Outpost Universe Forums
Projects & Development => Inactive Projects => GORF => Outpost 3: Alien Worlds => Topic started by: zeritou on April 02, 2004, 07:56:48 PM
-
xfir, if this has allready been suggested deleate it, im too lazy and impatient to look through all the topics in this forum and im sorry this takes up so much space on a page
when your short on workers the buildings go down in a pattern
please note that if food goes down, your screwed
i think it goes:
(if applicable)
food
forums (the public performance things) and rec centers
med centers
residences
university
nursery
labs
factorys
smelters
cc
i think that should be changed to the following:
forums/rec centers
med centers
residences
labs
factorys and smelters instead ofgoing down randomly:
consumer fac
rare storage then rare smelters
scorp fac
vehc fac
common storage then common smelters
structure fac
agridome
university
nursery
then cc
by the time enough people die past the common smelter your agridomes should be able to make enough food to support the current pop untill you can rebuild it
-
What use is this?
What does it apply to?
-
Okay.
What he means here is when you lose a worker, instead of taking it from the Agridomes, it should instead take the worker from Rec. Centers.
P.S. This has not been posted before.
-
That would actually be better, it would by more time to fix population problems.
-
Better would be a possibility to choose between several modes:
E.g. a warmode, i.e. factories (esp. for vecs) should work and smelters, but consumer factories or other buildings that aren't useful for battle should be turned off.
Another mode would be for fast research, and so on...
-
Actually I'm seriously thinking of getting rid of the colonists dying. It is a huge dampener on the game and will be very annoying in multiplayer.
-
Gee...
Don't take that away man...
But seriously the colonist part was my favorite in the game.
You could place it a different manner like the rate of morlity be the same of training like being 1 or 2 time marks between a death and a training, only certain conditions would make the time betwwen them loger like bad moreale and such, and the other way too like being trained more people than die with high morale
-
the main problem is that people die all the time in op2. if they didnt die all the time it would b better.
-
make it an option, kind of like disasters
If there gets to be too many options you could have gametypes like Halo has, and when you play multi you pick a gametype, and it would be transfered to the other players.
-
Personally, I approve of people dying. (err, please never quote me on that.) It adds to that air about the game that I enjoy. You know, like "You have failed! Our colony is doomed!" (thumbsup)
Although, when scientists die, I wished they would be taken out of research rather than have your nursery go offline. I've always found that sort of thing to be pain.
-
colonists should die in this game, it helps make it a 'colny builder sytrategy' (xfir, is there a spell checker mod somewhere you could put on?) and im gonna agree with hooman, when a scientist dies it should be taken from research because:
througout the storyline i get the impression that the colonists were more worried about survival of the human species than reaserch to make an ear of corn grow pink, more worried abot their nurserey being able to raise children to increase the pop than they were about reaserching a way to raise children with a hydraulic arm
and when a colonist dies the building that gets disabled, (if need be) shouldnt be something thats needed for survival
this game should have had its prioritys strait when it came to the building disability order (i just made up this name for this issue: BDO) and it can be fixed in op3,
also, in op2, when a building gets destroyed, why dont you lose people? i gues if it gets destroyed slowly they could evac but how often does a buildng get destroyed slowly? maybe they all saw it out the window and ran, but then why wasnt it disabled? another idea for op3:
status: disabled - fear of destruction
-
also, in op2, when a building gets destroyed, why dont you lose people? i gues if it gets destroyed slowly they could evac but how often does a buildng get destroyed slowly? maybe they all saw it out the window and ran, but then why wasnt it disabled? another idea for op3:
status: disabled - fear of destruction
before a building gets destroyed, it gets disabled because of damage, so that the colonists have time to leave it.
And I've already experienced fast destructions of buildings as the consequence of a vortex. And the colonists DID die.
-
Outsider is correct,
I too have experienced colonists dying as a result of a vortex destroying a building quite rapidly.
And buildings do get disabled when it’s heavily damaged.
-
Yah, me too, those darn vortexses!
-
I like the idea of being able to pick wether or not colonists die in the game. Have at least 4-5 different options to make the game very customizable.
-
I always found the whole colonist death thing to be kinda useful in multiplayer... if i think my enemy is doing some massive research in a lab or two, i send over a couple starflares or supernova to take away their scientists... and possibly half the colony along with them (if i'm lucky).
-
That's why I think that it should be an option. Because at times you may want to play with colonists, but sometimes, if all players are lazy, they may just wanna not have to worry about it.
