The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Saying I have "the wrong mindset" about something that is at this point completely subjective is not your place. I had already read the post you quoted, that is the second time in this thread you have quoted that paragraph, and I had already told you I had read it. I understand your idea and our disagreement is just a difference of opinion. I prefer a system where large rockets are a necessity for escaping the gravity of full-sized planets until you have the proper orbital infrastructure in place.

Please do not assume that the fact that I don't like your idea isn't because I don't understand it.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Well, I'm looking at things from three angles. The first is the "game pacing" POV. The second is a "Keeping the commander viable as the game's queen chess piece" POV. Lastly, leaving a planet's gravity well is probably the most important part of the game. It controls how players interact with the galaxy, with each other, and how the game functions as a whole. That angle is easily the toughest one to figure out.

Early on, it's a good idea to keep commanders close together by limiting their ability to sprint across the universe. A "slow" and low tech rocket gives easy access to space. At the same time it punishes transit by wasting the commander's time in deep void, where he can't do anything. Grabbing local planets is good, but grabbing distant worlds by rocket isn't. Tightly packed players are a good thing for forcing battles and keeping the early stages interesting.

Mid-campaign, the commander gets a speed boost with gate teleporters. A poorly defended world no longer has protection through obscurity, as every world is now a potential target. A giant galaxy can stay giant for everyone else, but the commander gains unique access to galaxy spanning power plays. The galaxy becomes dotted with every faction everywhere, which is once again a great way to encourage lots of fighting and escalation. It also helps punish players who started with a long distance rocket, as the local guy can build up a larger economy and give chase.

Late-campaign, asteroids are flying around left and right, and no planet is safe anymore. A commander on a rocket has to race against asteroids, which can cause real problems in terms of commander sniping. Find the ACU's rocket, select 100 asteroids, and right click to end the game. A rocket transport can only do so much against that. A gateoporter lets the commander escape to nearly anywhere, without a trace, so that asteroids can be a planet killing weapon but not necessarily a comm sniping tool.


~~~~~~~~~~~
But wait, there's more! There is yet another angle. There was another thread discussing the role of tiers in game. (I've branched across how many threads now? 3? 4?) There was a very good post about keeping the low tiers very "basic" and "generic". Higher tiers would introduce "advanced" units that had more strategic value and carried special roles. I'd hate to sound pretentious and say that it slices, it dices, and it fulfills the tiered progression of basic to complex... but it kind of does that too.

Rockets remain viable late game as a cheap way to put engineers on asteroids and other worlds. Rockets can also play a critical role in moving "satellites" and other orbital units around, for scouting or laser death or whatever arcane purpose they might serve. Rockets can do a lot of things, don't have much of a size limitation, and can do so in a very basic and generic way. They can stay useful no matter what.

Gateoporters are good for one thing only. They move a small to medium unit from A to B. However, this simple option opens up a whole can of opportunistic worms. Using its ability with normal units is kind of meh. For example, one might plant half a dozen walking bombs into a front line power grid. Cute, but not much more. However, use that same gateoporter with the Commander(the most powerful and important single unit in the universe). There is now a vast array of options for expanding, deployment and retreat, at a pace no other unit can possibly match, as already explained above.

Basically, the teleporter functions as the advanced version of the rocket. Both fill the same basic role (moving solitary units long distance). However, the former retains more generic functions while the latter turns a very simple action into a very complex role.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

I'm just talking about games on a single system...

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

I think the problem is that you're not being as clear about the basis for your argument, I was under the impression of my system, but seems you have your own system you were talking about without providing any context.

Mike

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Here is the basis for my argument, from when I revived the thread:

Zacb then said:

Which was odd, because the post linked to made no mention of space elevators. And it doesn't address my reasoning anywhere that if other units can reach escape velocity by there own power then the big rockets seem a bit out of place.

You then quoted the post linked to, expanding further into the explanation of dropships vs. gantries. Which is fine, but it didn't really have to do with space elevators or my question about little units escaping gravity by themselves.

I then tried to argue from a gameplay perspective, because I feel that building a T2 factory is no more of a heavy investment than building a rocket gantry would be (not to mention a far better long-term investment), but apparently that wasn't terribly convincing.

So here we are. From my perspective I was trying to make a suggestion about transportation between ground and orbit, and reviving an old thread instead of starting my own to not annoy people, and it seemed like you were telling me that my idea was pointless because you had already argued for dropships.

Ok, to prevent further misunderstandings I will lay out my reasoning as clear as I can:

1. A rocket gantry requires a massive and possibly one-time-use rocket to move 1-2 units into space from a full-sized planet (we're not talking about moons here.).

2. A dropship, as you proposed them, can fly a fair number of units into space with its own little engines and no prep or extra energy cost.

3. What's with the massive leap in rocket engine technology between tech 1 and 2?

4. A rocket gantry is probably not cheap. It might be a bit cheaper than a T2 factory, but you'll get more long-term use out of the T2 factory so that's a better investment anyway if both can be used to get you into space.

5. A space elevator (preferably as an orbital structure instead of a massive tower) prevents transports from needing to land. This eliminates the problem in item 3.

