Jam3 Jam3

A real Solar System

A real Solar System

Well I am a bit dissapointed. I thought from reading up on this game that the solar systems and star layouts would be somewhat realistic. I can say that its a bit better than some games but overall lacking.

Why are FPS games so popular? Because the recreate environments with painstaking detail. A city block has all the things youd expect to find on a city block. A mailbox, a storm drain, stores, litter, pedestrians, shops, apartment buildings, the sounds, a wind kicks up some litter, etc. All of these things make the suspension of disbelief easier and immerses you into the game.

What are space games lacking? Why have the fallen out of popularity? Because no designer thinks about immersing the player in space! I mean we all know what the basic layout of a solar system looks like. Planets, moons, stars, binary star systems, trinary star systems, asteroid belts, comets and magnificient things like black holes feeding off a companion binary star, can you imagine what that would like like from a close by planet? With recent dicoveries we also know that gas giants can be right next to stars! Not all solar systems follow the layout of our own in terms of planet order from the sun. This is not to mention Orbital and ecliptic behavior. And what do we get in our space games? Skyboxes, planetary layout done at a whim making no sense whatsoever to how solar systems work (I am not just talking about sins here), and uninspired nebulae on the skboxes (not even attempts at some of the really fascinating stuff out there. Typically no moons, no orbits, no trajectories, no asteroid belts, no ringed planets, no SPACE!

The days are long gone, except for a brand new gamer, where we could have a skybox and feel immersed, its like we still playing doom where all we get are flat 3d polygons and some textures.

Now for sins I am not expecting them to rewrite the game or to add all the stuff that would make it like space but you can do some things with the current engine to help us suspend our disbelief and get immersed in the game.

1) Layout the planets in solar systems like one would expect if looking at a solar system, planets lying on the ecliptic and sometimes with vast distances between one another. Add some Gas giants! Would be great destinations for miner ships. Put the asteroids in belts! Dont put terran worlds all over the place there is only a certain area where a terran world could possible evolve in any given solar system. Ice planets should be far out volcanic close in, desert should be near the terran, etc, etc. Just have it make a little bit of sense.

2) More stars, more solar systems, less objects in each solar system. I really was wondering if the solar systems in the game where meant to feel like solar systems or galaxies! Only the presence of a single star confirmed they were solar systems. You barely even move the map around cause there are so many objects in your own solar system that you just kind of focus there. Travel intra solar and extra solar should be markedly different. The travel times in phase space take FOREVER extra solar.

It should also be fairly rare that 2 empires start in the same solar system, let alone 5 or 6, the chance of having two worlds capable of supporting sentient life in a single solar system is infintescimal.

3) Space is black unless your in a gas cloud. There should be enough ways to do lighting on ships and lighting from the primary star in a system and reflection of that light from planetary bodies to light up the view so we can see whats going on. Not to mention the skybox having some nebulae, gas clouds, stars of course, and maybe some other interesting stellar phenomena. Could the game get anymore orange?

4) Zoom out. The max zoom out is just kind of weird, if you add more solar systems the view should zoom out further to a point where you can see a labeled view of all the star systems. It should really cool at this view like your looking at a sector of a galaxy.

I am not asking for orbiter, I am not asking for perfect scales or for them to try and put in real orbits and trajectories, nor include every type of asrtnomical body that we know about. I am just asking that they try and make space feel like space as we know it and at least give that a better shot than pretty much every single other space game that ever made it to market. Will a developer please just once actually give this shot?
26,912 views 46 replies
Reply #26 Top
I have yet to test that theory as I do not know how to change my race icon color...


Just hit back then next at the game creation screen over and over until you get the color you want (it's random).
Reply #27 Top

I have yet to test that theory as I do not know how to change my race icon color...


Just hit back then next at the game creation screen over and over until you get the color you want (it's random).




oh haha thats what I have been doing, I thought there was an official way to do it...
Reply #28 Top
It was mentioned here somewhere the background color has to do with your race icon color... I have yet to test that theory as I do not know how to change my race icon color...


Interesting idea, but no, the background color has no connection to your race icon color.

Of what I saw the tactical RTS combat it looked . .Cramped . . ships where big and very closely packed .


