JoshParnell wrote:OK, this argument is less about the suggestion and more about the general concept of jump drives.

However, I will propose the obvious solution to the problem Gazz has stated. A wormhole generator can only link to an existing wormhole, not to any arbitrary point in space. This means choke points are still choke points, but it also means that you get most of the benefit of the jump drive (not having to cross 10 systems to get to a system that's 10 jumps away).

Furthermore, it raises an interesting potential: if a wormhole generator can only link to existing wormholes, how about we have the ability for another generating ship to infiltrate enemy space, set up an 'orphan' wormhole, which we then link to from our side of space? This means that it is possibly to subvert choke points, but at great risk to the attacker (any ship carrying a generator is going to be expensive just because it's a big ship, and the first ship will always have to come through a choke point). Staying on top of scanning and patrolling your territory should easily thwart this.

EDIT : Pahaha. Pseudo-ninja'd.

but...but...but i like my point to point jumpdrives!

Looks like I get to be Annoying Guy.

I liked the idea of wormholes having a "charge" that would limit pass-through. To allow players/NPCs to add charge, though... not so much.

My interest in these wormhole thingies -- and will someone PLEASE define a single specific name for the technology that acts as a portal to wormholes?! -- is primarily strategic. How do they affect efforts to manage a large multi-system empire?

If thoughtful, perceptive, creative strategic-planning play is to be possible, then there cannot be any game feature that allows large fleets to appear without warning. If it takes only minutes to move large forces to a target location, then what you have is not strategy where there's time to understand changes in the large-scale patterns of force and carefully think up plans to respond to those patterns; what you actually have are immediate tactical battles.

Tactical combat is fun. I want that in LT. What I would not like to see is the introduction of a feature that drastically reduces inter-system movement rates for large numbers of vessels, which instantly replaces strategic play with tactical play.

Gazz properly pointed out how the idea of a "wormhole charger" kills strategic play:

Gazz wrote:While activating / charging a local wormhole "on demand" makes fleet operations easier, it axes the strategic significance of the original proposal: That you can "drain" a wormhole with a mass transit and be stuck on the other side for a good while. Without that, wormholes may just as well be "always on". The whole charge issue would be trivialised once you have a few of these charger ships.

I would say the real value of charge is not of one ship getting stuck; it's that it limits the speed at which multiple powerful ships can move between star systems. But that caveat aside, his conclusion is completely right.

Gazz also proposed a counter to the "charger" idea:

Gazz wrote:If you have a wormhole charger... you should also be able to have a wormhole discharger which locks down the WH. =P

I'm not an absolutist; I could live with this "wormhole discharger" notion as long as it was rather less expensive to build than a wormhole charger.

But I'd personally rather not even go there. A wormhole charger feature would break the entire idea of "charge"; you might as well just not implement the idea of charge at all.

JoshParnell wrote:I will propose the obvious solution to the problem Gazz has stated. A wormhole generator can only link to an existing wormhole, not to any arbitrary point in space. This means choke points are still choke points, but it also means that you get most of the benefit of the jump drive (not having to cross 10 systems to get to a system that's 10 jumps away).

Ack.

Yay for not being able to jump anywhere.

But allowing multi-system jumps would severely degrade strategic play because it greatly reduces the time available to an empire-managing player (human or NPC) to see strategic-level activity happening and figure out how to respond to it.

JoshParnell wrote:Furthermore, it raises an interesting potential: if a wormhole generator can only link to existing wormholes, how about we have the ability for another generating ship to infiltrate enemy space, set up an 'orphan' wormhole, which we then link to from our side of space? This means that it is possibly to subvert choke points, but at great risk to the attacker (any ship carrying a generator is going to be expensive just because it's a big ship, and the first ship will always have to come through a choke point). Staying on top of scanning and patrolling your territory should easily thwart this.

Oh, lordy. So in addition to all the challenges of managing an expanse of space, I would also have to buy and monitor enough ships to patrol all of my territory to prevent an orphan generator ship from establishing a hole anywhere?