6. Alternatively, a tractor beam skyhook type orbital structure could assist dropships taking off. This also eliminates the problem in item 3.

7. In either case, the rocket gantry cannot be circumvented by simply waiting until T2.

8. If elevators/skyhooks are needed the RG will maintain its value long term since there will be situations in the late game where elevators/skyhooks are not available.

9. On the other hand if dropships can take off on their own RGs are rendered obsolete, since you can always bring over dropships from another planet(oid) once you've reached T2.

10. I am totally happy with dropships landing and taking off from moons and asteroids on their own. Again, in this discussion I'm only concerned with the big planets.

I'm sorry for getting irritated. I hope there can be peace between us, even if we never agree.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

woah! My impression has been that even a single KEW is a massive investment. Your impression that there will be "asteroids flying all over the place" and that you could "right click with 100 asteroids" pretty much make me sad.

If asteroids become common enough that you begin describing them like that (even if you're exaggerating), then I've clearly misread just about every dev post on them.

-Stretch

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Don't forget that the only reason you're leaving a gravity well, is so you can eventually kick someone else off their gravity well.

Well, we don't know how many asteroids there are, or how much anything costs at this point. What we do know (and can potentially speculate) is this:

1) Commanders will be flying through space, landing on planets.
2) Asteroids will also be flying through space, smashing into planets.
1+2) Commander, meet asteroid. Asteroid, this is Commander.
4) "Hi." "Heya."
5) BOOM

It's a pretty straightforward relationship. A Commander to avoid this fate by staying permanently in space (boooring), or by being too difficult for asteroids to catch.

An ultra super mega fast rocket can make a great escape vehicle, but it leaves you permanently on the run against a target the comm can't defend. It's also putting two separate balancing points into one gantry- keeping your comm safe and giving access to space. You need a real escape option. Something that GTA might describe as "losing all your stars". As a separate tool it can be made perfectly suited to the task, without stepping on the other functions of the gantry.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When it comes to invading a world, there are many different "tiers" of invasion. You have:
- On the same planet (ride out and meet him)
- Between planet and orbit (where elevators and sats might reign supreme)
- Between planet and local planet (Unit cannons, comm rocket, nukes, local bases, etc.)
- Between nearby star systems (where transports, asteroid bases, etc. might work)
- Between vastly distant systems. (it is a scaling 40 player game, after all. )

Each scenario differs in one simple respect- distance. Getting closer to the enemy naturally gives you better base support and more options to invade. So the big questions with every option is:
- How many units can it move?
and
- How far can those units go?
and
- How fast can those units go?
and
- When can I expect reinforcements?
and
- How much does it cost?

Each option in this thread answers those questions in a different way:

• 
  A unit cannon says "Not many; not that far; pretty quick; soon; one time payment of $$$".
  A space elevator says "Tons; point blank; they're here; right now; one time payment of $$".
  A transport says "Lots; very far; bring something to read; you should probably build a base; 1 $$ per handful."
  An asteroid says "All of them; very far; kinda slow; includes its own base; as much $$$ as you want to spend"
  A rocket says "One; very far; pretty quick; BYOBuilder; 1 $/ea.".
  A galactic teleporter says "One; anywhere; any time; good luck; 1 $$$/ea".

If one option ends up completely superior, then there's no reason to have the lesser option. And any option can be tweaked and refined, of course. But there is a lot of room to create many niches for not just leaving a world, but making sure the next one doesn't stand a chance.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Wow, that's a really well thought out post Bobucles. I applaud you.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

I'm not quite getting the orbital elevator idea. It just seems to be fluff so that we don't have transports launching from the ground. Was there another use for them?

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Linking orbital platforms to the surface. And preventing transports from needing to land is not fluff. Planets are supposed to be "low ground," difficult to escape from without a big rocket or some other form of assistance.

I think personally I'm starting to lean more towards the "skyhook" concept, an orbital unit with a tractor beam to assist transports in escaping the gravity well.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

It is fluff since the unit's whole purpose is just as a middleman. A transport could just as easily launch from the so called low ground, simplifying the process. Instead you seem to want to put units on the orbital elevator, and then onto a transport. Am I missing something?

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

You're not missing anything. You may have skimmed over the reason I want to do it... I wrote that out as best as I can on the last page but I'll repost it here:

If you think it's fluff that's totally fine. Up to you. If the issue above doesn't bother you that's fine. Or if you have a less fluffy answer I am very open minded about it. I realize space elevators are a bit over complicated but I can't figure out an explanation for why transports wouldn't need giant booster rockets.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

It's a reasonable progression with one notable word of caution.

Space elevators. Not a new concept in Science Fiction, and a highly impractical one in a violent war setting like PA. For those of you unfamiliar with the mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson I recommend reading it. For those of you too lazy to do so, I'll skip to the relevant part in this discussion.

They built a space elevator (twice). And one faction chose to blow it up. The cable was cut (explosives) from the asteroid it was tethered to in space. The asteroid flew of into space uncontrollably. And the cable fell to Mars.