I am not certain how to address this one. Personally, I never had a sense of 'Crampness' in the game, aside from the icon representations. Some of the screenshots were from heavily modded game. Perhaps they are showing a false representation? I don't know. Anyone else have similar feelings on this one?
Reply #29 Top
If I have 5 capital ships and about 15 frigates they seem to like to smoosh into a good size pile, especially once they exit phase space at a new planet, they sorta ram into each other, lol...
Reply #30 Top
I don't see a problem with the realistic solar systems... From the screens I guess we can always imagine those are not solar systems but whole galaxies and what you see in them are the only noteworthy solar systems, represented by their "main" planet.
Reply #31 Top
i dont get a cramped feeling the thing i find hard is you are always fighting on someones turf. one person or another has "home field advantage". there does not seem to be any neutral territory to draw your enemy into a fight. i am however at a loss on how to correct this.
Reply #32 Top
I am not certain how to address this one. Personally, I never had a sense of 'Crampness' in the game, aside from the icon representations. Some of the screenshots were from heavily modded game. Perhaps they are showing a false representation? I don't know. Anyone else have similar feelings on this one?


I get the opposite impression; all my space battles feel very spread out. Later game, this changes a little, and as I get larger fleets, they group closer, but they never seem too crowded.
Reply #33 Top
I don't see a problem with the realistic solar systems... From the screens I guess we can always imagine those are not solar systems but whole galaxies and what you see in them are the only noteworthy solar systems, represented by their "main" planet.


Ehhhh....We could, but that argument flies out the window when there is only one star(unless you wanted to make that star fracking huge or turn it into a blackhole[oooh please Ironclad PLEASE(that'd be funny! "sir! We can't escape the gravity well of the system?" "WHY?" "There's a blackhole in the way!" heehee)

Anyways, due to how its set up the 'realistic' system is supported by those of us who want to see the SOTS system but just more focused and large.(That is how SOTS did there solar system deal, you only went to the planet of most interest, which isn't what I'd do...I want to be able to build stuff by Gas Giants, etc.)

A Realistic universe would look amazing, but it'd eat resources and as the devs have stated, they'd rather have fun than realism, and I honestly do understand that. They recognize that several of us enjoy the large long games, but they do have to make it a "mass-market" game that'll draw more than the fanboi fanatics.

I'm glad to hear though that they did START with that idea, because it means they've left it in as a small possibility for us to mod it in ourselves and will leave the door open for them to know how popular that really is for possible expansions or supported optional "patches" that would dump back in all that 'realism' they started with.


Edit- apologies for turning the topic back to the original, had to...
Reply #34 Top

I don't see a problem with the realistic solar systems... From the screens I guess we can always imagine those are not solar systems but whole galaxies and what you see in them are the only noteworthy solar systems, represented by their "main" planet.


That's what I've been doing. And the star is merely the center of the galaxy. Not necessarily a black hole though.


...real-gravity... Infact a lot of the code to support these systems are still in the game. The reason they were taken out...



So this means the whole sling shotting your ships around a planet to catch up with another fleet is gone? If so, that's too bad, because that actually adds tactical value to the game when you can use gravity like that. That is definitely a feature that should have the option to use or not. Even though I realize the CPU power required, it would definately add the "T" to your 4XRTS.
Reply #35 Top

So this means the whole sling shotting your ships around a planet to catch up with another fleet is gone? If so, that's too bad, because that actually adds tactical value to the game when you can use gravity like that. That is definitely a feature that should have the option to use or not. Even though I realize the CPU power required, it would definately add the "T" to your 4XRTS.

This part hasn't been cut though it isn't functional in beta 1 for unrelated reasons.

Reply #36 Top
That's what I've been doing. And the star is merely the center of the galaxy. Not necessarily a black hole though.


Exactly.
Reply #37 Top
"A Realistic universe would look amazing, but it'd eat resources and as the devs have stated, they'd rather have fun than realism,"

This does not follow . . .I have played games with "realistically" Scaled and some with variuos hybrids of “realistic” and "manageable" (read SLIGHTLY foreshortened for quick game play) 10+ years ago! This is NOT a computer resource problem at all.
If the tactical part of the game turns into just another RTS but with “space as water” and “Space ships as navel ships” (even with some minor z axis movement) I really have to say why bother having it. If the units are all bumping each other and crowded in a ball fighting another cluster of units and > number and tech = win . . again been there done that. (what about formations, weapon ranges/coverage, sensors, and all sorts of tactical movements and alternitives), Look what Moo3 Said they where going to do and actually executed . . . owch!
Could from what I have seen . . . it looks ok, but uninspired and possibly boring in rather short order. . . But this IS an early beta and things are in development. But what we do need in this continuing development is a sense of a battle group attacking a planetary system . . not a bunch of units half hazardly attacking a ultra “geebee” sized representation of a system. That would really being people over . . . including me.
Reply #38 Top


As a compromise, our intention was to provide some customization options in the galaxy creation screen (currently you can only modify stars, planets and artifacts). For example we already have code to organize the planets by type and we could put a check box in that area if there was enough support for it. Even if we don't add a particular element you are interested in in the customization screen, many of the elements you want are easily modded into the game.


