So, from about 6 months ago when me, Kovin, Orakio, Azaremoth, Aegis, and others started working on FF, to the point when we stopped, the general consensus of the community was that nobody wanted to play a TA based mod made up of big aircraft on large water maps filled with pseudo asteroids.
Since then, creative modders have shown us that lua can be used to create gameplay that is arbitrarily different from the traditional TA style. So, now that Kovin has returned, I would like to poll the community regarding whether or not a Final Frontier based project should be continued, and how the devs should proceed about it.
Please vote, and feel free to submit any relevant ideas to this discussion.
Final Frontier Ressurection?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
By the way, IF this generates enough response, we would like to get an lua coder to help us. Aegis, I know you helped us implement morphing last time, and I'd like you to join us again, if you have time.
Otherwise, we could put our team back together with our old modeler and texturer, etc.
Otherwise, we could put our team back together with our old modeler and texturer, etc.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
If you bring in objective based play and customizable weapons, I'll sign on to help. I can do a lot of necessary support work, the S44 team will vouch for that.
I think you should add a third resource, however. Morale or unity - used to force conscription of minor units or speed production. An entirely different dynamic from the norm, able to augment build-power or possibly purchase new forces from the non-combat sector.
I think you should add a third resource, however. Morale or unity - used to force conscription of minor units or speed production. An entirely different dynamic from the norm, able to augment build-power or possibly purchase new forces from the non-combat sector.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
one of our blocks was the inability to edit most unit attributes on the fly with lua 
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Do you have a preliminary design document?
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Not at the moment, but I think it might as well be time to start it. Before we continue any further, I would like to finalize some main points. Neddie, please give me your input on this.
First of all, we continue the theme of TA in space, and design our units accordingly. That said, our economic system should incorporate the TA elements of Energy and Metal, but I'd rather not have them be used in the same manner as say BA or CA.
Economy should come in three parts: Energy, Metal, and Moral or some other named meta-resource.
Energy should continue to be produced and used in the style of OTA: it powers factories, units, weapons, etc, and can be produced everywhere using designated structures. However, I'd like to shift its usage away from unit production, and more towards powering units. All non-energy production units require e to stay powered on. If you e stall, your ships will stop moving, firing, etc, and your factories will stop functioning entirely, as will your defenses.
Metal can be produced by capturing planets/asteroids. I'm debating between purely using THIS-like, or having extractors figure into the picture somehow.
Moral influences your build-power, tech level, and even unit limit. It can either directly influence the nano power of your construction units and shipyards, or it can place a limit on the number of factories/nanotowers/constructors you can operate. You might need a certain level of moral before being able to tech. You gain moral by gaining territory, capturing planets, holding asteroids, etc. If you've ever played Rise of Nations, you'll remember how your nation's strength influences the size of its borders, which can be seen visually. I'd like to have the same system implemented.
This is my idea for changing the core of everything from economy to gameplay:
For each FF space map, you have features and free space. Features include stuff like asteroids, space stations, planets, stars, and maybe nebulae. Everything else is free space. My policy for free space is influenced by the territory control system of RoN games, while features are influenced by the Star Trek: Armada series of games.
Both features and free space can be captured and held by players/teams. Features would be capturedby simply moving your units to it for a period of time (time should scale with feature size/importance). Free space, on the otherhand, is held and lost depending on your influence. For example, by building an orbital battlestation somewhere on your frontline in free space, you extend your influence around a region that is calculated based on the range and firepower of said battlestation. You are then free to build structures in your held region of freespace. This also applies to units: if you have a massive fleet in one area of freespace, you exert influence over an area proportional to the range and firepower of whatever constitutes said fleet. If either lose your battlestation or you move your fleet away from that region, you consequently lose your influence, and that region of free space becomes neutral, or your enemy's depending on their level of influence.
In original FF, structures are divided into those buildable on either terrain (asteroids, space stations) or free space. The new system will continue to distinguish between these two types of structures, except now you must own the territory you wish to build on, be it a feature or freespace.
Resource wise, free space provides you with area to build economic structures such as solar arrays and factories. Holding freespace will also give you moral. It's possible that metal makers will still be available, although it will certainly be disadvantageous to run a metal maker economy.