-
I agree, i cant count how many times being lazy has caused my ultimate downfall. It would also kidna draw out the length of some of these games, because you could ship off your vecs and start another colony while the old one is falling apart. A good way to keep things interesting in a fast-paced ffa.
-
Maybe I could have it as a random event, rather than a constant threat.
As for an option at the start of the game. I suppose I could do that too.
-
Yah, I think randomizing the deaths would be a good thing, 'cause I mean, people just dont all of a sudden die when there is proper medical equipment available!
I mean come on! Mabey you could put a random message like: "Worker has died by falling into the smelter core" or something like that. lol.
-
get rid of colonists dying??
now doesn't that kinda completely defeat the major point of the game op2, and therefore defeats teh purpose of its legacy... i.e. take what you have and survive and then thrive.
i mean how can you have "extinction is not an option" as the waywords of the outpost universe where your colonists CANNOT die... especially when you consider that they live in structures on an almost atmosphereically devoid planet.
PS: hey kirby i see you like machall and morrowind ^^ *looks at his morrowind GOTY edition and smiles* great game
-
get rid of colonists dying??
now doesn't that kinda completely defeat the major point of the game op2, and therefore defeats teh purpose of its legacy... i.e. take what you have and survive and then thrive.
i mean how can you have "extinction is not an option" as the waywords of the outpost universe where your colonists CANNOT die... especially when you consider that they live in structures on an almost atmosphereically devoid planet.
PS: hey kirby i see you like machall and morrowind ^^ *looks at his morrowind GOTY edition and smiles* great game
I fully agree.
Everything I like at op2 is the challange to manage all the problems together, not only to fight in multiplayer.
War is one aspect of the game, but not the only one.
-
Okay I have decided to have a random event generator. This enables a lot more possible occurrences. Not just people dying. It'll also make the game a lot more interesting. So I won't remove the possibility of colonists dying. But I will add a few suprises for everyone...
-
So if there isn't going to be an option with no dying, can there be an option like on OP2 to have steady morale?
-
I think there should be gametypes like Halo has, where you can fine tune every variable in the engine, save it into a sort of "File", and use it to play multiplayer.
-
yeah... like no random deaths, colonists only die when the structure they were in explodes, colonists dont die at all...
its true that the point of op2 was to survive and thrive, but how often does that idea actually reflect in the multiplayer? i think having options online for colonist deaths would let people decide for themselves wether they want to focus on either survival or war.
-
So I think that most people want a choice. Yes those variables could be interesting, but a lot of people just want to build up a colony and kill people, they don't want to have to worry about building houses and building recreation facilities and such, it'll take away too much from the multiplayer experience.
-
never thought this topic would get so long....
im now going to go with the idea of options
-
No I'm not getting rid of colonists dying, just not as often. This will keep the balance of realism that some people want and the ease of multiplay that some people want.
-
Actually, now that i think about op2 a little more, there was a colonist death problem that i had an issue with.
Say you have your main colony, and like 50 miles away you have a totally seperate mining colony. For some reason, a fleet of thor's hammer tigers and totally waste it. Now guess what? everybody in your colony is still alive, mysteriously transported to your cc 50 miles away.
I have a little problem with this. The game does has evac transports, but you never have to use them. I personally think that one should have to to load colonists onto evac transports when moving people to another area or setting up a new colony, and maybe even be able to transfer them to other players. This would make alot more sense than how op2 works now, and i think it would make the game more interesting.
just a thought...
-
It's the same with resource-transfer between different locations: Metals are even transferred if the colonies are divided by a stream of lava.
But I don't know if it'd really be better to change this, bcz. gaming could be made too complicated.
-
Yes it is true, all of these things would have made it more realistic, but it also would have made it a whole lot less fun. I like the fact that you could just build and kill and not have to worry stuff like that.
-
Yes, it would be too complicated.
Just say that the colonists escaped in evacuation pods upon the point of explosion of a building, and land at the new cc.
As with rescources, I really thought that was wierd also.
Anyways,
I think you should be able to turn off colonists in multiplayer, but only on certain conditions:
Deathmatch: No Colonists
Space Race/Greed: Colonists
I think that this would add, not detract, from the multiplayer ascpect of op3.
-
I agree that the ore thing might be a bad idea to change, that might end up making the game slower and a tad difficult. However, I think having to manually transfer colonists might make it more interesting.
