all, but could we get an answer or an idea as to where they are going with this...

At this point, it would be interesting to hear from the dev team about non-created folders. These are folders I heard about when I first got the game last summer, where the game doesn't make the folders when it is installed, but can make use of them if you create them.

yes I agree, and the folders you may be thinking of was the station folders. I had to add those when it was first implemented.

I think folders would be a much better system than how it is now. It allows for more complexity such as selecting spawn rates and such (like someone else pointed out). If they tried to do that along with how it is now, it would simply be too complicated to adjust for each faction. Folders would be much more organized and would be much less clutter.

Yes, this is the way I was originally wanting.

 

[Calbiri]

Based on some recent updates (You'll see them in the next patch, improvements to starting gear) this planned feature is coming closer to implementation.

 

[Blodge]

Based on some recent updates (You'll see them in the next patch, improvements to starting gear) this planned feature is coming closer to implementation.

Awesome :D

 

[mrsinister]

Based on some recent updates (You'll see them in the next patch, improvements to starting gear) this planned feature is coming closer to implementation.

And Thank You Calbiri! for the information.

 

[ante185]

something that would be nice to follow with the folder structure is, as i think i've possibly mentioned earlier in this thread? that you can have a config file for either each and every ship or one each for the factions, where all details such as behavior, spawn rate, how many to spawn each time and who their wing-men should be

 

[whooplaah]

It's a bit off topic, but I'd like to toss this out there: Spend faction points to spawn NPC ships aligned to your faction.

This turns every player faction into a potential army of NPC's. There may be a cap to how many can be spawned at a time over all owned systems, whether they spawn only in owned systems or in nearby systems, and maybe a way to control which sectors they patrol (way points they fly between). Faction leaders can toggle their behavior from a configurable set of orders: Attack faction enemies on sight, protect planet/ship/station, follow trespassers, patrol, stand-by, attack location/structure/station.

In this way the current system for Faction creation, diplomacy, and territory claims can be integrated into A.I. mechanics. The behavior of ships relative to other factions is toggled by a person and changes over time and by situation as they deem. A.I. will attack stations/locations according to orders from a person.

 

[Blodge]

It's a bit off topic, but I'd like to toss this out there: Spend faction points to spawn NPC ships aligned to your faction.

This turns every player faction into a potential army of NPC's. There may be a cap to how many can be spawned at a time over all owned systems, whether they spawn only in owned systems or in nearby systems, and maybe a way to control which sectors they patrol (way points they fly between). Faction leaders can toggle their behavior from a configurable set of orders: Attack faction enemies on sight, protect planet/ship/station, follow trespassers, patrol, stand-by, attack location/structure/station.

In this way the current system for Faction creation, diplomacy, and territory claims can be integrated into A.I. mechanics. The behavior of ships relative to other factions is toggled by a person and changes over time and by situation as they deem. A.I. will attack stations/locations according to orders from a person.

This is a good idea but, wouldn't it be effectively doable by using NPC crews which are already planned?

 

[mrsinister]

It's a bit off topic, but I'd like to toss this out there: Spend faction points to spawn NPC ships aligned to your faction.

This turns every player faction into a potential army of NPC's. There may be a cap to how many can be spawned at a time over all owned systems, whether they spawn only in owned systems or in nearby systems, and maybe a way to control which sectors they patrol (way points they fly between). Faction leaders can toggle their behavior from a configurable set of orders: Attack faction enemies on sight, protect planet/ship/station, follow trespassers, patrol, stand-by, attack location/structure/station.

In this way the current system for Faction creation, diplomacy, and territory claims can be integrated into A.I. mechanics. The behavior of ships relative to other factions is toggled by a person and changes over time and by situation as they deem. A.I. will attack stations/locations according to orders from a person.

interesting idea, but I would limit the amount of A.I. controlled faction vessels, since the game would then just play its self and take the human aspect of it out of the equation, except the building part.

 

[whooplaah]

interesting idea, but I would limit the amount of A.I. controlled faction vessels, since the game would then just play its self and take the human aspect of it out of the equation, except the building part.

We have to keep in mind that some people don't really like the ship-battle aspect of Starmade - and this would be a viable alternative for them. I personally spend way more time building than fighting.

I wouldn't say this would take the human-aspect out completely. If two A.I.'s battle they are equal except for their ships - so the design is really what wins the battle. Also, I don't think that A.I. will ever be able to collect resources or refine ore into parts for the player - so even builders will have to make supply runs. Also, A.I. is limited and adding in a single player to any A.I. battle will affect the outcome more than adding in 1-more A.I.

I do agree that we'd want to limit the number of NPC/Bobbys that work this way. We have to build their ships, so there is the resource limit already in place. I'd think that we can make an artificial limit by:
1. Putting in a cost to create (bobby) or recruit (NPC)
2. Putting in a maintenance cost per bobby/crew active
3. Loosing FP when a bobby/crew dies
4. (optional) Cost to recruit/maintain/lost on death is modified by their ship size. Loosing a capital ship is a loss of resources, but also costs more FP than loosing a fighter.