Even if this idea were modified such that the initial generator ship could only provide enough charge for one more generator ship to come through, and they have to add to each other's charging for big/many ships to come through, you're still talking about something that's a nightmare to defend against -- i.e., not-fun.

I will say that this might be interesting to have in a universe that strongly favors attackers. I might even enjoy being an observer of a universe like this, where anyone could show up anywhere at any time and the borders of empires might as well be made of tissue paper.

I don't think I'd want to play in such a universe, though.

...

Because I don't like to be the kind of person who can only criticize the ideas of others, I want to be constructive.

To do that in this case, I need to understand something: what's the goal behind allowing players to affect wormhole charging? What problem is it intended to solve, or what appropriate player experience is it meant to enable?

If I could understand that, I could maybe help work out some ways to get there that don't break strategic play.

Flatfingers wrote: To do that in this case, I need to understand something: what's the goal behind allowing players to affect wormhole charging? What problem is it intended to solve, or what appropriate player experience is it meant to enable?

If I could understand that, I could maybe help work out some ways to get there that don't break strategic play.

its intended to unify all wormhole / FTL related game mechanics into one big package.

making jumpgate construction something understandable, dynamic and manipulable.
not something like "this jumpgate has a range of 4 lightyears and can at most transport 20kilotons of mass at once" with no possibility of changing it

Flatfingers wrote:and will someone PLEASE define a single specific name for the technology that acts as a portal to wormholes?!

wormhole module

Cornflakes_91 wrote:not something like "this jumpgate has a range of 4 lightyears and can at most transport 20kilotons of mass at once" with no possibility of changing it

Why is that bad?

Cornflakes_91 wrote:

Flatfingers wrote:and will someone PLEASE define a single specific name for the technology that acts as a portal to wormholes?!

wormhole module

So no more use of terms like "jumpgate" or "jumphole," then?

Flatfingers wrote: Why is that bad?

because its pretty static and undynamic.

"why cant i extend the range of it and sacrify capacity?"

and such things, my system allows for dynamic mechanics, that make trade-offs and choices possible

Flatfingers wrote: So no more use of terms like "jumpgate" or "jumphole," then?

for adressing the different forms of structures of FTL connections.
jumpgate: static, artificial connection
jumphole: static, natural connection
jumpdrive: mobile, artificial connection
wormhole: the actual connection, established by either of the 3 possibilities

Cornflakes_91 wrote:"why cant i extend the range of it and sacrify capacity?"

and such things, my system allows for dynamic mechanics, that make trade-offs and choices possible

If your initial proposal had said anything about reducing capacity as a direct consequence of extending range, I could have supported it. That would preserve strategic play since it wouldn't let you bypass the speed limitation on moving large fleets of big ships that is imposed by the basic "charge" feature.

Simply adding charge, though, without restricting anything else, is the same thing as a making all tech modifiers confer benefits -- there's no tradeoff to make; you'll always want it.

As Gazz says in his sig: "Choice vs Problem. Know the difference."

Cornflakes_91 wrote:for adressing the different forms of structures of FTL connections.
jumpgate: static, artificial connection
jumphole: static, natural connection
jumpdrive: mobile, artificial connection
wormhole: the actual connection, established by either of the 3 possibilities

Aaaaaaaaaand... we're back to making my brain hurt.

I'd really like it if there were no distinction between natural and artificial connections. (In fact, I could very happily play LT with no artificial connections of any kind.) Anything beyond "wormholes" and "jumpgates" starts making my head hurt; I can't imagine what someone completely new to LT would think about this arbitrary profusion of terminology.

Flatfingers wrote: I'd really like it if there were no distinction between natural and artificial connections. (In fact, I could very happily play LT with no artificial connections of any kind.) Anything beyond "wormholes" and "jumpgates" starts making my head hurt; I can't imagine what someone completely new to LT would think about this arbitrary profusion of terminology.

its not an distinction between natural and artificial connections.
its just an distinction how they are created.

you'd probably have to treat a jumpgate, that is maintained and controlled by a faction different than a natural jumphole