Or, perhaps, this could be a standard thing for the single-player missions and an option for the multiplayer... I would at least like to see the option of transfering colonists between players, it would seriously improve the whole teamwork aspect of allied multiplayer games.
-
But the player will have to risk to have too few colonists either in the main colony or in an outpost. This will influence the game the more the bigger the distance between both locations is and therefore make having two seperated colonies a hard job.
Maybe that's what you intended, but other parts of the game would have to be easier then.
-
well...
you could make these as option in the game...
better, make these options in patches
-
knux already said that he was going to cut back on the colonist death rate, so theres one point that would kinda balance out the difficulty. The vecs we are talking about in the air units thread would also make it easier to relocate colonists...
so theres two things that would make things easier in op3, anything else?
-
knux already said that he was going to cut back on the colonist death rate, so theres one point that would kinda balance out the difficulty. The vecs we are talking about in the air units thread would also make it easier to relocate colonists...
so theres two things that would make things easier in op3, anything else?
If there will be air-untis (I still don't support them) it'll be ok. In fact I don't know if the result would be better or worse.
And I also want the Colonists-part to be a main part in op3. There shouldn't be too many and too different types of combat-units.
-
No, the OP2 way is the best way, it is already random to a degree... Outpost 2 had an algorithom to determan every thing (eg. overcrouding, morale, children, even dieing increased the chances of dieing (stress factor)) I loved the realism that brought to the game... i do agree however that there should be an option to do a "morale steady" thing... in OP2 all you had to do was supply food and the collonists wouldnt die off... I honestly dont think thats too much to ask from a player... it makes it so much more realistic that way
((( Did i totally miss the discusion? i only looked at the first page... )))
also... why am i the only one with a warn meter? what the hell is that?
--xfir answered this via PM as to prevent off-topic posts.
-
Yes I do think that the op2 colonist algorithem is very accurate, however there should be an option (Extra, Extra Easy or something) that should have a steady moral.
-
It seems that you all want a direct clone of OP2, with a few minor changes here and there. Keep in mind that the player base for this game was somewhat poor because of the magical phrase "just hurry up and wait" which was used in nearly every review I've read about OP2. Perhaps some other things should be changed (such as speeding up colony development or having some kind of balanced combat system) to attract new players. Know that little things like driving colonists to a new base and managing ores separated by lava adds to micromanagement, which (IMO) is exactly what killed Outpost 2.
Just my $.02 :)
-Amrazek
-
I like that in OP2 with morale steady, all you had to build was agridomes, and if you wanted you could build hosptial's to keep them alive longer. Now I would support an option to not only have morale steady, but at what level to have morale steady at. Like you could set it to fair or excellent or whatever before the game started.
Also, I liked that the game came with such a variety of maps. Like you could either choose Pie for a real quick game usually or choose a worl map and have the game take forever.
-
It seems that you all want a direct clone of OP2, with a few minor changes here and there. Keep in mind that the player base for this game was somewhat poor because of the magical phrase "just hurry up and wait" which was used in nearly every review I've read about OP2. Perhaps some other things should be changed (such as speeding up colony development or having some kind of balanced combat system) to attract new players. Know that little things like driving colonists to a new base and managing ores separated by lava adds to micromanagement, which (IMO) is exactly what killed Outpost 2.
Just my $.02 :)
-Amrazek
I don't want a clone of Outpost 2, but I also don't want a game, that's too different from it. The reviews are, in my mind, totally wrong. If you play at speed 10, there'll hardly be a moment, in which you have nothing to do.
And micromanangement is excatly what makes op2 good, it's the slight difference, which makes op2 better than other RTS games.
-
well...
The micromanangement is what attracted all the people here in playing op2 so i guess it's quite good too.
The awnser to this ploblem could be an button to turn micromanangement on or off.
That should satisfy greeks and trojans here
-
Jgamer Posted on Apr 16 2004, 04:45 PM
well...
The micromanangement is what attracted all the people here in playing op2 so i guess it's quite good too.
The awnser to this ploblem could be an button to turn micromanangement on or off.
That should satisfy greeks and trojans here
huh? what do you mean "turn micromanagement off"?
And personally, i believe that ttamdude is right in saying that the system op2 used to kill off colonists was well thought, and i think if we want to make colonists die less in op3, i suggest using something similar and just slowing its affects down a tad.
-
i mean in general outlines, like making buildings use no colonists and research use no scientists at all, like in other RTS games like C&C
-
Well I couldn't turn the micromanagement off. That means a total rewrite of the game and a different set of rules running in the background. That would be totally, unrealistic.
