This is either going to be epic, or completely boring. Thoughts?
http://store.steampowered.com/app/476530/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/476530/)
Quote
The Most Scientifically Accurate Space Warfare Simulator Ever Made.
Children of a Dead Earth is a simulation of true-to-life space warfare. Design your spacecrafts using real world technologies. Traverse the solar system using actual orbit mechanics. Command fleets as the solar system descends into war, and see if you have what it takes to become the victor.
Features
REAL SCIENCE, REAL TECHNOLOGY - Every technology, from the Nuclear Thermal Rockets, to the Railguns, to the Magnetoplasmadynamic Thrusters, was implemented using actual equations from Engineering and Physics textbooks and white papers. Everything aspect of these systems, efficiency, size, mass, power usage, heat dissipation, are all derived from valid equations.
CAMPAIGN AND SANDBOX MODES - Assume the role of an admiral and fight through a detailed storyline chronicling the descent of the solar system into all out war, spanning every planet in the solar system and everything in between. Or simply play in the sandbox, designing ships and pitting them against other ships.
EXTREMELY ACCURATE ORBITAL MECHANICS - With an N-Body Simulator (the kind NASA uses to plot actual spacecraft trajectories), all orbital phenomenon from hyperbolic orbits, Lagrange points, and orbital perturbation are all correctly simulated. Spacecrafts can stationkeep orbits, or enter into free falling perturbed orbits.
1:1 SCALE - The solar system is modeled completely to scale. The sizes of all planets, moons, and asteroids are accurately enormous, and the distance between them is similarly mindboggling huge. The extremely high orbital speed of your ships deep in high gravity orbits is correspondingly correct.
FREEFORM SHIP DESIGN - Build your spacecrafts out of rockets, propellant tanks, weapons, powerplants, radiators, and crew modules. Wrap it all up with multiple armor layers, and maybe a Whipple Shield to boot. The acceleration, moment of inertia, delta-v, and much more are all correctly calculated for all spacecrafts you design.
HIGHLY GRANULAR MODULE DESIGN - Tweak everything from the nozzle length or stoichiometric mixture ratio of your bipropellant rockets to the armature and rail dimensions of your railguns. The results of every change is seen in real time, from the change in your rocket's exhaust velocity, to your railgun's inductance or muzzle velocity.
PHYSICALLY ACCURATE MATERIAL PROPERTIES - All materials, chemical reactions, and spectra are physically correct. When your arclamp pumps your solid state laser, the pumping bands are need to have to match up with the actual emission spectra of your excitation gas. When the photon absorption of a material is needed, it is derived from actual refractive index spectra data.
IN-ENGINE MOD SUPPORT - The engine supports black box creation of untested or far future technology for modders to work with. All other game data, from levels to material properties, is also accessible to modders.
All of the above aspects combine to yield a space warfare simulator that is unparalleled in scientific realism. No other game combines the extremely accurate orbital mechanics, 1:1 scale of the solar system, and technology which is implemented 100% by scientific equations. If you ever wanted to know what space warfare would actually be like, this is the game for you.
It will certainly bore the crap outta the twitch crowd. Geeks like me and Capt. Darwin might enjoy it though.
QuoteHIGHLY GRANULAR MODULE DESIGN - Tweak everything from the nozzle length or stoichiometric mixture ratio of your bipropellant rockets to the armature and rail dimensions of your railguns. The results of every change is seen in real time, from the change in your rocket's exhaust velocity, to your railgun's inductance or muzzle velocity.
This should be highly enteraining. It's not like rocket design isn't a highly specialized science or anything... ::)
Definitely following this one. My guess is that this won't be a game for "twitch jockeys." Probably requiring a great deal of patience to set up shots using Newtonian physics. I seem to recall Braben's "Frontier Elite II" back in the 90s, used Newtonian physics. Combat took a while and required patience. None of the "WWII fighters in space" mechanic that we have grown to expect. I even seem to recall that energy weapons had instantaneous beams that made no noise. None of those Star Wars like pulses that fly through space like giant tracer rounds.
Quote from: Barthheart on September 23, 2016, 01:05:17 PM
It will certainly bore the crap outta the twitch crowd. Geeks like me and Capt. Darwin might enjoy it though.
QuoteHIGHLY GRANULAR MODULE DESIGN - Tweak everything from the nozzle length or stoichiometric mixture ratio of your bipropellant rockets to the armature and rail dimensions of your railguns. The results of every change is seen in real time, from the change in your rocket's exhaust velocity, to your railgun's inductance or muzzle velocity.
This should be highly enteraining. It's not like rocket design isn't a highly specialized science or anything... ::)
My guess is you'll see no less than 15 "Space Penises" in the first week.
I still haven't figured out Kerbal Space Program.
I'm not a twitcher, but I can't see me spending my limited gaming time trying to get past the learning curve, when there is so much more accessible and tasty low hanging fruit available. Heck, I think the Gal Civ ship building editor is really neat, but I didn't do much with it because I wanted to get to the game itself.
They probably should have just named it Space Penis Construction Set.
"The Most Scientifically Accurate Space Warfare Simulator Ever Made."
It's a very grand claim. I hope it isn't unfounded. We'll see...
It sounds like Aurora with added plumage. Not saying that bad though...
From what ive been reading its basically KSP with really big guns. Im quite interested in this, I could never get into KSP though. Space and physics terminology confuses me.
Quote from: Hofstadter on September 23, 2016, 09:09:34 PM
From what ive been reading its basically KSP with really big guns. Im quite interested in this, I could never get into KSP though. Space and physics terminology confuses me.
I'm finding this much more technical than KSP and although KSP is a very serious simulation behind all the cute kerbals, CODE is all science and all war.
PHYSICALLY ACCURATE MATERIAL PROPERTIES - All materials, chemical reactions, and spectra are physically correct. When your arclamp pumps your solid state laser, the pumping bands are need to have to match up with the actual emission spectra of your excitation gas. When the photon absorption of a material is needed, it is derived from actual refractive index spectra data.
ah i see, so the manual is a PhD in physics and a master in engineering to round it up ;)
the solution for gloves off real war in space is: manage to bring a small (in size, and high maneuverable ) high in yield nuclear warhead in the rough vicinity of the given target (spacecraft) and the gamma radiation flash just kills everything, men or semiconductors. you cant bring up enuf material to shield the hard gammy rays and fast neutrons..... this is not your cosmic rays background or a solar flare you can ride out inside the water storage tank of the spacecraft
you have to go underground in available suitable stellar objects like asteroids and moons and dwarf planets and fight from there
This is something I'd really enjoy.
I wonder how the "Sandbox" option works. Is it just a single group vs group engagement to drop your toys into? Or is it more like an open non-scripted campaign, with many possible engagements, and the time to build new/upgraded units?