As sci-fi buff I wouldn personally love to get it as accurate as possible so I appreciate these comments and that is part of what betas are for. If anyone has any ideas that strike a healthy balance between gameplay and simulation we do want to hear from you.





First off, great job so far. I'm very impressed with the paucity of bugs I've found.



I think you will make most people happy (w.r.t. realism) by simply lowering the minimum number of planetoids in each star system in a custom galaxy (the current minimum of twenty is way too high). This will solve the biggest complaint about realism that has been posted over and over again. It really is quite laughable to see several terran-type planets all suspended at about the same place in a star system.

However, I think there are some additional things that can be done to make Sins both more fun and more realistic:

1.) For each galaxy setting, increase the number of stars and greatly decrease the number of planets in each star system.

2.) Make interstellar travel be a somewhat later-game technology and increase the interstellar speed by a moderate margin.

3.) Late game quick jump calculation research should provide a MUCH GREATER decrease in the time it takes to jump from planet to planet. Way too much time is spent in the late game just waiting for your massive fleet to hop from planet to planet to planet.

4.) Some structures in a planet's gravity well (for example, the metal/crystal mines) should orbit around the planet.

5.) Replace some of the metal/crystal asteroids with spherical moons. Give these moons a variety of moon textures (with impact craters) and a variety of sizes.

6.) Increase the variety of sizes for planets.

7.) Increase the size of a star and it's gravity well.

I'm perfectly willing to give up on the colonization of the moon's of gas giants.


Also, a side note: I have enjoyed the planetary bombardment graphics. I'm hoping that the other races have different planetary bombardment methods complete with their own unique planetary bombardment graphical effect. It will get very boring if in every game you watch the same nuclear bomb bombardment over and over and over again.



Please let me know if anything I've said is unclear.
Reply #39 Top
2.) Make interstellar travel be a somewhat later-game technology and increase the interstellar speed by a moderate margin.

I agree with this, it should at least be a level 3-4 technology!
Reply #40 Top
I agree with Jams basic premise and I think Ironclad would do well to face it and think what they can realistically do about it.

That is the main reason why I made the post entitled "Celestial Icons, thoughts".

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/?forumid=440&aid=148904

in which I made some suggestions about how to handle the icons and look of the star systems.



I know Ironclad have worked on icons and have established a change with zoom-range system which does work nicely, but to my first impression (which I still think is a fair assessment) they are not even half way to finished, that is just one job out of several that need to be done to get the look right, the current artwork looks like place holders. You need to know this, you will thank us for it oneday.

Reply #41 Top
Erring on the side of realism in relation to scale and physics sounds great to me.

But if that can't be done, at least leave us the modding tools to do so ourselves.
Reply #42 Top
You know, I do find the idea of relating your Icon color to your background color interesting. I hate being the same colour as I ahve a hard time seeing my ships. Others have compalined; while not currently in game maybe you should consider addiing this type of feature in.
Reply #43 Top
oh, another thing:

8.) Increase the size of capital ships by a moderate margin.
Reply #44 Top
how about tech for all jump lanes in and out of system and then you have to build gates in both grav. wells for it to be put in place
Reply #45 Top
There is an old independent game that actually creates a real galaxy in a real-time strategy environment. That game is Far-Gate by superxstudios and it employed the real-life view of how a galaxy operated. Examples; the sun provided light for the galaxy, planets and other objects realistically orbited large gravity wells, small objects like asteroids could collide and change orbit, player units were not an exception to the laws of physics in the galaxy, etc. The reason this game was not sought after is because its interface was bad, it had a bad storyline, and the game took long to learn. Look at this game's engine for inspiration if you like it is the best example I have.

game url:
WWW Link
Reply #46 Top
I can understand how having multiple species in one solar system fits the background, but I don't think that should tie up custom matches. I feel custom games would be a much more compelling experience if it used something similar to Gal Civ 2, a balance of positions with some randomness thrown in. Or if you prefer a check box to switch between the two modes.

As far as objects in a solar system, it would be nice if that was configurable also, or if it won't just tone it down a little and add more solar systems.