Models - Chris Kuhn

Thinking about improving the Artwork in Vega Strike, or making your own Mod? Submit your question and ideas in this forum.

Moderator: pyramid

klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

It all doesn't matter. The current model is flawed enough that i'd propose scrapping it entirely and coming up with a more sensible model, and a more sensible implementation since we're at it. ECM not so much as stealth. It's stealth the most horrible offender here.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote:It all doesn't matter. The current model is flawed enough that i'd propose scrapping it entirely and coming up with a more sensible model, and a more sensible implementation since we're at it. ECM not so much as stealth. It's stealth the most horrible offender here.
The only worthwhile approach to stealth is a pervasive one, where most every equipment choice and combat action affects it. The hull design of a ship would have an inherent stealth rating. Energy production would reduce stealth by the waste heat it produces. Firing certain types of weapons would be an extreme giveaway of your position while others would have no affect. Thrusters would be an even bigger concern, so only extremely low output cold thrust would be remotely stealthy. And distance would have the greatest effect of all, both through falloff and information delays caused by the speed of light or the time it takes sweep a large area. As a result, the closer you get to an observer and the longer you stay there, the more obvious you become. Line of sight would also factor, so hiding within an asteroid belt or the atmosphere of a planet or behind a sun would render you invisible to any stationary detector.

I imagine a stealth ship, or Hunter, would be a bit like a dirigible, big but light. It would have a large, thin, faceted outer hull to dissipate heat diffusely and deal with radar. Deep inside would be a very small internal hull containing the cockpit, a power plant just big enough to power a SPEC drive and thrusters capable of producing both hot and cold thrust plumes. Weapons would be almost exclusively time delayed missiles, flash-less accelerators firing tracer-less rounds and less often true directed energy weapons. Probably never particle weapons. A large compliment of mines and recon drones would be carried as well.

Hunters have a few mission types. They run passive observation tours in friendly or hostile space, deploy hidden minefields and drone recon networks, hunt down and destroy any isolated targets they can neutralize without heavy retaliation, and launch high risk raids against major targets using drones and mines to screen their approach and retreat through hostile defenses.

But for any mission, the same conflicting concerns are often present. For example, a hunter could be detected due to excessive proximity to an approaching patrol, so it should actively keep it distance. But a hunter could also be detected by excessive activity, like by firing its thrusters to move away from the patrol. At the same time, the moving target the hunter is trying to intercept is escaping. Attacking the patrol would have a good chance of getting it out of the way quickly so it could move on to the target, but would alert the target just as quickly, which might become more evasive. And as the image of the exploding patrol traveled further out into space at the speed of light, more patrols would be attracted to the area over the proceeding minutes. Much of the meat of the hunter role gameplay comes from this type of complex decision making that changes the tone of the rest of the mission.
IansterGuy
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:49 am

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by IansterGuy »

I love all of this, and imagine it working well, except for a few paragraphs
Deus Siddis wrote:I imagine a stealth ship, or Hunter, would be a bit like a dirigible, big but light. It would have a large, thin, faceted outer hull to dissipate heat diffusely and deal with radar. Deep inside would be a very small internal hull containing the cockpit
I can't shake the thought of space blimps. I'm thinking small ships could have built in faceted hulls for decent stealth. Though it would look silly, maybe normal ships could get a faceted outer hull attachment for electromagnetic radar ping stealth. Which is similarly short range like visible stealth. As for visible stealth it should be imperfect and either be part of the hull or a shield like projection around it. While long range FTL subspace stealth would as you said have mostly to do with the reactor and equipments stealth rating on board. Using active subspace ping scanners while cloaked would reveal ones location, so sensor range should be passive and lower range with stealth activated. On this note the radar map should show when an object disappears from radar at it's last known location for a short while, so if done improperly the prey may suspect they are being stalked.
Deus Siddis wrote:Probably never particle weapons...
Particle weapons I would think the most useful. They are long range, and would be infinite range if not obstructed. They can be shot silently and if from an infinitely sized rail gun could move projectiles at infinite speed. This would be good for sneak attacks because as I previously suggested/thought_Privately, they would be devastating to ships without shields (physical_shields/deflectors/Inhibitor_fields) activated, but would be useless at range if shields are on. Inhibitor_fields would relatively decelerate, and deflectors direct particles to miss, while the physical shield would efficiently cushion impacts. This significant combined protection would make lowing ones shields to flee an area with a cloaked ship a greater risk, because they would be vulnerable to devastating hull damage from probable particle weapons.