Just had a look at this. A few months ago I worked my way through the "Expanse" novels by James S. A. Corey. They're basically all about this (though with a bit of alien stuff as well), so I might give it a go when it's on sale down the line.
Is there a decent tutorial, at least?
Quote from: tgb on September 24, 2016, 06:14:33 AM
Is there a decent tutorial, at least?
Ive read that its really in depth and fantastic
In the campaign, the first few missions gradually introduce new concepts to the player. The plot is supplemented with required reading that discusses the science behind new terms or concepts that are in play in the mission. In game, there is an officer that walks the player through the mission concepts and generally explain how to accomplish your objectives, while noting the significance of the key scientific rules at play. It is very high level, intellectual stuff. The mathematics and science behind it all is far deeper than any tutorial within the confines of the game can manage, but by focusing on the mission goals I am slowly becoming more comfortable with orbital mechanics, trajectories, delta-v, intercept points, and now weaponry.
This could very well be a space/science buffs dream game. I just participated in my first combat and it felt extremely authentic. First, having to plot an intercept, having to deal with elliptical rather than circular orbits, orbital perturbations, etc. Then, having to make the intercept, taking care to watch for velocity and closure, distance and weapon range. By the way, the engagement took place with my ship and the enemy kilometers apart, but due to the exceedingly fast speeds, I had less than 2 minutes to execute my attack before fly-by. I was able to target specific systems and modules and watch as the enemy ship silently took damage. It was fast, cold and peculiarly exciting. Weapons were located on the side of my vessel, so I first had to home in on the enemy ship, then turn to give it a broadside. Each weapon has very detailed statistics and charts. Even though I do not understand what most of it means, I couldn't help but smile.
Very cool stuff so far, but I can see it getting frustrating when coming to more complex operations. This isn't a problem with the game per se, only my limited capacity to understand complex mathematics and scientific principles. Still, this game has already taught me a lot.
So you're saying you have to make those calculations, adjust both your ship and weapon trajectory, and get of a successful shot in real time?
Quote from: tgb on September 24, 2016, 12:19:42 PM
So you're saying you have to make those calculations, adjust both your ship and weapon trajectory, and get of a successful shot in real time?
No. You don't have to do any of the arithmetic. You just hit the necessary controls and press the necessary keys and your officers do the rest.
Is it as realistic as KSP? Is it just KSP with weapons?
I had to read up on orbital mechanics and rocketry just to be barely competent at KSP, thoroughly enjoyed it. Thinking of taking the plunge on this, though if I could wave a magic wand I'd make it a strategic or tactical game rather than the first person combination of keyboard controls and newtonian calculations!
Quote from: dinsdale on September 24, 2016, 01:05:22 PM
Is it as realistic as KSP? Is it just KSP with weapons?
I had to read up on orbital mechanics and rocketry just to be barely competent at KSP, thoroughly enjoyed it. Thinking of taking the plunge on this, though if I could wave a magic wand I'd make it a strategic or tactical game rather than the first person combination of keyboard controls and newtonian calculations!
My feel is that it is more mathematical than KSP. Additionally, unlike ksp, you don't directly control your craft in flight. You plot movement, burns and transitions on a map.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on September 24, 2016, 09:28:32 AM
This could very well be a space/science buffs dream game. I just participated in my first combat and it felt extremely authentic. First, having to plot an intercept, having to deal with elliptical rather than circular orbits, orbital perturbations, etc. Then, having to make the intercept, taking care to watch for velocity and closure, distance and weapon range. By the way, the engagement took place with my ship and the enemy kilometers apart, but due to the exceedingly fast speeds, I had less than 2 minutes to execute my attack before fly-by. I was able to target specific systems and modules and watch as the enemy ship silently took damage. It was fast, cold and peculiarly exciting. Weapons were located on the side of my vessel, so I first had to home in on the enemy ship, then turn to give it a broadside. Each weapon has very detailed statistics and charts. Even though I do not understand what most of it means, I couldn't help but smile.
Well, that just sold me...
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on September 24, 2016, 01:29:52 PM
My feel is that it is more mathematical than KSP. Additionally, unlike ksp, you don't directly control your craft in flight. You plot movement, burns and transitions on a map.
That sounds great, I far prefer navigation than manually controlling the burns.
I've curtailed my computer gaming (and purchasing) considerably recently but I think this one will make it's way into my steam collection. I'm a big fan of Attack Vector:Tactical so this looks amazing.
I see on steam that there is no manual for this; a huge pet peeve of mine. Are the tutorials enough to explain everything or is this one of those "watch a lets play on YouTube" deals?
Edit: also there is a trilogy (only two books done yet though) that is called "through struggle the stars"
Authors last name is Lumpkin. Great "hard" military space opera in the near future. Uses near future weaponry and the spaceships are very fragile and nothing fancy about them. They are just tubes with thrusters at the end basically. Like in this game. Things like having to extend giant "heat sink" sails in order to get heat out off of the ship. These have to be retracted during combat because they are vulnerable. if they aren't and get destroyed then eventually people inside Will die from the heat. Combat can only go on so long before the internal heat sinks Phil because of the heat involved with the weaponry. Little things like that. It is great hard near future military sci-fi. Seems to go along with this game very well
Quote from: mikeck on September 24, 2016, 05:11:40 PM
I see on steam that there is no manual for this; a huge pet peeve of mine. Are the tutorials enough to explain everything or is this one of those "watch a lets play on YouTube" deals?
I've only played two campaign missions so far, however, both contained tutorial information. The first addressed circular orbits and orbital operations. The second addressed elliptical orbits, and simple combat. Both tutorials were sufficient to explain the fundamentals and permit me to successfully accomplish the missions. I played the first mission twice to reinforce the concepts.
great. My only other question is about weaponry. From the looks of the videos everyone shoots these orange tracer looking things or bright orange beams. Is that all there is or are the road variety of missile types for example ? If so are there things like Point defense or ECM systems ? Additionally is it as detailed as having to build or put on weapon targeting systems or do you just stick on "lasers "
Quote from: mikeck on September 24, 2016, 05:26:54 PM
great. My only other question is about weaponry. From the looks of the videos everyone shoots these orange tracer looking things or bright orange beams. Is that all there is or are the road variety of missile types for example ? If so are there things like Point defense or ECM systems ? Additionally is it as detailed as having to build or put on weapon targeting systems or do you just stick on "lasers "
There is a wealth of information on the systems and concepts modeled in the game here:
https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com (https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com)
Weaponry runs the gamut of beam, kinetic, missile, etc. and come in all different intensities, sizes and calibers. Some of the supplemental reading in game even explains why beams and projectiles look the way they do in game. Even that is scientific and accurate. Ballistics, armor, electronics, countermeasures, etc. it's all there.
Wow. Ok: bought!