Features will provide a fantastic variety of different benefits, all of which will make them an essential part of your strategy. Asteroids provide metal deposits, which can be extracted normally. Planets can be captured, and then farmed using orbital space stations. After building an orbital station, you begin to gradually increase a planet's % utilization. As this % increases, your planet outputs more and more resources for you (energy, metal, and moral). You can build only one station per planet, but each station can be upgraded multiple times for either economic, or military purposes. Nebulae might offer special bonuses (or negative effects) to the units inside them. They might "heal" units, or damage them. Stars influence your output of energy: building solar arrays closer to stars increases their output. Captured stars might allow you to build an orbiting station as well. Space stations function like giant mega-units you can capture and use. They might come with prebuilt defenses, nanotowers, and resource generation, as well as offering you terrain to build structures.
Capturing and holding feature and freespace is critical to winning the game.
Your resources and your unit control flows freely so long as there is controlled area between your units, structures, and captured features. If, for example, an enemy fleet cuts in between two areas of your territory, or surrounds one of your asteroids, etc, you might lose control of the units in that area. This is similar to KDR's FIBRE: if there are no energy generating structures in that area, then all your isolate units lose power. If you lose all of your influential structures (defenses, battlestations), then you lose control over your economic structures, which become free for the enemy to capture. I'm debating whether or not to include structures that provide a remote uplink with your base, to share resources and control. This way, you can still build an isolated stealth base, surrounded by enemy territory.
First of all, we continue the theme of TA in space, and design our units accordingly. That said, our economic system should incorporate the TA elements of Energy and Metal, but I'd rather not have them be used in the same manner as say BA or CA.
Economy should come in three parts: Energy, Metal, and Moral or some other named meta-resource.
Energy should continue to be produced and used in the style of OTA: it powers factories, units, weapons, etc, and can be produced everywhere using designated structures. However, I'd like to shift its usage away from unit production, and more towards powering units. All non-energy production units require e to stay powered on. If you e stall, your ships will stop moving, firing, etc, and your factories will stop functioning entirely, as will your defenses.
Metal can be produced by capturing planets/asteroids. I'm debating between purely using THIS-like, or having extractors figure into the picture somehow.
Moral influences your build-power, tech level, and even unit limit. It can either directly influence the nano power of your construction units and shipyards, or it can place a limit on the number of factories/nanotowers/constructors you can operate. You might need a certain level of moral before being able to tech. You gain moral by gaining territory, capturing planets, holding asteroids, etc. If you've ever played Rise of Nations, you'll remember how your nation's strength influences the size of its borders, which can be seen visually. I'd like to have the same system implemented.
This is my idea for changing the core of everything from economy to gameplay:
For each FF space map, you have features and free space. Features include stuff like asteroids, space stations, planets, stars, and maybe nebulae. Everything else is free space. My policy for free space is influenced by the territory control system of RoN games, while features are influenced by the Star Trek: Armada series of games.
Both features and free space can be captured and held by players/teams. Features would be capturedby simply moving your units to it for a period of time (time should scale with feature size/importance). Free space, on the otherhand, is held and lost depending on your influence. For example, by building an orbital battlestation somewhere on your frontline in free space, you extend your influence around a region that is calculated based on the range and firepower of said battlestation. You are then free to build structures in your held region of freespace. This also applies to units: if you have a massive fleet in one area of freespace, you exert influence over an area proportional to the range and firepower of whatever constitutes said fleet. If either lose your battlestation or you move your fleet away from that region, you consequently lose your influence, and that region of free space becomes neutral, or your enemy's depending on their level of influence.
In original FF, structures are divided into those buildable on either terrain (asteroids, space stations) or free space. The new system will continue to distinguish between these two types of structures, except now you must own the territory you wish to build on, be it a feature or freespace.
Resource wise, free space provides you with area to build economic structures such as solar arrays and factories. Holding freespace will also give you moral. It's possible that metal makers will still be available, although it will certainly be disadvantageous to run a metal maker economy.
