Killjaeden wrote:which compacts the entire deep space thing tremendeously. Because suddenly you know where things are. You are not stumbling on this by accident or because you looked around, you are guided in on it, because you would never be able to find it without this guidance.RAVEN.myst wrote: I can think of at least one way to make it more interesting: following clues, or a bread-crumb trail
If you can just stumble upon these things you mentioned, they wouldnt be in deep space (unless your definition of deep space is very shallow). If they are far out, you would would not find them without beeing guided to them - because space, even in X series, is vast and a miniscule minority will be filled with things you can actually discover -> Chance of accidental discovery goes to 0. The 3rd dimension added compared to "world based" games is the main "problem" here.
It wouldn't be placed customizable, such unique missions would be procedurally generated (which most missions in Rebirth generally are), so Egosoft wouldn't be going crazy on new scripting as allot of what needs to be done is already in the game.
You fly into empty space, a percentage chance of the missions triggering if you long range scan a specific region of space.
RAVEN.myst wrote: OK, I'm afraid here you are missing the point somewhat, and kinda contradicting yourself: on the one hand you criticize some prior points because they would require tedious thorough examination of vast amounts of space; yet on the other hand you naysay other ideas because they would contract space. Relative motion of celestial bodies combined with vast space obviates both of those: the whole point of rare and remote sites that can be scanned by good fortune or located by following otherwise-acquired clues is that it is NOT about painstakingly scanning each cubic centimetre. In fact, making that an impossible task is a major point in all this, as the vastness of space is such that such a task would be unimaginably impractical. This is where that random generation comes into play - on a given "warp" (or whatever) between two points of significance, there could be an infinitesimally small chance of stumbling on something (adjusted upward by object's mass/volume/energy output) - consider, for example, flying through the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter's orbits - the chances of actually hitting something are really really small (asteroid belts in Rebirth, and space games and sci-fi movies etc in general, are routinely depicted as being absurdly dense). However, if you have specialised surveying/exploration sensors, you then increase those odds into the realms of the possible in practical terms. IMPORTANT: The object need not exist in-game until such time as it is "discovered" - the act of observing it successfully causes it to come into existence, so to speak [Hmmm, could name the deep-space sensors the Schrodinger Searchlight, or Quantum Scanner, or something similar] - ie. a successful roll against the sensor's chance of success instantiates the location or the clue that initiates the trail to it. Would quartering every cubic foot of space increase the odds of finding something? Yes, but only insofar as it is leading to more sensor success checks to be rolled - the same effect could be achieved more easily by running up and down the same route and letting the "dice" get rerolled repeatedly (this ONLY makes sense in a dynamically moving universe, though, from a consistency point of view, as otherwise shit is just materialising where it wasn't five minutes ago "I've been driving on this road for 15 years, and never before was that tree there - it wasn't there when I came by this morning either! What's going on here?" Answer: booze! ) This would have the side-effect of not-yet-generated content not consuming system resources - it gets put into memory only when it has been discovered (which I'm sure is how a lot of even permanent content is being handled whenever possible, to conserve RAM.)
There are no absolutes in space, and there is no such thing as a truly "stationary" object - be it in so-called "outer" space or your bathroom cabinet - it is all relative to a particular frame of reference. Therefore, the method of "systematically" searching all of a game's space volume isn't really remotely realistic - it makes more sense to radiate the intensity of search/exploration activities as decaying probability curves radiating from landmarks/points of interest. This is even how such tasks are performed for real: a simple spiral search pattern is initiated usually at a point of highest probability (although sometimes dictated instead by convenience) and expands; every successive "whorl" is longer and thus each revolution takes longer - the farther you get from your landmark, the slower the searching goes. Sometimes the "landmark" is not a point, but a line - say, a road, for instance: if you are looking for derailed trains, you start your search AT the railway track, not 5 miles away. In a vast and mostly empty space, points of reference are even more important, because you don't have an environmental frame of reference. Anyhow, I'm digressing on a wild tangent here - when I started this part, I had some "very important" point to make - I have no idea what it may have been! hahahahah
So, time for me to go actually PLAY something! More fun...
Happy hunting!
I've watched enough Universe documentaries to know that Space is full of wonders and scary things that cause massive damage.
- Asteroid field showers (Causing great damage to stations/ships alike)
- Micro Asteroid shower (Like bullets that can decimate ships if you fly into them.)
- Balls of heated plasma coming from stars that can damage shields and systems of a ship.
- Black Holes.
- Mini Black Holes.
- Gravitational anomalies.
- Gas clouds that can be ignited causing massive explosions.