I've been waiting for a "realistic" space combat game for a decade. Aurora was the only one but I could only do it for a few days at a time as it had no graphics and I got tired of waiting 5 hours for combat to finish somewhere else. Even after the "fix" for that, it still occurred
Anyway, hope this fits the bill. Hopefully it's moddable. I imagine the community could go nuts with this
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on September 24, 2016, 05:56:23 PM
Quote from: mikeck on September 24, 2016, 05:26:54 PM
great. My only other question is about weaponry. From the looks of the videos everyone shoots these orange tracer looking things or bright orange beams. Is that all there is or are the road variety of missile types for example ? If so are there things like Point defense or ECM systems ? Additionally is it as detailed as having to build or put on weapon targeting systems or do you just stick on "lasers "
There is a wealth of information on the systems and concepts modeled in the game here:
https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com (https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com)
Weaponry runs the gamut of beam, kinetic, missile, etc. and come in all different intensities, sizes and calibers. Some of the supplemental reading in game even explains why beams and projectiles look the way they do in game. Even that is scientific and accurate. Ballistics, armor, electronics, countermeasures, etc. it's all there.
I could read the information on that site for fun even if I didn't have the game!
This. Is. Awesome.
Have played the first three missions so far. I managed the first two without a lot of difficulty, but the third is challenging me. There's a lot going on, with having to change orbital planes, keep distance from the enemy ship (which has guns that outrange you) and launch drones that are deadly, but have limited delta-v.
I love it.
The ship models are nothing super exciting to look at, but are almost certainly very accurate. The UI for plotting orbital changes and intercepts is very good, very easy to use. The glowing lines stuff is actually traces so that you can see the effectiveness of your fire. Those aren't beam weapons at all, but mass drivers and cannon. Quite accurately, lasers are (mostly) invisible in space!
To say that I'm excited about the drones being a major weapons system is an understatement. The lack of drones and reliance on beam weapons (or even worse, manually controlled fighters) is a major immersion killer for me with nearly all space games today. This game gets things SO RIGHT.
Definitely not for the flashy explosions and WWII dogfighter in space crowd. If you're after something about realistic space combat with a great tutorial and a pretty intuitive UI for giving orders, this is a good bet.
Thanks JH - this was a great buy.
My pleasure! Glad I'll have at least one other person to share stories with.
It's sort of like a cross between aurora, CMANO and Homeworld. Really an impressive piece of software here. I don't know who the developer is in "real life", but he is a rock star!
I looked up Q Switched Productions. The boss is a software engineer who spent 14 years at Relic and Bungie. Suspect they hired the 'brains'.
Intriguing game. so this is more "science fact" than sci-FI. All combatants are bound by the limits of human technology and cannot use undiscovered alien tech.
Quote from: bobarossa on September 24, 2016, 08:38:27 PM
I looked up Q Switched Productions. The boss is a software engineer who spent 14 years at Relic and Bungie. Suspect they hired the 'brains'.
I don't know, but whoever is writing the blog (which is also whoever wrote the tutorials and briefings in the game) knows what they're talking about. There's some good stuff on the blog.
The blog for the game also really describes the amazing underlying detail in the game. It isn't just the orbital mechanics that have been simulated accurately. Power systems, armor, crew accommodations. fuel characteristics, weapons...there's been an impressive amount of thought put into this. They developers have really stuck to known, working technologies as well, from what I can tell. Fission versus fusion reactors are used, for example.
Quote from: mikeck on September 24, 2016, 05:11:40 PM
Edit: also there is a trilogy (only two books done yet though) that is called "through struggle the stars"
Authors last name is Lumpkin. Great "hard" military space opera in the near future. Uses near future weaponry and the spaceships are very fragile and nothing fancy about them. They are just tubes with thrusters at the end basically. Like in this game. Things like having to extend giant "heat sink" sails in order to get heat out off of the ship. These have to be retracted during combat because they are vulnerable. if they aren't and get destroyed then eventually people inside Will die from the heat. Combat can only go on so long before the internal heat sinks Phil because of the heat involved with the weaponry. Little things like that. It is great hard near future military sci-fi. Seems to go along with this game very well
I have the first of these and hadn't got around to reading it yet. Opened it up this evening, and what do you know - our very own Mark Graves provided some editing/commentary on a draft of the novel, and did it while he was deployed. Mark is not terribly active in the forums but assists with Command Post Wargaming at Origins and I believe has written some articles for the Mythical Front Page.
Well read it...because if you like this type of "hard" space combat, you will like the book. Stuff I never thought about: like having to have "shutters" over the lasers. When you fire the laser, an enemy ship can detect it and fires a laser back at yours...blinding the optics and destroying it. So you may burn one hole in the enemy but you lose your entire laser. So in less than a second, a shutter opens, laser fires, shutter closes. Issues with interception, heat dissapation, you name it. Plus, the story isn't fanciful
A technology discovers allows for wormholes. They must be created at the same point in space. Then one is moved to another star and ships can pass from one to the other (basically it's particle entanglement). At this point, the U.S., China, and Japan are the big boys and India, Russia and Europe are in it as well. Each power has anywhere from 1 to 6 planets staked out that it is colonizing. Then war. So no alien invaders. No super hero captains who always make the right call and amaze everyone, no stupid technologies made up to force ships to fight like 18th century ships of the line, etc
Started reading it last evening, and enjoying it enough that I've purchased the sequel. The Praxis trilogy by Walter Jon Williams is similar, though involving more SF tech, but reasonably realistic space combat tactics.
Panzerde, have you been able to complete the 3rd campaign mission? I was able to transition planes and match the enemy corvette's orbit, deploy my drones and intercept the corvette with the drone fleet. However, I only had about 12 seconds I think to engage before fly-by and although the drones got a few shots off, they didn't do any real damage.
I didn't try to reengage because I didn't think I would have the delta-v.
How'd you fair on this mission?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on September 25, 2016, 07:55:22 PM
Panzerde, have you been able to complete the 3rd campaign mission? I was able to transition planes and match the enemy corvette's orbit, deploy my drones and intercept the corvette with the drone fleet. However, I only had about 12 seconds I think to engage before fly-by and although the drones got a few shots off, they didn't do any real damage.
I didn't try to reengage because I didn't think I would have the delta-v.
How'd you fair on this mission?
I beat my head against this one for a couple of hours last night before I finally figured out that you're better off telling your drones, which are actually more like fighters than missiles, to orient broadside rather than to do homing. Once I did that the drones opened up with a torrent of projectiles and shredded then enemy ship in seconds. Launch as many drones as you can to maximize firepower.
The other thing to try is to intercept at as shallow an orbit as possible, with as low a relative speed as you can manage. That will increase the engagement envelope of the drones. Honestly though, I didn't need that for this mission. Once I was orienting broadside (which actually means "point your biggest guns at the enemy") it was over in seconds.