A cannon note, the shields great effectiveness against fast particle weapons would have been the entire driving force for the production of the alternative slower concentrated energy bullet weapons, meant to significantly disrupt or evade shield protections.
Deus Siddis wrote:And as the image of the exploding patrol traveled further out into space at the speed of light, more patrols would be attracted to the area over the proceeding minutes.
Assuming subspace communication is jammed when revealed is the attack. Though you would think that their allies should notice them disappearing off radar and if not occupied come to ensure they are not under stealth attack.
Last edited by IansterGuy on Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

The only thing I see could become rather complicated, is speed of light delays. I don't think we ought to venture into that area. I foresee lots of complications that would arise, in gameplay mechanics, that would be hard to overcome.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote: The only thing I see could become rather complicated, is speed of light delays. I don't think we ought to venture into that area. I foresee lots of complications that would arise, in gameplay mechanics, that would be hard to overcome.
Then we should enforce a maximum radar and communication range somewhere under a light minute.

Tangentially, that will solve our major issue of every ship of a hostile faction in the system attacking you at once. And the issue of the radar and target selection interfaces being overloaded with radar contacts. And the issue of knowing everything that is in the solar system without having to explore it.
TBeholder
Elite Venturer
Elite Venturer
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:40 am
Location: chthonic safety

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by TBeholder »

Deus Siddis wrote:Then we should enforce a maximum radar and communication range somewhere under a light minute.

Tangentially, that will solve our major issue of every ship of a hostile faction in the system attacking you at once.
Isn't this already done (with a special exception for capships)?
Soeaking of which, ships should have separate values for resolution. Maybe radialsize would do, though.
Also, the question is, how this is related to communications? In that either an unit advertises its presence, or it can't be specifically called by anyone outside its flightgroup, and the faction to which it talked knows where it is.
Deus Siddis wrote: And the issue of the radar and target selection interfaces being overloaded with radar contacts.
"T" is mostly useless anyway, between separate "friendly", "hostile", "navigation" and "missile" lists.

This aside, "island" physics (separate local/system precision spaces) could help to do range checks much faster, as huge subsets can be easily filtered out instead of checking everything in the system one by one (this includes radar, collision, blast radius checks - everything).
Deus Siddis wrote: And the issue of knowing everything that is in the solar system without having to explore it.
And this carries the risk of "You didn't see the local sun when it's outside of the radar range". :D
"Two Eyes Good, Eleven Eyes Better." -Michele Carter
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

TBeholder wrote: Isn't this already done (with a special exception for capships)?
I mean a hard limit, no exceptions for capships.

It appears most ships have a detection range limit of one light second, maybe that should be the upper limit...
Also, the question is, how this is related to communications? In that either an unit advertises its presence, or it can't be specifically called by anyone outside its flightgroup, and the faction to which it talked knows where it is.
You don't want an attacked unit instantly contacting allies on the other side of the system. Communication systems should have the same range limit as detection systems since both are limited to the speed of light.
And this carries the risk of "You didn't see the local sun when it's outside of the radar range". :D
Large celestial bodies are a special case. It would feel a lot more like exploring if you had to fly around a whole system to find every one of its planets because the ability to see them was limited to your detection range. But this being a 3D game, you would likely end up flying off the 2D "disc" that is the solar system, into deep space, where you would discover only your own loneliness.

What would work though, is if you had to get close to a planet to know what kind it is, what it looks like and what it is called. So when you entered a new system for the first time, you would know how many planets there are and what direction in fly to reach each one, but nothing more.
loki1950
The Shepherd
Posts: 5841
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:37 pm
Location: Ottawa
Contact:

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by loki1950 »

Determining planetary types can be done from outside the solar system we are doing it now with the so called extra -solar planets all it takes is a spectograph which we have been using for over a hundred years,get your own knowledge of physics out of the dark ages :roll:

Enjoy the Choice :)
my box::HP Envy i5-6400 @2Q70GHzx4 8 Gb ram/1 Tb(Win10 64)/3 Tb Mint 19.2/GTX745 4Gb acer S243HL K222HQL
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

loki1950 wrote:Determining planetary types can be done from outside the solar system we are doing it now with the so called extra -solar planets all it takes is a spectograph which we have been using for over a hundred years,
Some planetary information can be determined from a distance. But you can't easily see if a planet has life or an industrial base or other game pertinent information, from so far away.
get your own knowledge of physics out of the dark ages :roll:
There is no need to be upset, it was just a passing thought. My focus here is only on the physics and gameplay of spacecraft stealth in VS. As I said, celestial bodies are a special case since they are so large and relatively static, so the game can continue to handle their detection as it does now (i.e. no range limitation).
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Well, yes, you can. Life byproducts are also detectable on spectrograph. But really, all that ability is moot, because you have catalogs, and your nav system just knows that planet X is there.

It's un-catalogable stuff the one that needs to be limited. Ie: ships.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote: Well, yes, you can. Life byproducts are also detectable on spectrograph.
I stand corrected.
But really, all that ability is moot, because you have catalogs, and your nav system just knows that planet X is there.
So then shouldn't the stars in the starmap be cataloged as well? Currently a solar system doesn't show up on the map until you have entered an adjoining one.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

The stars are there, but you don't know about the jump network.