When you couple the idea of charge, with

Cornflakes_91 wrote:jumpgate: static, artificial connection
jumphole: static, natural connection
jumpdrive: mobile, artificial connection
wormhole: the actual connection, established by either of the 3 possibilities

you can solve the problem of player/NPC charging/discharging quite simply:

Jumpgates: Static connection, artificial construction built around artificial wormhole, provides as much charge as is stored/generated and cannot be discharged without destroying the stabilizer. This would not necessarily dissipate the wormhole, it still has its own internal charge.
Jumphole: Static connection, naturally occurring, needs to recharge naturally without a jumpgate, and can be discharged by an external entity.
Jumpdrive: Static connection once powered up, meaning ship must be stationary to jump. Generator can jump as often as the ship has power for it to burn, but this must be balanced with a huge power usage per cubic meter etc. Therefore, it's given that emp or similar prevents a ship equipped with a jumpdrive from jumping.
Wormholes: Given the existence of naturally occurring Jumpholes, wormholes must generate their own internal charge, meaning a Jumphole could even be used as a source of energy, however tenuous it may be.

Flatfingers wrote:If thoughtful, perceptive, creative strategic-planning play is to be possible, then there cannot be any game feature that allows large fleets to appear without warning.

This.
Instant battles anywhere, anytime are fun but are better suited for a Wing Commander style game with a much smaller scale.

But I'd personally rather not even go there. A wormhole charger feature would break the entire idea of "charge"; you might as well just not implement the idea of charge at all.

That's why I tried to divert this into a device that allows "overloading" a wormhole, letting you pass a higher tonnage of ships before the wormhole inevitably collapses and starts recharging.
That works with the mechanic instead of devaluing it.

It makes wormhole important strategic assets and you may even bar anyone from passing one if you want to keep it "ready" it for your own fleet movements.

I'm not an absolutist; I could live with this "wormhole discharger" notion as long as it was rather less expensive to build than a wormhole charger.

Any jumpdrive that allows you to jump to a destination at will is a strategic nightmare even if the destinations are "only" the sum of all wormholes.
IMO, a wormhole should be a semi-rare and awesome natural phenomenon that links 2 points. Period.
It provides shortcuts over long distances that break up the neat gridwork of jumpgates.
They should not be Stargates where you just dial up whatever destination you want.
That is a proper choke point.

So many things can be done if the "paths" through the universe are static.
Safe and unsafe trade routes, gaining control of both ends of an important wormhole that lets you by pass 2 pirate invested sectors.
Making secret treaties with factions to let you pass your war fleet through their territory and backstab the faction that has fortified a wormhole junction that you would rather have. By taking the long way around you bypass the fortifications.
If you can simply jump to any wormhole, all of this is largely meaningless because everyone needs to defend every wormhole because it could spit out forces coming from anywhere, anytime.
Why even bother with any interesting wormhole mechanics in that case?

Every trade route is safe if you merely charge up a wormhole and jump directly to the target system.
Everything inbetween is irrelevant.

To do that in this case, I need to understand something: what's the goal behind allowing players to affect wormhole charging? What problem is it intended to solve, or what appropriate player experience is it meant to enable?

If I could understand that, I could maybe help work out some ways to get there that don't break strategic play.

I don't think strategic play is a consideration when someone asks for an anywhere-to-anywhere jumpdrive.
The intention is clearly to bunnyhop around the universe.
Don't take me wrong - this is easy and fun and I abused the hell out of it in X3 but... it makes a mockery of any military strategy other than turtling around your single cluster of space stations.

Everytime you expand you need to do double and triple your military force because you must defend every point of your space like it was connected to an infinite number of unknown points in other sectors.
Of course, you can argue that your own military force can also bunnyhop around. (see X3)
Everyone only has 1 killer stack and the one with the biggest killer stack wins every battle because it is everywhere.
This reduces the game to a tactical battle with your one fleet. There is no distance, no voyages.