I think I ran the mission five or six times before I figured that out.
Quote from: Pinetree on September 24, 2016, 03:59:51 PM
I've curtailed my computer gaming (and purchasing) considerably recently but I think this one will make it's way into my steam collection. I'm a big fan of Attack Vector:Tactical so this looks amazing.
Same.
While I don't yet have
Attack Vector, I did just break out
Birds Of Prey last week in preparation for learning it's related physics-based system. Especially now that there is also a solitaire add-on for it. 8) Brilliant system, despite a higher learning curve than many. I <3 you, nomographs.
I'll probably get back into a space mood if Ares Magazine ever gets their ass into gear, and production done, on the
High Frontier 3rd Edition. Which was supposed to be delivered a year ago, but hasn't even had the print materials finalized yet. Would be a good time to pick up CoaDE, while I'm learning all that space colonization gobbledeygook.
Haven't played it yet. But what is the deal with the glowing orange fins and solar panel looking things? In the videos, every ship has several. Why do they glow orange?
Also, anyone else find it odd that there is really no mention or discussion of this game anywhere? No reviews, no previews, nothing.
Quote from: mikeck on September 25, 2016, 10:55:17 PM
Haven't played it yet. But what is the deal with the glowing orange fins and solar panel looking things? In the videos, every ship has several. Why do they glow orange?
Also, anyone else find it odd that there is really no mention or discussion of this game anywhere? No reviews, no previews, nothing.
i don't have the sim (jet ;)) but i found this link provided by JH very interesting
Quote
There is a wealth of information on the systems and concepts modeled in the game here:
https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com
the red fins and solar panels must be the heat dissipating devises and because its in the empty vacuum it can only be done by radiation.
question for the active players: how are nukes (warheads) handled in the simulation.
Bought it too, the fapping in this thread convinced me
Quote from: mikeck on September 25, 2016, 10:55:17 PM
Also, anyone else find it odd that there is really no mention or discussion of this game anywhere? No reviews, no previews, nothing.
There is an engrossing discussion of the game right here. What are we, chopped liver?
Panzerde, thanks for the tip. I didn't try with a broadside approach.
Quote from: mikeck on September 25, 2016, 10:55:17 PM
Haven't played it yet. But what is the deal with the glowing orange fins and solar panel looking things? In the videos, every ship has several. Why do they glow orange?
Also, anyone else find it odd that there is really no mention or discussion of this game anywhere? No reviews, no previews, nothing.
Yes, the fins are the heat radiators. These work exactly like the radiators described on the ships in
Through Struggle, the Stars, Mike. They glow because they are radiating waste heat from the nuclear power plant. You can achieve a mission kill on a ship by explicitly targeting these, causing the enemy to have to shut down their power or boil.
In addition to the excellent web site that JH linked, which exhaustively explains the science and choices behind virtually every facet of the game, there is a game forum at http://childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/. It isn't obvious that this exists by reading the blog; the developer has clearly been more focused on finishing the game that he has been on marketing and promoting it.
As for reviews, discussions, etc.: this is in no way a mainstream game. The developer is an indie developer. Everything about this is very, very niche, even more niche than KSP. If you are debating getting the game and can't decide after reading here, on the game's blog or the game's discussion board, wander over to Atomic Rockets (http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/). If you enjoy reading the articles there, you'll probably like this game/simulation.
Appreciate the answers. I had found the site and the forum buy have not had the time to read through it. I already purchased it after JH's review so no concerns there. I KNOW I'll like it, was just curious as to some things. i could never get into Kerbal BECAUSE it wasn't a war game so I'm sure I will be fine with this
Quote from: mikeck on September 26, 2016, 10:29:40 AM
i could never get into Kerbal BECAUSE it wasn't a war game so I'm sure I will be fine with this
I know the feeling. Cool game, but I never could get into it because I never felt there was a point to what I was doing.
Quote from: MikeGER on September 26, 2016, 01:57:43 AM
question for the active players: how are nukes (warheads) handled in the simulation.
There are basically two kinds of missiles I've encountered so far "flak" missiles that explode and throw shrapnel at the target, and a couple varieties of nukes. There are some small, 2.5kt warheads and larger (20kt?) warheads. Missiles have enough delta-v to be fired at targets in a different orbit on hyperbolic paths, or can be set to coast after an initial burn and intercept some time later.
The nukes themselves are not as effective in space as they would be on a planet - there's no shock wave, no massive fireball due to the atmosphere, etc. Effects are pretty much the immediate blast and then radiation. One important thing to know is that an exploding nuke can kill other, nearby missiles, and being nukes, that doesn't cause a larger explosion, just vaporized missiles. So, there's a trade-off between firing a large enough group of missiles to get through the target's countermeasures but not firing so many that fratricide leaves you with empty magazines for a follow-up strike. Sending waves of 20 to 25 missiles at a time seems effective.
So far I've managed kills using the bigger nukes. I've also had some luck in a scenario where I needed to disable an enemy ship by firing 100 flak missiles at it, which just sandpapered all of the radiators, guns, and engines right off the hull. The scenario warned against doing that, but it worked a treat!
I'm not sure if the engine would allow for it, but I would love to see this game expanded to include ship building and resource extensions. Basically one side is attacking the other and you have to hold certain locations to gather the necessary resources to be able to operate your space Navy. You design ships and based on resources and money available field them. Then figure out your strategy.
Don't get me wrong, I would never want to waste a realistic space combat simulator by turning it into yet another space f don't get me wrong, I would never want to waste a realistic space combat simulator by turning it into yet another space 4x; just looking for some purpose in the sandbox other than basic ship and weapon testing. Maybe an expansion
Apparently the ships from AVT are possible to build in the game with "black box" tech so you never know we might see a Wasp vs Rafik fight soon. That also means the ships from the Human Reach series are possible too.
I Was trying to remember the name of the book series. "Through Struggle the Stars" was the first book... But yes..."The Human Reach"
Different ships is always good. Hopefully the Dev can add a strategic layer of some sort to sandbox. If not, I'm still thankful someone finally made some realistic combay
Nukes don't have EMP effect?
Quote from: jomni on September 27, 2016, 12:42:24 AM
Nukes don't have EMP effect?
From Atomic Rockets....
When it comes to the dreaded EMP created by nuclear detonations, matters become somewhat complicated. Please, do NOT confuse EMP (electromagnetic Pulse) with EM (electromagnetic Radiation).
Most SF fans have a somewhat superficial understanding of EMP: an evil foreign nation launches an ICBM at the United States, the nuke detonates in the upper atmosphere over the Midwest, an EMP is generated, the EMP causes all stateside computers to explode, all the TVs melt, all the automobile electrical systems short out, all the cell phones catch fire, basically anything that uses electricity is destroyed.