But yes, they should show up. All except uncharted jump points should show up. Sadly, the engine doesn't support that yet, and since space is so mindbogglingly big in VS, it would also be quite challenging to come up with some interesting catalog (charted vs uncharted). It would probably require a clever script of some sort.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote: Sadly, the engine doesn't support that yet, and since space is so mindbogglingly big in VS, it would also be quite challenging to come up with some interesting catalog (charted vs uncharted).
I find it isn't so much the sheer size of the map on its own that is mind boggling, but the combination of that plus its 3D-ness plus various GUI deficiencies...

For examples the map's vector graphics add to the visual clutter level and they don't seem to rotate as smoothly as they should, distant systems are not drawn with less opacity and there is no search by name feature for stars and planets nor the ability to plot a multiple jump course by selecting a destination star.

The local system map inherits some of these issues as well, which might be an issue for stealth game play. Because I think stealth evasion may depend on the player having a clear idea what is happening, within his detection radius but beyond visual range, as far as the position, distance, heading and speed of surrounding ships. I might even go so far as to suggest the 3D map be integrated into one of the HUD displays (if it is not so already), with the camera rotation keys controlling its perspective while in the normal cockpit view.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Deus Siddis wrote:The local system map inherits some of these issues as well, which might be an issue for stealth game play. Because I think stealth evasion may depend on the player having a clear idea what is happening, within his detection radius but beyond visual range, as far as the position, distance, heading and speed of surrounding ships. I might even go so far as to suggest the 3D map be integrated into one of the HUD displays (if it is not so already), with the camera rotation keys controlling its perspective while in the normal cockpit view.
That could work, and in fact it'd be easier than coding a new nav map from scratch, and I can see how it would turn on as soon as you engage navigation mode. There's already key mappings for head turning, I think all that would be left, is the ability to switch to mouse/joystick panning.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote: That could work, and in fact it'd be easier than coding a new nav map from scratch, and I can see how it would turn on as soon as you engage navigation mode.
I actually mean something like the mini-maps that other games have, i.e. a part of the HUD that is there regardless of what mode your flight computer is in. By default it would be centered on your ship and show only the extents of your detection range, to give a rotatable fully 3D view of the immediate tactical situation around your ship. But then you could switch it to the system view that centers on the local sun and shows the extents of the entire solar system, to give you the same 3D perspective on your wider situation.
klauss wrote: There's already key mappings for head turning,
You mean q, z, s and f?
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Deus Siddis wrote:
klauss wrote: That could work, and in fact it'd be easier than coding a new nav map from scratch, and I can see how it would turn on as soon as you engage navigation mode.
I actually mean something like the mini-maps that other games have, i.e. a part of the HUD that is there regardless of what mode your flight computer is in. By default it would be centered on your ship and show only the extents of your detection range, to give a rotatable fully 3D view of the immediate tactical situation around your ship. But then you could switch it to the system view that centers on the local sun and shows the extents of the entire solar system, to give you the same 3D perspective on your wider situation.
That's a radar. We could pretty up the radar. But no, I meant something like a HUD overlay that shows nav markers.
Deus Siddis wrote:
klauss wrote: There's already key mappings for head turning,
You mean q, z, s and f?
No, they seem unbound.

Cockpit::LookDown, LookUp, LookLeft, LookRight
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

Well I may be over complicating this issue with the interface thing... It probably doesn't make sense to worry about that until a new, working stealth mechanic is implemented.

So to summarize my stealth proposal:
  • Every ship hull has a stealth value that effectively makes the ship seem farther away when doing a detection test.
  • Every ship has a thruster stealth reduction value that is multiplied times the kilonewtons of thrust produced by all the thruster in use for that frame.
  • Every weapon has a stealth reduction value that is applied while it is firing.
  • Reactor energy draw decreases stealth. (By producing waste hit that has to be radiated, making the ship glow brighter in IR.)
So if a ship has a detection radius of 1000 units and a stealth ship is 400 units away with a stealth rating of 800, the stealth ship is invisible.

The detector ship has to get 200 units closer to detect the stealth ship. Or the stealth ship has to take a stealth reducing action like firing thrusters, firing weapons or using systems that draw power from the reactor to reduce its present stealth rating by 200 units or more.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

That sounds about right. Not the exact implementation details, but the general idea.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote:Not the exact implementation details, but the general idea.
Which details should be changed?
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Deus Siddis wrote:
klauss wrote:Not the exact implementation details, but the general idea.
Which details should be changed?
Instead of merely a "stealth" parameter, I was thinking of having sensor packs have different detection bands, and each of the things a ship has (thrusters, reactor, etc) add a signal on those bands. Then, a ship would be detected when that signal's apparent magnitude crosses the detection threshold (apparent = considering distance and occlusion).