I will say that the medical centres have been scrapped and morale only affects production and research. If morale does drop to very low levels then the population may stop growing and the death rate may rise slightly but the people dying will be mainly controlled by random events.
What I am using the population for is unit control. For what will stop you amassing massive amounts of units super quick?
1. Some games have slow production
2. Some have limited resources
3. Some have high cost units
4. Some have slow resource collection
5. Some have support structures required for multiple units.
I am having:
1. Infinite resources
2. Support structures
I may include more depending on feedback from game users.
-
infanate resources? what do you mean by that? do you mean no mines? no rare ore? no sending your servayor to see what kind of mine? no rush for the three-bar? no... that will kill the game... there has to be some form of gathering resources and op2 did it right... maybe a way to cut out having to move the trucks and things... like you build a pipe or something... i dont know...
-
by that he ment that mines wouldn't loose all resources.
Like this:
In warcraft you gold mine had only about 1000000 gold and after you mined it all it sort of like selfdestructed
In outpost you rare ore mine with 1 bar has 100 ore but can be mined till you have 15654621654842548218 rare ore out that single mine
-
What I am using the population for is unit control. For what will stop you amassing massive amounts of units super quick?
1. Some games have slow production
2. Some have limited resources
3. Some have high cost units
4. Some have slow resource collection
5. Some have support structures required for multiple units.
I am having:
1. Infinite resources
2. Support structures
I may include more depending on feedback from game users.
no bad ideas, but be careful with such things. If different players have different conditions, there's a danger for the game to become unrealistic.
And it should of course depend on the difficulty, how much you're restricted.
-
there is another restriction in the game knux:
build space.
you can't build a factory in top of a cliff ... or inside an active volcano afterall
-
I don't like: Having support structs., having really infinite oree: or maybe yes, but the yield must be low... I remember when I was playing WarWind II. You have limited materials and they are extracted quickly. But I found a way how to get over it: the SUN ( one of the sides ) has a spell to make some. So I waited for other players to run out of resources, while I had infinite. Easy win :D
-
With the infinite resources, don't forget that op2 had infinite resources.
-
no, resources were restricted by the amount of space, the colonists you had to operate the storage, and the amount of food you had to feed those colonists; again going back to amount of space
-
another resource of course is that of time
...
though you obviously can't change that, or the whole system collapses...
as for making mines have limited resources... well, the op2 mines were in a sense limited, just that, well you'd need a few decades to exhaust a mine wouldn't you (and basically no game lasts that long in game terms) ...
ok, i know that you have ppl live and die in the space of a game, but, well, i'm sure everyone can agree that some of the time settings are not in sync (like the convecs move time against its build time for example).
well to put it really simply, if you put resource limits on mines, that's gonna cause a lot of balancing issues, and re-evaluation of map ideas. (for one thing, Eden's magma well would make them the winner of any war of attrition)
and i'd not recommend playing with the yield values (the system works well, and op3 will be running a similar system to op2, lets not overwork knux, ok), execept maybe put a single 4 bar mine in somewhere as an easteregg
-
dont forget, we'll be juggling with 3 types of ore now, not just 2, in a multy game with alot of people or a constricted map (like a version of pie) it will be hard enough to just get all 3 types of ore, thats 3 mines and smelters at least you have to defend, at least one is probly going to be outside your main coloney, having it run for a a few minutes and than you have to search for another one would be almost impossible, plus having mines with limited resources would destroy enjoyable long games, where peolple build up huge armys and have the clash eachother over and over (well seeing 400 tigors duke it out is cool for me :D )
-
as we all know beta, lol
limited resources isn't good, that's the way it is in AoM, and unless you cheat, you can no longer defend yourself once your resources are gone
-
not every map has to have a rare or heavy ore available
-
good idea Ezekel, that will restrict the game play etc.
also a tech level restrictrion would b good. so u are retristricted in the stuff u can get.
-
hmm, force people to fight with lynxs, I guess that would work, I dont know how populer those maps would be (because people can just agree to just use lynx)
-
well my thoughts are also along the lines:
if something is so rare, whats to say that it will exist on a small map (unless the map is a sorta tournement map... then each player would have at least one of all 3 mines near their base... though this isn't a necessity)
hey knux, will somethings require heavy ore AND common ore?
or will everything that requires heavy ore also require both common and rare?
-
hey guys, this is a thought I came up with while reviewing a game of Age of Mythology I played against someone online.