This is true as far as it goes, but when you start talking about deep space warfare, certain things change. Thanks to Andrew Presby for setting me straight on this matter.
First off, the EMP I just described is High Altitude EMP (HEMP). This EMP can only be generated if there is a Terra strength magnetic field and a tenuous atmosphere present. A nuke going off in deep space will not generate HEMP. Please be aware, however, if a nuke over Iowa generates a HEMP event, the EMP will travel through the airless vacuum of space just fine and fry any spacecraft that are too close.
Secondly, EMP can also be generated in airless space by an e-Bomb, which uses chemical explosives and an armature. No magnetic field nor atmosphere required. This is called a Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NNEMP). As with all EMPs, once generated they will travel through space and kill spacecraft.
Thirdly, there is System Generated EMP (SGEMP) to consider. HEMP is created when the gamma rays from the nuclear detonation produce Compton electrons in air molecules, and the electrons interact with a magnetic field to produce EMP. But with SGEMP, gamma rays penetrating the body of the spacecraft accelerated electrons, creating electromagnetic transients.
SGEMP impacts space system electronics in three ways. First, x-rays arriving at the spacecraft skin cause an accumulation of electrons there. The electron charge, which is not uniformly distributed on the skin, causes current to flow on the outside of the system. These currents can penetrate into the interior through various apertures, as well as into and through the solar cell power transmission system. Secondly, x-rays can also penetrate the skin to produce electrons on the interior walls of the various compartments. The resulting interior electron currents generate cavity electromagnetic fields that induce voltages on the associated electronics which produce spurious currents that can cause upset or burnout of these systems. Finally, x-rays can produce electrons that find their way directly into signal and power cables to cause extraneous cable currents. These currents are also propagated through the satellite wiring harness.
Is the ship building completely open? Are there set templates or can you make a massive battleship/carrier to your own specifications?
Okay. I had a go.
Thats hardcore. I was going okay, then it started talking about other frames of reference. I got confused. So I just started tugging on the blue and red balls until i got that green signal.
Absolutely no idea what I did. May need several thousand more playthroughs.
Quote from: undercovergeek on September 27, 2016, 05:41:05 AM
Is the ship building completely open? Are there set templates or can you make a massive battleship/carrier to your own specifications?
I haven't really explored the ship builder, but it looks pretty robust and open-ended. That being said, you will still be hampered by hard science and the reality of physics in the void. You will not be making star destroyers in this game. Science will unquestionably limit your designs.
Quote from: Hofstadter on September 27, 2016, 07:08:34 AM
Okay. I had a go.
Thats hardcore. I was going okay, then it started talking about other frames of reference. I got confused. So I just started tugging on the blue and red balls until i got that green signal.
Absolutely no idea what I did. May need several thousand more playthroughs.
It's fine..that's exactly what NASA does. So far so good.
I had a chance to retry the 3rd campaign mission last night and I succeeded on the first attempt.
Again, I transitioned to the enemy Corvette's orbital plane, launched all of my drones and then initiated an intercept with the drone fleet. When we caught up to the enemy, we again had about 12 seconds to engage. I made sure the drones were formed up for a broadside and then initiated the attack. The drone pass shot the corvette up to $hit, disabling a few of the critical modules, but not destroying the vessel outright. Most important, the 236mm coil gun was disabled. So with no more delta-v on the drones, and with that massive coil gun no longer a threat, I intercepted the corvette with my escort carrier and upon attack, bombarded it for close to 2 minutes before she finally exploded. Mission accomplished.
I really love how each and every impact really shows on the target. You can clearly see how the rounds impact, and how they do damage. I truly dread the time when humans will kill one another in space. As if the harsh jungles, deserts and wastes of the planet were not cruel enough, death in the void will be extremely nasty.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on September 28, 2016, 08:53:32 AM
I had a chance to retry the 3rd campaign mission last night and I succeeded on the first attempt.
Again, I transitioned to the enemy Corvette's orbital plane, launched all of my drones and then initiated an intercept with the drone fleet. When we caught up to the enemy, we again had about 12 seconds to engage. I made sure the drones were formed up for a broadside and then initiated the attack. The drone pass shot the corvette up to $hit, disabling a few of the critical modules, but not destroying the vessel outright. Most important, the 236mm coil gun was disabled. So with no more delta-v on the drones, and with that massive coil gun no longer a threat, I intercepted the corvette with my escort carrier and upon attack, bombarded it for close to 2 minutes before she finally exploded. Mission accomplished.
I really love how each and every impact really shows on the target. You can clearly see how the rounds impact, and how they do damage. I truly dread the time when humans will kill one another in space. As if the harsh jungles, deserts and wastes of the planet were not cruel enough, death in the void will be extremely nasty.
Agreed. This sim really demonstrates just how violent and fast space combat will be.
I'm also really impressed with how laser damage is depicted. Mission 5, I think it is, requires you to disable but not completely destroy the target. I chose to use a UV laser for that. You can't see the laser in space, but you can see where it hits the target, and the path across the hull as it moves around and causes damage. If you're viewing your ship from the enemy ship, you can also see the light of the laser as it fires - it looks exactly like the description of the launch laser in the beginning of
A mote in God's Eye.
This is a very cool game.
Can I use the designer to design my own ships and then use those ships in the scenarios? Or are ships made in the designer relegated to sandbox play only?
Quote from: mikeck on September 28, 2016, 04:03:07 PM
Can I use the designer to design my own ships and then use those ships in the scenarios? Or are ships made in the designer relegated to sandbox play only?
I would think not. The campaign scenarios are highly scripted in terms of order of battle. Most of the scenarios require the player to think strategically in order to overcome limitations imposed by the specific vessels present. So far it has proven very important to factor in the strengths and limitations of your vessels, as well as those of the enemy. Having the ability to design your own ships and use them in the scenarios would break this.
Still wondering about how Sandbox works. Is it just some drop-down menus for selecting units for the two sides, along with a location?
Got the game today, I think I'm in love already,lol, and I haven't fired anything yet. Went through the first mission, was doing ok until I changed the frame of reference. Holy hell, what a mind bender. I understand what they are for and what they do but the way the trajectory paths changed threw me. Still, I managed to half my time and Delta-v the second time around.
Just finished the 3rd mission, managed to get a silver on my first try. I used nearly half my delta-v to match orbits and then launched 20 drones so they would intercept the enemy about 2 hours from main intercept. They went in fast and took out the coilgun and some radiators, I'd actually forgotten to aim them so it was a good result. Seeing that, I launched my last 5 drones using high delt-v and targeted them on the remaining radiators. They managed to knock them all out and cook the crew. I didn't even have to engage with the carrier. Very quick and brutal combat. It's going to very interesting when I get an enemy with lots of delta-v to play with as well.