Gazz: i personally thought more the other way around with the ratio of Jumpholes to Jumpgates.
jumpholes are a common sight, and hold the universe together.
Jumpgates are the semi-rare and awesome occurence that may opens up new, shorter, less dangerous ways.

because: how would the jumpgate get there in the first place if you cant enter the system without the "rare" occurence of a jumphole?
even if jumpholes were rare, every system would have at least one connection, because of the reason already stated: how do you get there in the first place without jump connections?


you seem to think that jumpdrives work ala X, with range measured in jumps.
why not view it from another direction?
make it based on the physical distance of systems.
this way you can create and fortify choke point systems by searching bigger gaps in the network and fortify the only possible path between the separated areas?

like here, the endpoints of the clusters would be natural chokepoints, as you might not just jump around the closest systems between the clusters, but instead have to go through a couple of systems that link the clusters together.

with the "you can only come out at existing wormholes" limitation, you'd only have to fortify these systems, albeit ALL of their jumpholes, but only single systems


you could try to provide some constructive critique on the already multiple times confirmed feature of jumpdrives, instead of permanently nay-saying and stating that a system even approaching this functionality is inherently broken and cant be fixed

Ok. I am generally in favour of most things stated here with the exeption on portable jump drives in ships for the reasons stated by Flatfingers and Gazz. It will cause massive strategic headaches and I cannot see a way to implement it that doesn't.

I would prefer if the only 2 options are natural jumpholes and constructed jumpgates. You can just say that the jumpgate technology is incompatable with movable ships.

If you still want to infiltrate an enemy system behind his defences you will need to sneak in with construction equipment and materials and go and build your exit gate in his territory. This will be a lot easier to defend againts and a lot more satisfying if you manage to pull it off.

Cornflakes_91 wrote:because: how would the jumpgate get there in the first place if you cant enter the system without the "rare" occurence of a jumphole?
even if jumpholes were rare, every system would have at least one connection, because of the reason already stated: how do you get there in the first place without jump connections?

Neandertal wrote:I would prefer if the only 2 options are natural jumpholes and constructed jumpgates. You can just say that the jumpgate technology is incompatible with movable ships.

IMO, a jumpgate is a wormhole... but a special breed of wormhole.
It's short range (in interstellar terms) and gets you to the next system / sector.
It has always been there but the "construction" that humans add around it stabilises it and keeps it in an "always on" state.
Boring and reliable.

You can even make that a game mechanic.
An unexplored system has 2 wormholes that are stable enough to turn them into proper jumpgates so you can start construction and make it so.
This can turn a backwater with unreliable access into a useful trade route.

It also implies that a "jumpgate" can be destroyed... reverting to it's existence as a wormhole. (charge mechanic and all)
You could seriously hurt a sector's economy by doing that... but you wouldn't permanently cut off it's access to the rest of the universe.
That eliminates the need for hogwash like some precursor race that created magical and indestructible jumpgates like in the X series.


The other "wormholes" are more volatile to begin with and cannot be "built" into stable jumpgates.
They remain a natural phenomenon that you can use... if they don't have a migraine.
You want to use them because they offer cool shortcuts over long distances so you put up with their antics.


I dislike having two completely separate systems for traveling and this would unify them as well as adding gameplay opportunities through the construction / destruction of jumpgates.

you seem to think that jumpdrives work ala X, with range measured in jumps.

Actually, no. I don't know how the universe will look so this value remains undefined for now. All I'm using are terms like "long" and "short" because that's sufficient for a concept.

Cornflakes_91 wrote:make it based on the physical distance of systems.
this way you can create and fortify choke point systems by searching bigger gaps in the network and fortify the only possible path between the separated areas?

with the "you can only come out at existing wormholes" limitation, you'd only have to fortify these systems, albeit ALL of their jumpholes, but only single systems

Why is it so important to eliminate "traveling" and always jump straight to the destination?
A big part of the charm of space games is that Space Is Big!
That it takes time to reinforce a fleet that is getting hammered.
By eradicating the distance between any two points, you take the Big out of Space and only jump around with your killer stack. Nothing else would make sense.
All the classic space tropes about loneliness and distance rely on that!

Finding such connector systems isn't a viable strategy when research is procedural and someone will eventually come up with a jumpdrive that jumps far enough.