Features will provide a fantastic variety of different benefits, all of which will make them an essential part of your strategy. Asteroids provide metal deposits, which can be extracted normally. Planets can be captured, and then farmed using orbital space stations. After building an orbital station, you begin to gradually increase a planet's % utilization. As this % increases, your planet outputs more and more resources for you (energy, metal, and moral). You can build only one station per planet, but each station can be upgraded multiple times for either economic, or military purposes. Nebulae might offer special bonuses (or negative effects) to the units inside them. They might "heal" units, or damage them. Stars influence your output of energy: building solar arrays closer to stars increases their output. Captured stars might allow you to build an orbiting station as well. Space stations function like giant mega-units you can capture and use. They might come with prebuilt defenses, nanotowers, and resource generation, as well as offering you terrain to build structures.
Capturing and holding feature and freespace is critical to winning the game.
Your resources and your unit control flows freely so long as there is controlled area between your units, structures, and captured features. If, for example, an enemy fleet cuts in between two areas of your territory, or surrounds one of your asteroids, etc, you might lose control of the units in that area. This is similar to KDR's FIBRE: if there are no energy generating structures in that area, then all your isolate units lose power. If you lose all of your influential structures (defenses, battlestations), then you lose control over your economic structures, which become free for the enemy to capture. I'm debating whether or not to include structures that provide a remote uplink with your base, to share resources and control. This way, you can still build an isolated stealth base, surrounded by enemy territory.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Ianmac, one of our team members before we faded, had started work for me on a multi-purpose space station. This was to be the command station, the center of your base. It was planned to be necessary for everything from unit production, to teching. Here's some preliminary model work he'd done, though he's disappeared now, so I don't know what's become of it. 
ianmac wrote:ok here they are the nano come out of the spikes in the middle and the weapens type the supper weapen is floatting on a fores field projected by the four talist spikes, thats the idea I want but if the supper weapen is off I can change it. And it also has a satalit cluster of middle of the road Rail guns.
weapens
ship yard
sensore
resorse
hope you like it.
-
smokingwreckage
- Posts: 327
- Joined: 09 Apr 2005, 11:40
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
I liked FF. It had huge guns and fighter swarms, my two most favourite things ever.
I'd be happy to see it pick up a RoN inspired territorial-control system, but just as happy to see it working!
I'd be happy to see it pick up a RoN inspired territorial-control system, but just as happy to see it working!
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
If you're doing something completely different why associate it with FF at all?
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
It's not completely different. It's still going to be Arm and Core fighters and starships battling for control of the universe. Albeit, the rules are a little different this time around.KDR_11k wrote:If you're doing something completely different why associate it with FF at all?
Speaking of which, would you mind helping us with your expertise in the area of lua?
-
Tribulexrenamed
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
REVENGE wrote:By the way, IF this generates enough response, we would like to get an lua coder to help us. Aegis, I know you helped us implement morphing last time, and I'd like you to join us again, if you have time.
Otherwise, we could put our team back together with our old modeler and texturer, etc.
Revenge please talk to me about this.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Heh, kindof ironic that now I actually have skills to start coding this, but much of the team has either disappeared or has diverted their attention to other things.
So from the polls, it seems that people want the TA-in-space theme, except with customizable ships and weapons. These will probably be kept as the core elements then. Objective based gameplay I'll leave to mappers, with the availability of map options and whatnot.
So from the polls, it seems that people want the TA-in-space theme, except with customizable ships and weapons. These will probably be kept as the core elements then. Objective based gameplay I'll leave to mappers, with the availability of map options and whatnot.
-
Tribulexrenamed
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Me and some other people were playing FF the other day, its fun. Gotta love EMP destroyers.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
don't call it FF, it isn't FF.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
BF/GF it is then. The only mod that can make out with itself!
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Is this possible now?aegis wrote:one of our blocks was the inability to edit most unit attributes on the fly with lua
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
to my understanding it has long been possible.
Re: Final Frontier Ressurection?
Are you saying:smoth wrote:don't call it FF, it isn't FF.
1. We can't call it FF because we didn't make the original mod or get permission from the original modder
2. It's becoming less and less of what the original FF was, so calling it FF would be misleading
3. Something else