Brilliant, brilliant game.
Yeah I did that mission, but I launched my drones in the intercept and took out their longest ranged guns, then i used my normal ones and just did flybys like...5 times to kill it
There's a lets play of mission 2 on youtube
Im going to start a lp series off this too. The game doesnt seem to be getting enough love
Quote from: Hofstadter on September 29, 2016, 08:03:37 AM
Im going to start a lp series off this too. The game doesnt seem to be getting enough love
Yes please! I can only watch so many videos of people pulling red yellow and blue dots around without saying what the hell they are doing.
Only one I've seen that is helpful in learning is this one by Scott Manley. Still not a LP...but isn't supposed to be. Man...I do miss manuals
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gSoVbwyrxDk
By the way...anyone know of any good military sci-ifi books (besides those below) Taking place in a similar hard-science /near future universe?
I bought "expanse" and there is also "human reach". I just can't read anymore "Lost Fleet" or "honorverse" far future stuff. Mainly one with no aliens and taking place only in our solar system or at least with some type of limited interplanetary travel
Quote from: mikeck on September 29, 2016, 09:39:32 AM
I bought "expanse" and there is also "human reach".
I'm still in the middle of the 2nd book..... of
both series. :crazy2:
Any other books or series you have read besides those?
Quote from: mikeck on September 29, 2016, 11:33:34 AM
Any other books or series you have read besides those?
Not with proper physics and such, like these.
You might take a look at The Quiet War by Paul McAuley. Not military SF per se, though there are plenty of military actions. Takes place in the relatively near future, and uses plausible technology. No aliens, etc. There are other books in the same setting, some of which are sequels, others not.
Thinking about it, you might also enjoy the Revelation Space, House of Suns, and Century Rain novels of Alistair Reynolds. Again, more hard SF than military SF specifically, though there is plenty of military activity in them, especially the Revelation Space novels. Most of these are a bit more far future, but all are very realistic in terms of physics, etc. There's no FLT in any of them, for example. House of Suns may in fact be in my top five favorite novels.
Quote from: Pinetree on September 29, 2016, 04:43:18 AM
Just finished the 3rd mission, managed to get a silver on my first try. I used nearly half my delta-v to match orbits and then launched 20 drones so they would intercept the enemy about 2 hours from main intercept. They went in fast and took out the coilgun and some radiators, I'd actually forgotten to aim them so it was a good result. Seeing that, I launched my last 5 drones using high delt-v and targeted them on the remaining radiators. They managed to knock them all out and cook the crew. I didn't even have to engage with the carrier. Very quick and brutal combat. It's going to very interesting when I get an enemy with lots of delta-v to play with as well.
Brilliant, brilliant game.
This was pretty much how it went for me, too. I actually launched all of my drones and didn't have to make a second run. Their fire just peeled away anything that was on the outside of the enemy hull in about five seconds.
This game really illustrated the "glass cannon" concept.
Nice vid, Hof.
Why did you keep calling the moon a "planet"? :P
Because his cat kept &$&-ing up his grove...throwing him off. Lol
Liking the looks of this one. Any chance it'd run on my old rig?
CPU: Intel Core2Quad 9450 2.66GHz
RAM: 8 GB
Video: eVGA GeForce GTX 750 Ti Superclocked w/2GB RAM
Quote from: steve58 on September 30, 2016, 03:27:51 PM
Liking the looks of this one. Any chance it'd run on my old rig?
CPU: Intel Core2Quad 9450 2.66GHz
RAM: 8 GB
Video: eVGA GeForce GTX 750 Ti Superclocked w/2GB RAM
I don't see why not. Its not What I would describe as a graphically intensive game.
Graphics wouldn't be an issue BUT, there are ALOT of calculations going on so you could see a slow down if your processor isn't up to it. Minimum is an Intel I5. I don't know much about it but I think you will be fine. Some experience stuttering when there are multiple ships firing multiple weapons at multiple targets from all the processing. Even if that does happen, it's not often and you don't need constantly high FPS to enjoy it
Thx JH, Mike. Mike you make a good point. Think I'll wait a bit and do some more research.
It's a turn-based game, though.
So I'd think it would just take a bit longer for the turn to resolve, on a slow processor, unless it freezes or something.
I'm only basing my comments on a few videos where the guy mentions he is getting stuttering. I know there is a lot of processing going on. My guess is that as the game matures, any problems with optimization will be corrected. Anyone with even a below average processor should be able to enjoy it though, even if it does stutter a bit in combat
Quote from: mikeck on October 01, 2016, 12:31:41 PM
I'm only basing my comments on a few videos where the guy mentions he is getting stuttering. I know there is a lot of processing going on. My guess is that as the game matures, any problems with optimization will be corrected. Anyone with even a below average processor should be able to enjoy it though, even if it does stutter a bit in combat
If it stutters for some people, then I'd be a bit concerned about Steve's processor. It is about 8 or 9 years old.
Edit: Which isn't as bad an issue as if it were the case a decade ago. But it also means that his system RAM is also probably quite small compared to newer machines.
I've done a few upgrades over the years and currently have 8GB RAM (originally 4GB) and a fairly decent GPU (GeForce GTX 750 Ti w/2GB RAM) so my old PC still soldiers on. But like Mike stated, the game probably does a whole lot of calculations for interplanetary warfare. A 1-on-1 fight might not be too bad, but a scenario with multiple ships on each side might be an issue. Just gonna keep on researching the game for now and take a wait-and-see stance...
Quote from: steve58 on October 01, 2016, 02:59:43 PM
I've done a few upgrades over the years and currently have 8GB RAM (originally 4GB) and a fairly decent GPU (GeForce GTX 750 Ti w/2GB RAM) so my old PC still soldiers on. But like Mike stated, the game probably does a whole lot of calculations for interplanetary warfare. A 1-on-1 fight might not be too bad, but a scenario with multiple ships on each side might be an issue. Just gonna keep on researching the game for now and take a wait-and-see stance...
But the specs on the store page seem pretty small and seems like you can handle...worst case is you buy it and then refund it.
OS: Windows 7+
Processor: Intel Core i5 @ 1.70 GHz processor
Memory: 2 GB RAM
Graphics: Intel HD Graphics 4000
Storage: 200 MB available space
Quote from: steve58 on October 01, 2016, 02:59:43 PM
I've done a few upgrades over the years and currently have 8GB RAM (originally 4GB) and a fairly decent GPU (GeForce GTX 750 Ti w/2GB RAM) so my old PC still soldiers on. But like Mike stated, the game probably does a whole lot of calculations for interplanetary warfare. A 1-on-1 fight might not be too bad, but a scenario with multiple ships on each side might be an issue. Just gonna keep on researching the game for now and take a wait-and-see stance...