Cornflakes_91 wrote:you could try to provide some constructive critique on the already multiple times confirmed feature of jumpdrives, instead of permanently nay-saying and stating that a system even approaching this functionality is inherently broken and cant be fixed :P

I have and in more than one way.
Trouble is, I have seen no suggestion (mine included) that would not destroy a major part of the strategic gameplay.

Travel time / lead time (through such a jump) is just not feasible as a balancing factor because you can't make the player sit in his ship for an hour while he "travels through warpspace" to the destination.
If you have travel time you can put up a huge sign in the target sector "Hi, I'm traveling to your sector now!" and local forces would have time to prepare a defense... like mining the jump anomaly you would be coming out of.
(Space mines work - if you know exactly where the enemy will be.)

Gazz wrote: This can turn a backwater with unreliable access into a useful trade route.

It also implies that a "jumpgate" can be destroyed... reverting to it's existence as a wormhole. (charge mechanic and all)
You could seriously hurt a sector's economy by doing that... but you wouldn't permanently cut off it's access to the rest of the universe.
That eliminates the need for hogwash like some precursor race that created magical and indestructible jumpgates like in the X series.


The other "wormholes" are more volatile to begin with and cannot be "built" into stable jumpgates.
They remain a natural phenomenon that you can use... if they don't have a migraine.
You want to use them because they offer cool shortcuts over long distances so you put up with their antics.


I dislike having two completely separate systems for traveling and this would unify them as well as adding gameplay opportunities through the construction / destruction of jumpgates.

where does my system introduce independent systems for travelling?
i actually built a system that introduces more unification for more systems.

wormholes dont need a special "jumpgate" state with my mechanic, just boost their charge with the jumpgate station.
you could even do it with ships, boosting the jumphole temporarily to make it passable for your ship(s)

Here are some thoughts I had on this.

What people want: The ability to affect wormhole mechanics, allowing for fleets to rapidly move across space without having to manually drag the fleet through 20 systems.

What people do not want: The ability for a fleet to pop up anywhere without warning .

my idea: batteries and daisy chain networks (a highway system)

For the purposes of this idea let me distinguish between wormholes, jump gates, and jump drives.

Wormhole: wild, naturally occurring link between two systems. allows for some mass to pass between the two ends, but the greater the mass the weaker it gets. (it is weakened by Higgs bosons) Though it slowly recharges, if its charge drops to 0,it collapses. after a short time, another wormhole will form between the two systems, but the ends themselves will be in different locations in the systems. (you will never be totally stranded, but you may have to search for the new wormhole and then wait for it to charge.) wormholes can grow to have infinitely large charges if nothing passes through.

Jump gate: a structure built around a wormhole that "tames" the wormhole. the only thing that a basic jump gate does is prevent the wormhole from collapsing if the charge reaches 0. The gate can then be upgraded in 3 ways.
Modules can be added which increases the recharge rate; Modules can be added which harvest or inject wormhole energy (allowing you to farm wormholes in quiet systems to feed ones in busy systems by means of WH batteries) ;and modules can be added which allow for the wormhole to be part of a daisy chain. the modules will be programable for certain frequencies, allowing multiple daisy chains to run through a single wormhole.

Jump drive: I am going to break this into two parts.

First, you have a daisy chain utilizer. This device allows you to use the daisy chain network at all, any particular one can only work with a single frequency. (perhaps a high tech one could work with multiple frequencies, or even be reprogramable if you discover the frequency of the enemy's DC network and want to use theirs.)

Second, you can have a mobile wormhole energy injector/harvester module. This allows a ship to use its on board WHE batteries to supercharge the wormhole and allow the fleet to pass through. However this also means that the wormhole can be drained the exact same way an asteroid is harvested. upgrades here will mainly just speed up the injection or harvesting. Batteries too can be upgraded in their capacity.

This means that a fleet can fast travel along a daisy chain network as far as their batteries take them, but be slowed to a regular speed outside of the network.

it also means that you can seal off a system entirely by constantly harvesting the wormholes which access it (from either side, so you can have impenetrable bases as well as sieges)

no one can jump in on you from anywhere at any time, and yet travel can be fairly rapid if you have the resources and infrastructure in place.

Well, there remains one question: what do daisy chain links actually do?