If you are adding cheats in with the game, they should initiate a signal that shows the cheat is activated to all players, even if chat to other players is disabled by the user.
When I reviewed the game, I realized the other player had been using cheats the entire time, trying to make me think he was a better player. On that game, a sound of thunder is given every time a cheat is used, and it was happening about 5 times a second for the first 30 seconds of the game.
-
i dunno... but i kinda think that cheats won't be usable in multiplay games
i'd guess that the cheats will be more for testing purposes (as is often the case for cheats in games), and are left behind as eastereggs
whatever the case, just disable them from multi games, then no problem exists
-
every once in a while, though, they serve a purpose
-
1. No, not all maps will have all 3 resources.
2. Heavy units will require 2 different ores maximum. Having 3 for one unit would be ridulous and too complicated.
3. There will be no cheats in my op3 and if I had cheats I would disable them for multi.
4. I will have unlimited resources but they will take a time to appear due to them being hauled to the smelters.
5. Rare ore smelters will process heavy ores but they will be in smaller requirements compared to common ore. Just like rare ore.
-
Yeah, the serve a purpose... They don't delete them, so somebody can tell a cheating website...
-
btw, if you wish to include my robo coloney (probly not for a while) it of corse would require all 3 types of mettals, but that may be one of the few things that do
-
1. No, not all maps will have all 3 resources.
2. Heavy units will require 2 different ores maximum. Having 3 for one unit would be ridulous and too complicated.
3. There will be no cheats in my op3 and if I had cheats I would disable them for multi.
4. I will have unlimited resources but they will take a time to appear due to them being hauled to the smelters.
5. Rare ore smelters will process heavy ores but they will be in smaller requirements compared to common ore. Just like rare ore.
let me get this straight, your saying that some things will require rare AND heavy but not common?
so you are saying none of the weapon platforms will need heavy ore, as a tiger/panther chassis already requires common and rare.
furthermore, are you saying that upon researching "rare ore processing" (or was it just "rare ore"?) you will be able to mine both rare and heavy metals?
and finally, does that mean all "offical" maps (i.e. the ones you release with the game) will never have more then 1 or 2 bars for all heavy ore mines...
i mean, well cos if you will need it in so small quantities, then shouldn't it be more of a rarity so as to prevent mass production just hitting off almost instantly
oh yeh, and where is heavy ore stored? in rare ore storage
*has a thought*
how will you address the problem that might arise if you have 1 rare/heavy smelter and a rare mine and heavy mine, and you have cargo trucks en route form both ... cos it seems to me that that could create a problem.
i think we'll need at least a heavy metal storagesilo structure even if you've decided to allow rare ore to be processed at teh rare ore smelter.
-
1. No, not all maps will have all 3 resources.
2. Heavy units will require 2 different ores maximum. Having 3 for one unit would be ridulous and too complicated.
3. There will be no cheats in my op3 and if I had cheats I would disable them for multi.
4. I will have unlimited resources but they will take a time to appear due to them being hauled to the smelters.
5. Rare ore smelters will process heavy ores but they will be in smaller requirements compared to common ore. Just like rare ore.
let me get this straight, your saying that some things will require rare AND heavy but not common?
so you are saying none of the weapon platforms will need heavy ore, as a tiger/panther chassis already requires common and rare.
furthermore, are you saying that upon researching "rare ore processing" (or was it just "rare ore"?) you will be able to mine both rare and heavy metals?
and finally, does that mean all "offical" maps (i.e. the ones you release with the game) will never have more then 1 or 2 bars for all heavy ore mines...
i mean, well cos if you will need it in so small quantities, then shouldn't it be more of a rarity so as to prevent mass production just hitting off almost instantly
oh yeh, and where is heavy ore stored? in rare ore storage
*has a thought*
how will you address the problem that might arise if you have 1 rare/heavy smelter and a rare mine and heavy mine, and you have cargo trucks en route form both ... cos it seems to me that that could create a problem.
i think we'll need at least a heavy metal storagesilo structure even if you've decided to allow rare ore to be processed at teh rare ore smelter.
Ha Ha, Ezekel, I think you keep taking my words too literary.
I don't think many things will require rare and heavy alone. But 2 ore types are sufficient for units and buildings. Any heavy unit will require heavy ore but depending on the turret, I will drop one resource. This is also to ensure units can still be produced on maps where there are only two resources. Plus I still think it's too over the top to have 3 resources for 1 unit. Maybe buildings but I still think it's too much.