Keep in mind that those multi ship battles where an old processor might chug aren't common. Vast majority of time is setting up orbits and getting in range and such. If it stutters only during the firing in a few battles (some are 1v1) then your not missing a whole lot. It MAY stutter but that's not a big deal...it's not a "shooter" or something where stuttering affects game performance
I've found out you can get gold on the missions by optimising a playthrough for each score. I'd already had a silver in the first mission for beating the time record so I went back and concentrated on minimising delta-v expenditure. I managed to get under the record so I was awarded gold.
How does the sandbox work? I have not even looked at it. Do you have access to every tech immediately? Seems I saw something that you have to unlock things. Also, once unlocked, is there any type of limitation on what you can design? Meaning costs limiting the type of armor and such? Or can you design things however you want so long as they obey the laws of physics
Just FYI, if any of you playing this are also reading Lumpkin's "Human Reach" books.
I found his website which has illustrations and specs on all of the Ships from all nations.
http://www.thehumanreach.net/ships_home.shtm
Quote from: mikeck on October 06, 2016, 10:57:16 PM
Just FYI, if any of you playing this are also reading Lumpkin's "Human Reach" books.
I found his website which has illustrations and specs on all of the Ships from all nations.
http://www.thehumanreach.net/ships_home.shtm
Turkey Basters of death.
Been a LOOOOONG time since I've touched this one, but it got a pretty impressive patch today. I'm thinking I will jump into this again...its like Cold Waters in space.
Quote
Highlights
- Fully Featured Level Editor
- Flattened Ship Armor "Wedge" Shape
- Multibarrel Guns and Preloaded Guns
- Multiengine Gimbals
- Better ship space efficiency
- Sandbox Instant Action
- Pre-aimed guns in combat
- Many, many bug fixes
Full Changelist
1.2.1 (6/1/2017)
- Level Editor
--- Levels, factions, celestial bodies can all be edited and put together into a single campaign, which can be exported to Steam Workshop and played by other players.
--- Existing celestial bodies and factions can be reused, or new ones can be created.
--- Can customize celestial bodies' ring textures, body textures, body model, or can create new bodies which reuse core game textures, models, etc.
- Design
--- Wedge Ships - Ship armor aspect ratio can be modified to yield flattened ship shapes. Only for non-cylindrical armor.
--- Multibarrel Guns - Projectile weapons can have many guns per turret, which can distribute heat and provide scatter fire patterns.
--- Preloaded Cannons - Conventional cannons have all munitions preloaded now, so with multiple barrels, can act as a turreted blast launcher.
--- Multiengine Gimbals - Engines can be stacked many to a single gimbal. This allows very dense rockets, and much higher thrust per area.
--- Space Efficient Attaching Modules - Attached modules fit better. For example, with two propellant tanks side by side, weapons use the space above and below better than side to side with the tanks.
--- Dodecagonal Cross Section - Twelve sided ship armor, which functions as angular but near-circular armor.
- Gameplay
--- Instant Action - New option in Sandbox which starts both fleets out in combat at their max weapon range.
--- Can now use missiles or drones directly in Sandbox.
--- Guns start combat already aimed at their target. Very useful for large, slow-turning guns.
--- Some AIs have the option to ignore range for launchers.
- UI
--- Mod Designs, User Designs, and Core Designs are split apart in lists for easier reading.
--- Option to watch the ending from the briefing menu if you've beaten the game (due to a bug that may have disabled the ending previously).
- Mods
--- Can switch between campaigns in game.
--- Exposed more properties in Limits.txt, including the total number of armor layers allowed.
--- Mod resources and Steam Workshop Items with now have priority over default resources with the same name, including Audio, Textures, Models, and Fonts.
--- Steam Workshop - All resource files can be read in from Steam Workshop, including font files, so language conversions can be loaded from Steam Workshop without any extra steps (if it has the font files).
- Other
--- Countless bug fixes, including missiles exploding as soon as they launch, Blast Launcher being able to reload, incorrect armor mass with partial armor, numerous typos, some material property fixes, ending not playing properly, Saturn's rings rendered wrong, and many, many more.
--- Countless crash fixes.
Interesting..
Thanks for the heads-up, Jarhead. Have had this on my wishlist for awhile. This update moves it up on my Estimated Time To Purchase scale. :)
Quote from: Nefaro on July 02, 2018, 02:46:20 PM
Interesting..
Thanks for the heads-up, Jarhead. Have had this on my wishlist for awhile. This update moves it up on my Estimated Time To Purchase scale. :)
It is a FANTASTIC game...but, caveat emptor...It is complex, unforgiving and very very difficult. If you can get passed all that, though, it gives a much more authentic feeling experience to what deep space ship on ship combat will most likely be like at a time when such things are in their relative infancy.
I've tried to learn this game twice, but gave up in frustration both times. Apparently I lack the necessary mental acuity. That's a shame, because I love the concept.
I decided to necro this today, because I decided, you know what the world really wants, really needs, today? My hot take on an abandoned five-year old game that no one's buying and that's on sale on Steam for 90% off.
I was really excited about this game for years because space is my day job, and I thought, finally a game with real physics. The description of this game is my dream game. Didn't get around to it with work and real life but finally made some time over the holiday this year... it is an awful game. Important point- I didn't say it's a bad simulation, or an inaccurate one, or that the developer didn't work hard on it, have good intentions, etc.- but I will die on the hill that it's a bad game.
Fundamentally, it has three problems from a game design point of view:
1) The designer has all the fun
Sid Meier, the famous video game developer of Civilization, PIrates, Railroad Tycoon, et al. fame, has a number of axioms for good video game design. One of these is that you need to be cautious that the player is the one having the fun rather than the designer. This is a perfect example of a game that fails that rule. If you read the game description, you'll see that, for example, the game has an extremely accurate orbit propagator. I am certain this is true. But where do I see that in the game? There is no visibility into how orbits are being calculated, what forces are being taken into effect, or into what the orbital trajectories would look like with a less accurate propagator. The orbits might as well be completely abstracted and not physically calculated at all. I'm not sure a typical player would be able to tell. The designer had a lot of fun coding a highly accurate propagator, but the results are invisible and ultimately irrelevant to the player.
Even more important is what this does to the combat phase. On the game's website it will talk about how each projectile is being physically simulated with real equations, the force generated by magnetic coils, the torque it imparts to the firing spacecraft, etc. Again, I'm sure this is true. I'm very excited by this as a theory. But there is no layer connecting the physics to the gameplay. As a player, all you see is a confusing mass of colors, some slowdown, and then some messages about what got damaged. You have no idea what weapons damaged what, how, where, when, or why. You have very little capability to do anything to really affect the combat, and again, while I'm sure all the physics of the engagement are highly accurate, they are totally invisible to the player. The designer clearly had an enormous amount of fun coding an extraordinarily accurate physical simulation of space warfare. I'm sure it IS accurate. But he forgot to include an intermediate layer actually connecting the player to any of the calculations occurring or allowing him to meaningfully affect it, or even see it.
