Sun biome and Barycenters?

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by komandorcliff, September 27, 2014.

?

Want?!

  1. WANT!

    72.2%
  2. Do not want

    5.6%
  3. Only barycenters plz

    5.6%
  4. Moar sunz only plz

    2.8%
  5. Bacon biome plz

    25.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. totalannihilation

    totalannihilation Active Member

    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    168
    The idea does look interesting...
    however, equating these things are a real pain.
    First of all, no planet should ever orbit between two suns, as the planet could be too close to another sun, and then "swap" orbits because one gravitational force is greatly stronger than other
    Secondly, the equations will become much more complicated, specially if the suns are too far away from each other.
    And thirdly, and mostly important, things like this are way too difficult to code, you could have a planet passing through the sun by mistake, and people will complain that it is unrealistic and stuff.
    4th: how will become the travel between planets? Right now, the system editor limits the minimum distance to the sun, because if it is too close, the planet's velocity will be so high that the in-game units will never reach it (it was a common bug in the past) thus they will be wandering around the sun forever.

    But I do agree with being able to customize the sun's size (right now is 4000), the mass (right now is 100000) and the color
    Barycenters of planets could be interesting though, but they should be small and put very far away from the system. Also, the mechanics of in-game orbital travel could become really bugged with such things

    And another thing I was almost forgetting, the game is coded to have The Sun as its center in Cartesian coordinates, if you move it out because of a barycenter, then they will have to redo all the core of equations


    Resuming: basically it is beautiful, its equations are difficult to model physically, and programming them will be impossible, as they will never be 100% of what people expected/wanted
  2. masterevar

    masterevar Active Member

    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    100
    I guess that actual barycenters wont be added to soon, but it should not be too hard to make a sun model that looks like two stars orbiting each other?
  3. aevs

    aevs Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    1,150
    For concerns over barycentric coordinates; you can treat the binary system as a single gravity well at their centre of mass for objects orbiting the two bodies from afar, and you can treat bodies orbiting much closer as orbiting whatever body they are near. And you can include barycentric coordinates easily by checking the relative masses of the bodies; if the difference is say, >25% or some other percentage then you model the orbit as barycentric. As is the case in the real world, you would be restricted from including co-orbital bodies to them, as that would necessarily lead to an unstable configuration.
    It is entirely possible to implement barycentric orbits in a setup like the system editor, and to enact orbital restrictions (like the ones we have already) to keep things stable.
    Fun fact: my spellcheck replaces 'coorbital' not with 'co-orbital', but with 'corgi tail'.
    Last edited: September 28, 2014
  4. squishypon3

    squishypon3 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,971
    Likes Received:
    4,357
    Mine seems to the think "it's" is not a word at times and instead makes it "it'd"
  5. totalannihilation

    totalannihilation Active Member

    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    168
    You mean, instead of making two objects to orbit each other, create a single object that "looks like" two suns orbiting each other? Well, it is a brilliant solution for programming, but it will be poorly customizable and then people will come to complain once again
  6. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    You guys realize all the celestial objects are on rails and aren't actually bothered by such nonsense as "gravity" right?
  7. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    That's no excuse for it to not look like it is some how affected by gravity.
  8. totalannihilation

    totalannihilation Active Member

    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    168
    Those "rails" are generated by the gravity force and everything that derives from it (energy, momentum, velocity, etc.), the exact path is a consequence of the gravitational force we use.
    If you don't like it, go make your own universe with your own physical laws, try making F=GMm/(r^1.8) for example and see what happens
  9. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    Well yeah. I'm just saying don't overcomplicate the issue. You don't really need highly advanced programming and complicated orbital equations to make something look like a binary system.

    [​IMG]

    See? Magic. Or you'll have to accept I've successfully simulated gravity in gif format.

    Gravity isn't simulated in the game.
  10. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Very true, it needs to at least look the part.

    But it is however accounted for to make projectiles curve to the planes curvature, making it look like gravity.
  11. aevs

    aevs Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    1,150
    Projectiles, as far as I can tell, actually are affected by gravity correctly. Artillery even seems to account for the Coriolis effect.
    igncom1 likes this.
  12. masterevar

    masterevar Active Member

    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    100
    Well, it could be done so that you can change colours maybe? and size? Of course people will always want more.
  13. totalannihilation

    totalannihilation Active Member

    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    168
    Now pick up your magic, add some planets orbiting around the stars and make some avengers fly from one planet to another...
    and redo for 10 different distance-velocity relationships
  14. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    In this instance, it would be better to have the planets orbiting at a range significant enough to not disturb the gameplay with wildly erratic orbits.

Share This Page