This allows more flexibility than a hard-coded limit. For instance, if our faction generates 20 FP per tick:
10 1-man fighters = 100 FP to spawn, 20FP to maintain
---= we have to stockpile FP to get here, then we no longer earn FP but can keep this fleet size indefinetly

15 1-man fighters = 150 FP to spawn, 30FP to maintain
---= we can only maintain this fleet for a limited time because we loose 10FP each tick to maintenance




Back on topic:
This would help keep NPC-ships from taking over game-play, but still add in a way to expand the current faction system and eliminate the concept of a 1-man faction. The same mechanics could be used to siege a sector owned by an NPC faction - instead of them spawning an unlimited amounts of ships in equal waves over time they will eventually run out of FP - smaller waves over time until they can only afford to spawn a couple small fighters each FP tick. If a player goes straight for a station, they run the risk of having a lot of ships spawn while they hammer away - but by sieging first the threat from defense waves goes down.

The same mechanic will help control how the NPC faction sends out armadas to neighboring sectors. How large a wave can they afford to maintain? How often do they earn the FP to spawn it?

Then one aspect of a sector's difficulty could be how much FP that faction generates each tick, and an A.I. mechanic would be how they spend/save/manage their FP: (a) dump it all into the largest army they can afford even though it means they loose FP each tick from maintenance (b) spawn the largest wave they can that won't cost more to maintain than they earn each tick (c) Save up FP for the largest ship they can spawn (d) spawn the largest wave possible using the smallest, most affordable ships (e) always spawn a particular combination of ships (f) only spawn waves after reaching a minimum stockpile of FP, then spawn until depleted.

We'd have to consider whether we want to invade the NPC faction now with our puny forces, or build up better ships. If we wait, they can stockpile FP which will make taking their sector that much harder because as their FP stockpile grows their threat level also grows.

 

[mrsinister]

We have to keep in mind that some people don't really like the ship-battle aspect of Starmade - and this would be a viable alternative for them. I personally spend way more time building than fighting.

I wouldn't say this would take the human-aspect out completely. If two A.I.'s battle they are equal except for their ships - so the design is really what wins the battle. Also, I don't think that A.I. will ever be able to collect resources or refine ore into parts for the player - so even builders will have to make supply runs. Also, A.I. is limited and adding in a single player to any A.I. battle will affect the outcome more than adding in 1-more A.I.

I do agree that we'd want to limit the number of NPC/Bobbys that work this way. We have to build their ships, so there is the resource limit already in place. I'd think that we can make an artificial limit by:
1. Putting in a cost to create (bobby) or recruit (NPC)
2. Putting in a maintenance cost per bobby/crew active
3. Loosing FP when a bobby/crew dies
4. (optional) Cost to recruit/maintain/lost on death is modified by their ship size. Loosing a capital ship is a loss of resources, but also costs more FP than loosing a fighter.

This allows more flexibility than a hard-coded limit. For instance, if our faction generates 20 FP per tick:
10 1-man fighters = 100 FP to spawn, 20FP to maintain
---= we have to stockpile FP to get here, then we no longer earn FP but can keep this fleet size indefinetly

15 1-man fighters = 150 FP to spawn, 30FP to maintain
---= we can only maintain this fleet for a limited time because we loose 10FP each tick to maintenance




Back on topic:
This would help keep NPC-ships from taking over game-play, but still add in a way to expand the current faction system and eliminate the concept of a 1-man faction. The same mechanics could be used to siege a sector owned by an NPC faction - instead of them spawning an unlimited amounts of ships in equal waves over time they will eventually run out of FP - smaller waves over time until they can only afford to spawn a couple small fighters each FP tick. If a player goes straight for a station, they run the risk of having a lot of ships spawn while they hammer away - but by sieging first the threat from defense waves goes down.

The same mechanic will help control how the NPC faction sends out armadas to neighboring sectors. How large a wave can they afford to maintain? How often do they earn the FP to spawn it?

Then one aspect of a sector's difficulty could be how much FP that faction generates each tick, and an A.I. mechanic would be how they spend/save/manage their FP: (a) dump it all into the largest army they can afford even though it means they loose FP each tick from maintenance (b) spawn the largest wave they can that won't cost more to maintain than they earn each tick (c) Save up FP for the largest ship they can spawn (d) spawn the largest wave possible using the smallest, most affordable ships (e) always spawn a particular combination of ships (f) only spawn waves after reaching a minimum stockpile of FP, then spawn until depleted.

We'd have to consider whether we want to invade the NPC faction now with our puny forces, or build up better ships. If we wait, they can stockpile FP which will make taking their sector that much harder because as their FP stockpile grows their threat level also grows.

Hmm, when you explained it a bit more in depth and the reasoning, I can justify that.