2) Game is driven entirely by post-action luck
In game design, there are considered to be two kinds of luck: pre-action luck, where the luck occurs before the player action and you get to make a decision informed by that luck (e.g. you draw a set of cards and then choose which one to play), and post-action luck, where you make a decision and then whether it works out or not is based on luck (e.g. you decide to attack something and the outcome is based on a die roll). To make a ridiculously broad, over-generalized statement, pre-action luck is generally considered by the game design community to be a desirable characteristic of game design, and post-action is generally considered to be an undesirable characteristic.
This game is 100% post-action luck. You design your spacecraft in the designer, but you then have almost no control over what they do in combat other than select a subsystem for your ships to target. You can do other things like modify their homing behavior, but it's not entirely clear to me if those other things even work. Whether your ships actually hit the enemy, or why, is basically completely out of your hands. And it lacks an Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts style hit probability calculator or a Gunner, HEAT, PC, AAR function, so not only is it pure, non-player related luck whether, for example, your railgun hits the other guy, but if it doesn't, you won't know why, and if it does, you might not even know it did! It's an extraordinarily frustrating state of affairs.
3) Information flow to the player is very poor
As described above, there's a ton going on under the hood, but almost none of it is meaningfully communicated to the player. Your experience playing the game is usually half an hour of fiddling with orbits to get your fleets to meet up (this is mostly trial and error- and my day job is astrodynamics! But the game gives you few tools with which to assess which trajectories will work other than just dragging bars around to see what happens) and then two minutes of flashy lights followed by one of the sides losing for reasons that usually are unclear. The combat phase in particular is disappointing because there's no way to change the rate of time, so it all happens extremely quickly, and you get zero insight into what's hitting what, what's being damaged, why, what you might want to do differently next time to avoid it. It might as well be an auto-resolve. Maybe every atom is being accurately simulated under the hood- that's the defense the fans give of it- but if I can't see any of it, then it might as well all be cartoon physics for all I care. As a player, if I can't see it, can't affect it, can't can't be sure it's happening- then it might as well not be in the game at all.
Again, I'm not questioning whether the developer worked really hard, there's a lot of math happening somewhere- it just doesn't make for a good game. I know no one cares about this game at this point, I'm just really frustrated because I envisioned spending the holidays in this physics-based space combat nirvana, and instead I end up trying to convince myself I should be having fun when I'm not.
P.S. I do actually have a bunch of issues with the physics realism and assumptions too, but I'm not even going to get into that... just focusing on the game design here.
Thanks for sharing Captain. I've got a few games in my library that were abandoned by their developers yet I still enjoy.
Although the audience is very small, there are a few of us who desperately want some sort of up to date feedback or even conversation about a game no one loved except for a few.
Thanks for the necro. I bought this a couple years ago cheap but have never played it. I am a fan of Aurora so I thought this game might be up my alley. Your comments make me think I would only be frustrated by the utter lack of feedback on what is happening during combat. That is one of the big joys I get from detailed games (I'm a retired engineer so I'm weird).
Quote from: bobarossa on December 30, 2021, 02:51:03 PM
Thanks for the necro. I bought this a couple years ago cheap but have never played it. I am a fan of Aurora so I thought this game might be up my alley. Your comments make me think I would only be frustrated by the utter lack of feedback on what is happening during combat. That is one of the big joys I get from detailed games (I'm a retired engineer so I'm weird).
And I'm an unretired engineer! Great minds think alike...
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 02:57:41 PM
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
It just goes to show, engineers have better taste than lawyers.
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on December 30, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 02:57:41 PM
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
It just goes to show, engineers have better taste than lawyers.
..and engineers are apparently more anal retentive than lawyers. Who knew?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on December 30, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 02:57:41 PM
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
It just goes to show, engineers have better taste than lawyers.
..and engineers are apparently more anal retentive than lawyers. Who knew?
Well played, sir.
As a somewhat more serious question, the lack of situational awareness/agency didn't bother your gamer brain? I kind of want to enjoy it, but I'm really struggling to do so. Maybe I'm somehow not thinking about it right.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on December 30, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 02:57:41 PM
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
It just goes to show, engineers have better taste than lawyers.
..and engineers are apparently more anal retentive than lawyers. Who knew?
Engineers enjoy the process and lawyers enjoy the results. We can enjoy a good failure as long as we know why it happened. Lawyers don't get paid for failures.
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on December 30, 2021, 03:09:58 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on December 30, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 30, 2021, 02:57:41 PM
I'm an unretired lawyer and I loved this game. There is very little else like it out there.
It just goes to show, engineers have better taste than lawyers.
..and engineers are apparently more anal retentive than lawyers. Who knew?
Well played, sir.
As a somewhat more serious question, the lack of situational awareness/agency didn't bother your gamer brain? I kind of want to enjoy it, but I'm really struggling to do so. Maybe I'm somehow not thinking about it right.
In truth, it has been more than 3 years since I played it and I only have 3 hours into it. I believe I just ran through a number of the single missions, but what I experienced I found really impressive. The extremely casual astrophysicist in me felt that the physics and concepts involved in the game were authentic enough to give it a really unique near future and imaginable feel. This is what I recall appealing to me most. I'm not sure I got deep enough to notice the issues you raise.
Reminds me of a joke I heard a long time ago. Btw as an aside I too am an unretired engineer.
"So this engineer dies one day. God above is really looking forward to receiving him into heaven but notices that he cannot find him at all. The only other logical place is that somehow he must have mistakenly been sent to hell. So God calls up the devil and asks him about the engineer. The devil says oh yeah that guy? He's down here with me. He's really a great guy to because he's installed air conditioning units, ice cube makers, and running cold water down here.
God says well look there must have been some mix up because that engineer is supposed to be here with me in heaven. The devil replied, "Well I think this engineer is going to stay here with me."
God speaking, "Just you wait Lou, I'm going to sue you and get my engineer back!"
"Oh really?", replies the devil, "And just where are you going to get a lawyer?"
Sorry JH, but know this. I told this joke to my brother in law (who is also a lawyer) and he rolled his eyes at me.
lol. I like it! Actually haven't heard that one. :DD
Mike Aben (I guy I follow for his Kerbal videos) did a series on Children of a Dead Earth a couple of years ago. I haven't seen these, but Mike is pretty entertaining when it comes to Kerbal, so I suspect they are good.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB3Ia8aQsDKhz-wIQi7wmBNwXCsWwSV3V
And yes, I bought the game. It was a cheap way of expanding my collection of unplayed Steam games.... ;D