There is a research topic required to mine and process heavy ore which has a mine but not a smelter. It will have it's own storage bar and I'm not sure if I will have a storage system. I fail to see the point really.
To eliminate queing problems with trucks, why not just have 2 smelters like with common?
I might have a 'haul to nearest' and 'haul to location' system to ensure they trucks can be evenly divided.
-
well i guess most of what you said makes sense, except for the part where you said you don't think you need a place to store heavy metal... cos, well it has to go somewhere, and if that somewhere is destroyed then the metals are lost
oh, i guess there will also be heavy rubble as well, right?
-
Well I personally don't see the point of the storage facilities. If I had to drop some structures, they'd be the first to go.
-
I do. Two Common metal storages cost a lot less power and a lot less people along with a lot less ground space than One Common Ore smelter.
That and stockpiling for later production is never a bad thing. Or even better yet, an emergency storage locker.
-
But if you already have a smelter, then you are wasting people having a storage facility as well. Plus I think resources will be used faster than you can store them if I speed the game up.
-
Well i think storages are really good things... First, as RedXIII said, it costs less power and colonist, plus it is faster to build... If i have ex. 6 workers, and 100 power available and i need a residence and 20000 common stored, but i should have a place to put down ore:
Solution One: - I build two smelters so my power is eaten up, and i can't build residence. Morale is 0 too. (thumbsdown)
Solution Two: - I build a smelter and two storages. I have one worker and 30 energy remaining. I build a residence, so i have marginal power and low res colony demand. Morale is 99. (thumbsup)
-
okay, so what you're saying, knux, is that you really do not like the storages? I have to agree with you on that one. They are completely useless in the campeign missions in OP2 (as long as you keep up defensive units, that is) so why would that change for OP3? I personally say, if it save you time and effort on this project, dump 'em. If you're low on power, build a power-facility. If you're low on land space, take down any unneccessary structures (i.e.: you finished all research that is available in all labs. The labs are now pointless, so demolish them)
-
Well i think storages are really good things... First, as RedXIII said, it costs less power and colonist, plus it is faster to build... If i have ex. 6 workers, and 100 power available and i need a residence and 20000 common stored, but i should have a place to put down ore:
Solution One: - I build two smelters so my power is eaten up, and i can't build residence. Morale is 0 too. (thumbsdown)
Solution Two: - I build a smelter and two storages. I have one worker and 30 energy remaining. I build a residence, so i have marginal power and low res colony demand. Morale is 99. (thumbsup)
Okay, you've outlined one of my points.
I say, why have storage when you have smelters?
Yes, smelters do use up more power and colonists. But storage facilities are useless without smelters.
Do storage facilities convert ore to metal? No, they don't.
So versus smelters, storage falls far behind.
Besides, what if smelters could store a lot more than 10000? Would you need storage then?
-
Now you have a point too :P
Got me with your post...
-
but, knux, if you increase the storage of the smelter, you have to increase the size. It is hard enought as it is to believe that 10,000 units of metal can fit into those structures.
-
its also hard enough to beleave that 6 vecs can be stored in the garage
if those tanks can store half of what a smelter can, and thats their size, I dont see why you couldnt fit 2 of them in a smelter (ie the size makes since)
mabe have somthing for reshurch like advanced storage or somthing, that adds even more to the storage of the smelter
anyway, the intial version of op3 will probly be lacking some buildings and vecs, but as an ongoing project, I dont see why he couldnt add things like ore storage later on
of corse its all up to knux
-
yeah, well one explanation for the garage (and thus spreads to the storage of metals) is that there is under-ground parking.
-
but, knux, if you increase the storage of the smelter, you have to increase the size. It is hard enought as it is to believe that 10,000 units of metal can fit into those structures.
Common ore smelter can hold 10000.
Common ore storage can hold 10000.
But which one is bigger?
-
storage can only fit half, but I do see your point. Still, it is very hard to believe that, comparing it in size with the other structures, it can fit that much...unless it is taller than it looks.
-
-or- add an upgrade soo that smelters can store that ammount of metal. Maybe something envolving metal states.
What i mean is: Gaseous state has a much more lower density that liquid or solid, but it can be compressed basically to a infinitium (as long as u can sustain the pressure AND heat), so a tech involving turning solid metal to gaseous metal and a method capable of widthstading the temperature and pressure would definetly increase it's capacity. Many times over actually.
-
you mean put the metal through sublimation to store it? You'd need an extreamly low pressure and verry high temperature for that to work.
