Author Topic: M.u.l.v.  (Read 6057 times)

Offline Combine Crusier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
M.u.l.v.
« on: March 15, 2007, 01:38:28 PM »
Launching in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 Lift off.........

The M.U.L.V. is Plymouths latest attempt to create a launch vehicle that operates simularly to Eden's R.L.V. The only problem is that Plymouths design isn't a total success. The M.U.L.V. can operate only a limited number of times.

Statistics: Plymouth:
M.U.L.V.
Lifespan (in launches):
Short: 6
Medium:7
Ultra Long:12 (definitly recycle by this time)
Time in space: same as R.L.V.
Common Ore: 2400
Rare Ore: 820
May varry

Good:
A.Gets Plymouth a slightly closer equality to Eden in space Race
B.Reusable
C.Capable of launching all payloads
D.Means you don't need to construct 2 things for every payload (thus less total biuld time)
E:Capable of being disassembled and sent to the GORF
F:Equiped with navigation systems (you can tell it which spaceport to land at)
G:Flawless payload launch system
H:Leaves rubble when it crashes
I:Made of lighter alloys so it can be moved by a truck (Ultra Slowly)
J:May last as long a 12 uses

Bad:
A.Crashes randomly when over used
B.Can blow up on landing if over used

The reason it may blow up on landing is that there is always a chance that the shock absorbtion system may be overloaded and take damage. This would cause systems to take the full brunt of the force and break causing a moderate explosion. You may be able to tell when this happens by the way it lands in the landing before the explosion (prior use). The explosion is much smaller due to the fact that much of the fuel has been used up.

This would be good to add to the game since it will add a new launch vehicle to Plymouth's arsenal and will provide a new disaster and a new use for the GORF.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 07:50:35 AM by Combine Crusier »
Fire at will!

Offline Arklon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1269
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2007, 10:41:33 PM »
Sounds too unreliable... especially since launch vehicles are manned.
Asymmetry is a bad way to balance the game, the colonies will just become reskinned versions of each other.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2007, 10:41:45 PM by Arklon »

Offline Combine Crusier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2007, 09:03:02 AM »
Ahh. That's the challenge, will you take the risk of using it more than 6 times or will you scrap it and biuld another?
Fire at will!

Offline Arklon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1269
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2007, 09:03:20 AM »
...

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2007, 10:18:24 PM »
If I were to use that rocket which I wouldn't because I would use eden (RLV RULES!).

I would just use a SULV and be done with it so I don't have the possiblity of s*** crashing down on me or trying to pump so many of them out that they crash on my enemy.

Offline Combine Crusier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2007, 07:46:43 AM »
Hey the darn thing always lasts 6 launches. The vehicle could have a display panel on the spaceports launch screen that tells how many launches it has been through and if there are any problems! So if you see that it has taken damage..... GORF it! And biuld another. Hey it's overall cheaper than a SULV. And about crashing it into other colonies.... You can't because there is no way to control a crash, unless your going to land on a biulding which an RLV could do if you disabled it's navigation systems, of course then it would need to be manned hich would make it a suicide missile (not wanted as far as I know).

Also it has an automated thrust control system that pushes it away from any active power signatures so it crashes harmlessly into unoccupied terrain, and it also has a capsule module like the SULV so in the event of a disaster it will eject the crew safely away.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 07:50:22 AM by Combine Crusier »
Fire at will!

Offline dm-horus

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2007, 05:16:10 PM »
why would you make something that is guaranteed to explode in a catastrophic failure after 6 uses? thats like making a pain killer that puts you in a coma every 6 uses.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2007, 07:15:02 PM »
There's enough micromanagement in the game. What value added is there in forcing me to keep track of 6 launches? How does that enhance my gameplay? It might be cheaper than SULV, but how many more launches do you need than 6 anyway? I didn't look at the charts, but you need what, 10 launches to get all the starship components up? An RLV (or MULV) is useless if I'm building an EMP missle because it's single use anyway.

Offline TH300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
    • http://op3game.net
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2007, 06:40:26 AM »
The general idea is not wrong:

have a launch vehicle that can be used a few, but not unlimeted times. After all it would use up less resources than 6 SULVs. After 6 launches it can still be demanufactured or 'landed' at any place far away from the own colony (landing in this case does include usage as some kind of missile, although the explosion wouldn't be too strong probably).

The only problem I can see is that in some situations the MULV can be blocking the spaceport when, for example, an EMP-missile shall be launched. The MULV would have to be launched to allow building the missile.

Offline BlackBox

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3093
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2007, 07:59:03 AM »
I would agree with TH300 there. If you were to use a vehicle like this, it would have to have a certain finite number of uses. Not anything random like "it might last 6 uses, it might last as many as 12"... that adds too much complexity to the game.

Another way to deal with it would be to damage it by a fixed amount every time it lands or something like that.

Offline Combine Crusier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2007, 06:07:41 PM »
Agreed.
If you look in OP 2's database you will see that Plymouth had attempted a multiple launch vehicle but it failed, this could be a byproduct of continued investigation. I think... I believe I added a reply saying that the spaceport could tell you the condition and the number of times the MULV had been used. Kind of like a maintnence check up, which you would NEED to do on a multiple launch rocket system.

Ahh I see so it goes from Excellent, to Good, Fair, Poor, and then Terrible condition. Nice comprimise!
Fire at will!

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2007, 07:42:55 PM »
That seems a better way to do it. Perhaps after the final landing it would auto-recycle instead of randomly crashing. Or you wouldn't have the option to launch again, only to recycle or dump it completely (based on GORF status).

Offline Combine Crusier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2007, 08:37:09 AM »
Da... I agree that would be more convenient for the players and game designers.
Fire at will!

Offline Mez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 648
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2007, 09:18:56 AM »
So to sum up,  After the MULV has launched, say x number of times, and it lands for the final time the launch icon, will change into a trash/recycle icon in the spaceport

Alternatively it could land, and then be deconstructed into the trash/GORF automatically.

Could also have a 'time penalty' where you couldn't use the space port whilst the old MULV is being decommissioned?

and to answer TH300,

You can't build an EMP missile if a SULV is on the pad, i.e. you have to launch it first. So what difference would it make?
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 09:20:29 AM by Mez »

Offline BlackBox

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3093
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2007, 09:35:44 AM »
Another idea, after the last launch, the rocket never comes back (after all you never 'see' an SULV come back -- the nose piece with the crew does, but that's not depicted in game)

You could also play an audio message to indicate to the player that it's not coming back. ("Multiple use launch vehicle depleted" or something to that effect).

As far as research behind it goes, the research which allows the EMP missile (Rocket Atmospheric Re-entry System) was Plymouth's attempt to build a reusable rocket. They failed at that, but instead they were able to design a missile.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #15 on: March 23, 2007, 08:03:37 PM »
Hacker has a good idea too. I like it... Sorta like the ablative plating has worn off and the rocket burned up during reentry.

Offline CK9

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6226
    • http://www.outpost2.net/~ck9
M.u.l.v.
« Reply #16 on: March 23, 2007, 09:03:53 PM »
that would be interesting in a game..."Rocet launched" "Command module deployed" "Rocket Lost"
CK9 in outpost
Iamck in runescape (yes, I still play...sometimes...)
srentiln in minecraft (I like legos, and I like computer games...it was only a matter of time...) and youtube...
xdarkinsidex on deviantart

yup, I have too many screen names