Active pinging would be passed through a "radar modulation function" defined for each ship. The function would vary according to stealth mode. So if you've got active stealth going on, it would severely attenuate pings.

And I mean a function and not a factor, because there'd be multiple bands. You'd have some radars working on the X band, and some on the Y band, and they'd be different. Some ships would be stealth against X but not Y. Etc.

This is an old plan of mine, btw. The apparent magnitude thing is really cool, it completely eliminates the "max distance" argument, because it depends on what you're detecting. Big ships are detectable farther away, while small ships have to be on your face.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
loki1950
The Shepherd
Posts: 5841
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:37 pm
Location: Ottawa
Contact:

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by loki1950 »

I like that model klauss it's complicated enough that it gives tactical options and simple to understand,and active scanning is the equivalent of saying to all here I am.

Enjoy the Choice :)
my box::HP Envy i5-6400 @2Q70GHzx4 8 Gb ram/1 Tb(Win10 64)/3 Tb Mint 19.2/GTX745 4Gb acer S243HL K222HQL
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote: Instead of merely a "stealth" parameter, I was thinking of having sensor packs have different detection bands,

And I mean a function and not a factor, because there'd be multiple bands. You'd have some radars working on the X band, and some on the Y band, and they'd be different. Some ships would be stealth against X but not Y. Etc.
Wouldn't that just be an extra detail though? Because once you have chosen a ship that hides from X band, the outcome of a conflict depends on whether the opposing ship happened to be equipped for detecting X band or Y band. It would only be a matter of chance?
Then, a ship would be detected when that signal's apparent magnitude crosses the detection threshold (apparent = considering distance and occlusion).
Ah, I forgot about occlusion. How do you want to consider distance falloff, linear or inverse-square?
Active pinging would be passed through a "radar modulation function" defined for each ship.
Should we have separate active and passive sensor upgrades or active and passive sensor modes?
The apparent magnitude thing is really cool, it completely eliminates the "max distance" argument, because it depends on what you're detecting. Big ships are detectable farther away, while small ships have to be on your face.
Agreed.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Deus Siddis wrote:
klauss wrote: Instead of merely a "stealth" parameter, I was thinking of having sensor packs have different detection bands,

And I mean a function and not a factor, because there'd be multiple bands. You'd have some radars working on the X band, and some on the Y band, and they'd be different. Some ships would be stealth against X but not Y. Etc.
Wouldn't that just be an extra detail though? Because once you have chosen a ship that hides from X band, the outcome of a conflict depends on whether the opposing ship happened to be equipped for detecting X band or Y band. It would only be a matter of chance?
Depends on content. In general, I'd expect most sensors focusing on band X, whereas just a few state-of-the-art packs work on Y. That's how it is in RL, btw. Big hunking ground-based radars work usually on some band, different from airborn ones. So, unless you spend a fortune, you can only hide from one such type of sensor.

So, whether it's a useful distinction or just random variation depends on content. I like though the modding possibilities it would open up.
Deus Siddis wrote:
Then, a ship would be detected when that signal's apparent magnitude crosses the detection threshold (apparent = considering distance and occlusion).
Ah, I forgot about occlusion. How do you want to consider distance falloff, linear or inverse-square?
It's inverse-square, but with different falloff ratios for passive and active. Active falls off a lot slower because it uses a focused beam, whereas passive detects omnidirectionally.
Deus Siddis wrote:
Active pinging would be passed through a "radar modulation function" defined for each ship.
Should we have separate active and passive sensor upgrades or active and passive sensor modes?
I wouldn't think so. In RL, sensor packs tend to be highly integrated, including both active and passive. No reason to model it differently in VS. Though, I'd expect the upgrade system to be flexible enough to allow that separation, we just wouldn't do it.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by Deus Siddis »

Revised Stealth and Detection wrote: Ships will have stealth ratings for their hulls that passively affect their detectability.
Ships' thrusters will have stealth ratings for their real time detectability while firing.
Weapons will have stealth ratings for their real time detectability while firing in the case of beams or while their shots are traveling through space in the case of projectiles.

Sensors will not be able to detect objects occluded by other objects and will be less effective at detecting objects farther away.
Sensors will have active and passive detection modes. Sensors in active mode will be more effective but decrease their own ship's ability to evade detection.

Ratings for stealth and detection can be specific to distinct bands, such that a sensor that only detects in band X will not detect a ship only visible in band Y.
So how does this sound for the ticket summary? And what should the target version be?
Last edited by Deus Siddis on Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Re: Models - Chris Kuhn

Post by klauss »

Sound purrfect
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Post Reply