-
The sublimation of metals require too much heat and too little pressure to be effective for storage
-
I don't know if anyone's noticed(because I'm not going to bother reading this entire thread :P ) but Eden's Smelter has the middle square thing built ontop a large cylinder thingy, that looks like a storage chamber, and Plymouth's smelter has three cylinder things on the left side, that look like the tops of storage chambers.
-
that would explain it, under-ground storage (would work for garage too)
-
it would, but wouldn't you need an elevator in that garage? I haven't see anything that looks like an elevator area.
-
Well yes, the storage can only hold 5000. But it's still much smaller than the smelter.
It's all stored in underground tanks in liquid form for quick transfer to other structures via tube. It looks like a tall tank to me.
But as for storing in different forms, solid is the most compressed. If you cool and compress a gas, it forms a liquid and then a solid. A bar of metal is as compressed as you are going to get.
-
yes, but gas can go into any form
-
I might be wrong here, but if you compress a gas to a certain point, then cool it, you could make a teaspoon weigh 1 ton. I don't think anything here, or in the new game would be capable of that, but that is one way to get a lot of extera storage, the only problem would be the weight of what is being stored.
-
true...oh well, is that really important to the game itself?
-
problem is, when u compress something -> temperatures go up...WAY up... underground storage could be the best solution, and no elevator could be persent in garages.why? because thevehicles go IN, and come out INSIDE of them, so a internal elevator is present. if u want, make some robots pulling the cables on top of the building but it would be a internal elevator nonetheless :P
-
it also has to be an elevator because of the fact that you can only have one going into or out of storage at a time
-
of corse were talking about realism here, dont forget, were baseing all this off of a game where a lynx has infonate rpg's
its not the most realistic game
and its kinda hard for me to say it, because normally im one of the people who do this the most but
I think we are thinking about this too much
-
beta, you, think?
lmao
I think the best solution is a tansportation system, too basic for humans, but advanced enough for the ammo
-
than how do people telleport from base to base?
like I said, we are thinking about this too much, I would agree if we are trying to build this thing in real life, but its a game, we could have the lynx fly if we wanted (no not inside a VTOL)
-
fine, a teleportation system that can't go into the enemies base, lol
-
What's a VTOL?
-
it's a weapon platform from Starcraft if I remember properly (a hover-craft type thing)
-
VTOL = Vertical Take-Off and Landing
Its more or less a jet that takes off and lands in the style of a helicopter.
-
and it's not from starcraft, it's from Total Aihilation. The Arm has a VTOL (a machine gunner aircraft) and Core has the Rapier (a rocket launcher aircraft)
Which reminds me, how bout bringing the joys of aircraft to the outpost world? and i mean rotor planes, not jets.
-
ARM has the Banshee, and might I add it is one hella wicked plane. Actually, all of the planes in TA are VTOL.
-
A good example of a VTOL
Is the Harrier Jump Jet
:ph34r:
-
ARM has the Banshee, and might I add it is one hella wicked plane. Actually, all of the planes in TA are VTOL.
yes, they seem so, but in the manual, only that one is referred as being a VTOL. I still have the manual of that game... don't know how it survived the "war of the cleaning lady" back in '98...
-
and it's not from starcraft, it's from Total Aihilation. The Arm has a VTOL (a machine gunner aircraft) and Core has the Rapier (a rocket launcher aircraft)
Which reminds me, how bout bringing the joys of aircraft to the outpost world? and i mean rotor planes, not jets.
I'm not taking VTOLS from any game. Does that mean that tanks are really from Dune 2? No, they're from real life and other things, from possible creations.
With the technology of interstellar spacecraft, cool nuclear fusion power plants providing near limitless energy. I doubt propellor aircraft would have a place.
VTOLs using a variation of jet propulsion using MHD thrust would be a logical choice for the outpost universe but if people keep complaining then I wont include them.
But I would still have a transporter.
But for the moment I have to work on the vehicle and structure graphics. Those are taking up all my time. Then I can get onto coding everyone's suggestions.
-
I think the VTOLs are a great idea.
-
and it's not from starcraft, it's from Total Aihilation. The Arm has a VTOL (a machine gunner aircraft) and Core has the Rapier (a rocket launcher aircraft)
Which reminds me, how bout bringing the joys of aircraft to the outpost world? and i mean rotor planes, not jets.
I'm not taking VTOLS from any game. Does that mean that tanks are really from Dune 2? No, they're from real life and other things, from possible creations.