The cable, even relatively minimalistic and small was still long enough to wrap around the planet two and a half times and thick enough to have considerable mass behind it when it struck. The first wrap around struck with enough force that it vaporized itself on impact, leaving a brutal impact canyon. The remainder of the cable had slowed down enough that it struck with less force, and came down more or less intact, but still wrecked massive damage to the planet.

The hard truth to deal with here is that space elevators are fragile. And worse than that, they're very destructive when they are broken. Would you really risk building one of those during a war?

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

For the purpose of the game, I doubt they would be that tall or quite that destructive.

Anyway I understand that a massive cable-stayed tower sticking out into space is a bit ungainly. That's why I suggested more of an orbital satellite that lifts units via either tractor beam or teleport.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

Oh no! How ever will a scarred landscape compare against a completely vaporized world?

Oh right. These robots don't care about the untold destruction they're waging across the galaxy.

A space elevator, while handy for bringing things off world, is even more handy for bringing things back on. Just think of a giant doom pole, with hundreds of units sliding down and flooding the surface. It's straight out of a typical saturday morning cartoon. Perhaps it doesn't make too much sense, but it's a really cool way to invade.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

sorry i didn't read all of the posts, but i wanted to put in my 2 cents real quick.

I believe we could have a single use rocket as in the Concept, it would be best saved for the commander or engineers, the player can have several stages on a rocket that they can add, so they can either just launch the object into the orbit, launch it to a moon, launch it to another planet in the system May be different sizes of rocket depending on the atmosphere and size of the planet.

there could be a unit cannon or lighter rocket gantry that is cheaper than the one in the concept, such a thing can only launch units into orbit where they can be caught by orbital transporters with a catchers mitt. or on a airless moon could launch units to the air-filled planet, unlike the concept however there would need to be a heat shield system.

the main advantage of the rocket and unit cannon ideas is that while generally expensive they are fast and hard to detect.

I believe the second main option is a 2 tiered transport system, specialized air transports can be carried in orbital transporters, the orbital transporters can't land as they have no heat shield but the air transports do have a heat shield so they can enter a planets atmosphere, pick up units and fly back up to the orbital transporters, the air transports have boosters that can carry them into the exosphere with the orbitals, but cannot properly fly through space this is probably the best system for transporting entire armies. while the rockets and unit cannon are good for the commander and small strike forces.

a space elevator is an interesting prospect, but would be very expensive and vulnerable, as it could be easily spotted from space and sniped, best to keep sniping to a minimum, i would suggest the space elevator be a prospect only for protected planets.

I would also keep teleportation as an option though probably an expensive 1, Tractor beaming should be 1 way and not let units go down.

landing units i think is equally challenging especially on planets and moons that lack atmosphere. as do you need the air component or will you even be allowed it how close can an orbital get to a planet with no atmosphere, how far out can air get on the same token. as i stated you should only be able to enter a planet if you have a heat shield or if you are teleporting. and furthermore how do you keep a player from landing a huge army next to a commander for a quick snipe without keeping the player from landing. certainly we should be able to land an army on a planet but equally important is having that option not blocked out entirely and not able to land exactly anywhere (again next to the enemy behind his lines).

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

You're in for a treat!

Check out the ACU snipes thread for everything on that. Basically, Comm sniping is a problem the Comm needs to solve on his own. It's not a huge factor for invasion.

Re: The three ease levels of getting out of the gravity well

The orbital grav lift (that's what I'm calling the satellite that pulls units up from now on) is far simpler as it only requires one unit, and not two in conjuction. Plus the unit cannon is probably a super-unit and therefore is probably too expensive to be a standard method for getting units off-world.

This isn't a bad idea, and it's something I've thought about. But the reason orbital transports wouldn't be able to land is because of the gravity, not the heat.

But again, the orbital grav lift is far simpler.

Making it an orbital space station with a grav lift, instead of a super tall structure, defeats these problems.

Why not?

1. ground based anti-orbital weapons.
2. anti-air would be able to hit units as they descend.
3. if you surround your comm with proper defense, the landing units will be blown to bits in an instant before they have a chance to snipe anything.

Resurrecting this old thread.
I know that we are a month away from the scheduled release and deep in beta but I would like to throw out an idea I had here based on recently learning about the upcoming "gates". I love that PA has simple newtonian weaponry and physics. Artillery, tanks, planes, missiles, the upcoming unit cannon, even orbital movement are all based on coventional physics models. Theres no SciFi fluff (levitation, plasma weapons, shields, etc) and the game is better for it. So suddenly we will have Stargates? ... Why?

A solution that would solve the need for large volume movement of units could be a super expensive skyhook structure (that is also a factory with some defensive orbital guns like the orbital fighters have, that builds the orbital units at a reduced cost as no rocket would be needed to launch each unit). It would also be able to build a large orbital transport dropship and could theoretically allow a small army of units be built on planet surface, quickly load onto the dropship(s) via the skyhook and then the dropship(s) could fly across the solar system & "rain" the units down en masse onto another planet. A system like this would keep the newtonian mechanics feel of PA, hold true to the idea of movement in & out of gravity wells being challenging and costly, keeping the orbital layer separate but accessable, and solve the need for large volume unit movement around a solar system. Thoughts?