With the technology of interstellar spacecraft, cool nuclear fusion power plants providing near limitless energy. I doubt propellor aircraft would have a place.
VTOLs using a variation of jet propulsion using MHD thrust would be a logical choice for the outpost universe but if people keep complaining then I wont include them.
But I would still have a transporter.
But for the moment I have to work on the vehicle and structure graphics. Those are taking up all my time. Then I can get onto coding everyone's suggestions.
just saying propeller planes would be a good choice because of this: planes on earth are common, but nasa is still struggling to get a rotor plane on mars. why is that? first off, atmospheric pressure. Then there's the air density. and finally, there's oxygen. All combustion engine motors need oxygen to function, and jet's need even more! Having an "eletrical" type of engine to run a tank is easy (god gravity is no issue here!), but having a plane running on electrical plants would only be viable in rotor vehicles (since jets require a considerable ammount of oxygen). As for jet's not requiring oxygen, well, this is sci-fi after all and a tech for that can be made up, or well pondered :P
That's my point. Rotor planes at beginning felling more like a "beta test" of aerial weapons platforms. They'r "slow" (same speed as a lynx, maybe a just little faster), need and airstripe, and lack armor. but they're cheap.
Then jets. Fast as hell, need an airstripe, have a considerable ammount of armor (less than a panther, more than a lynx) but they are somewhat expensive.
Then are VTOL's. Transport tech becomes available since now they can land/take off vertical without any need for airstripes. An aditional plane would be available. They would be faster than rotors, but slower than the jet. since they are VTOL's no airstripe needed and they would have a significant ammount of armor. But they are somewhat expensive.
I think VTOl's should be defenetly in the game, but i think a small "beta test" performed by the colonies before VTOL's would be viable, also for an alternative of building an xpensive as hell plane instead of a cheap one.
-
Knux is suggesting to use the eletrical power not to power the rotor or something, but the eletrical power it the propellant. Well, at least that's what i understood.
-
is what you are saying is using a charge similar to the planet's own emf in order to be lifted off the ground?
-
that, and mabe a version of the pulse fusion reactor in the earthworker, if it can liquidfy earth, why cant it turn compressed air into plasma?
well there I go again lol
-
on colonist deaths: maybe it should just be elderly people who die. i mean, after a while workers or scientists become Senior Citizens and only they die NATURALLY.
-
im going to go back to the thing about gaseous mettals and i feel i need to clarify this with the laws of physics
this is a model of the molecules of a gas, the + would be air
____________________________________________________________
o++++o+++o+++++o+++++o++o++++o+++o+++o+++o+++O+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o+++o
____________________________________________________________
this is a solid
____________________________________________________________
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
____________________________________________________________
if you were to compress a gas enough the molecules may come closer together and the volume would be less wich is what you people think but then the molecules would touch and then it would just be a super heated solid
-
you know, ESFs (or electrostatic fields) can be used to make things float (or fly)
course at the moment the requirements to procuce an ESF makes it inviable for anything but a fun demonstration of physics as for it to work you need to pass an immense voltage through the material
i saw a piece of foil able to be floated from receiving circa 20,000 volts across it.
a 20,000 volt generator weighs considerably more then a piece of foil (as in the stuff you put baked potatos in)
-
intresting
well for the ore thing, I dont see what the thing is on storeing, theve decribed the technique for storeing mettales in detail, they forge the mettal into small pelletts, and than suspend those pellets in an oil based slurry, they just have big tanks with sturring paddels to keep the slurry in suspention, those tanks are probly fully or partially underground so the surface graphic would not show it
-
is what you are saying is using a charge similar to the planet's own emf in order to be lifted off the ground?
No, it uses a system to charge and phase the flow of air particles, through the engine. But it is not a combustion engine, so it does not require oxygen. It just moves the air past itself very fast. They use a high powered cool fusion generator to do this.
-
intresting
well for the ore thing, I dont see what the thing is on storeing, theve decribed the technique for storeing mettales in detail, they forge the mettal into small pelletts, and than suspend those pellets in an oil based slurry, they just have big tanks with sturring paddels to keep the slurry in suspention, those tanks are probly fully or partially underground so the surface graphic would not show it
well... the structure still has to have a graphic for it... you can't have an invisible structure ... both the common and rare storages have graphics regardless as to how much of them is subterrainian or above ground
-
on colonist deaths: maybe it should just be elderly people who die. i mean, after a while workers or scientists become Senior Citizens and only they die NATURALLY.
what about viruses?