Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
luotinen

Registered:
Posts: 48
Reply with quote  #1 
We played with a group of five and I collected and aggregated feedback from each chair. I don't necessarily agree to all the points, but I promised to relay them as they were given.

Quote:

- The buttons should be also available from keyboard so that they can be bound to joystick buttons.

pupbrad

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 889
Reply with quote  #2 
They are. They can be set in the controls.ini file in the Artemis folder. I fly helm through a PS3 controller [smile]
__________________
Captain of the USN Basroil.
"I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar." - Hoban Washburne
"Give me a ship to fly and I'll make it sit up and beg, roll over (but NEVER play dead), and even do the jitterbug if you so fancy." - Unknown
savanik

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #3 
Nifty!

From our side of the galaxy, Helm would like the 'engine' slider result in speed that is constrained by the power from engineering, and not scaled by it. So if he sets Warp 1, he can rely on going at most Warp 1.

I believe at one point he flicked it to warp 1, complained out loud about the lack of power while ramping it up to warp 4 to get the ship moving a little tiny bit, and then let out a girly scream as Engineering applied full power to the engines and we zipped through two minefields and an asteroid belt unexpectedly. [smile]
Impaler

Registered:
Posts: 131
Reply with quote  #4 
Can't agree with you more savanik, speed should not scale like that, neither should turning rates.  Helms should just see a lengthening of all the bars in question to show that they have that space available to use if they wish.  I recall reading that their was some kind of 'efficiency' difference between warp 1 with high power vs warp 4 with low power but it is not very intuitive, I'd just make higher warp speeds progressively less efficient in terms of energy expended per unit distance.
pupbrad

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 889
Reply with quote  #5 
I actually completely agree here. I think that helm should have the OPTION to have engineering affect speed of the ship, but not normally affect it if the helm doesnt want him/her to. I've had way too many times when I'm warping and engineering gives a sudden boost to warp. Because of this, I tend to play with the house rule of engineering doesn't touch warp unless ordered to by me or the captain.

Also, impaler, that is how warp works. As you go up in speed, the energy spent per unit of distance traveled gets higher, even if you decrease power to warp.

__________________
Captain of the USN Basroil.
"I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar." - Hoban Washburne
"Give me a ship to fly and I'll make it sit up and beg, roll over (but NEVER play dead), and even do the jitterbug if you so fancy." - Unknown
dakkadakka

Registered:
Posts: 49
Reply with quote  #6 
I like the way it is now, as it forces crew members to communicate with each other. I unfortunately have been guilty of goosing warp power about the same time that the helmsman engaged warp 3, and we took a mine up the nose with no shields. These kinds of experiences are the stuff of grand tales told long after the mission; and, IMHO, are what Artemis is all about.
luotinen

Registered:
Posts: 48
Reply with quote  #7 
Summary:

Extra speed:

This should enable warps 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 instead of multiplying the current warp. The current way causes Engineering to control speed, but it should be a Helm task. Examples:

Current way:
Helm sets warp 4 and ship goes at warp 4. Engineering gives 300 % to warp and the ship goes warp 9.

Suggested way:
Helm sets warp 4 and ship goes at warp 4. Engineering gives 300 % to warp and Helm receives new warp speeds up to warp 9, but ship still travels at warp 4 unless Helm increases speed. This would promote cooperation between Helm and Engineering. Buttons 1-9 should be bound to real warp speeds 1-9.

Extra maneuverability:

Using the same analogue: the extra maneuver should extend the maneuver sliders rather than multiplying the setting. Examples:

Current way:
Helm sets max turn to port and ship slowly turns to port. Engineering increases Maneuver and ship turning speed increases.

Suggested way:
Helm sets max turn to port and ship slowly turns to port. Engineering increases Maneuver and the Maneuver slider grows. Ship turning speed is unaffected unless Helm utilizes the extra maneuver.
Zacharyah

Registered:
Posts: 77
Reply with quote  #8 
I like this idea. Currently the speed of warp 1-4 is variable, where in the star trek universe they were absolutes. The engineer shouldn't have control over the speed of the ship, he should have control over the maximum speed the ship can go
rothestar

Registered:
Posts: 24
Reply with quote  #9 
Hi

im new to artemis.. played the demo for an hour and liked is so i bought it...

The last entry is from 2013, but the issue has not yet been addressed??

best regards
Henrik
Denmark

__________________
github: https://github.com/rothestar/Danish-Artemis-bridge-build/wiki
Aramond

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #10 
Hey rothestar!

No, this has never been changed. I'm not sure I'd call it an issue, though. There are those, including myself, that have no issue with the way things work now.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #11 
Well, personally I have always seen the controls of the ship to be like the accelerator of a car. You don't "dial in" 60 mph and the car goes to that speed, you constantly have to maintain the position of the accelerator to achieve that speed. It's the difference between absolute control via the Helm, and relative control. And we don't really know how the controls on Star Trek worked.

I think it is important that the Engineer coordinate closely with the Captain and Helm. The sliders aren't just a toy for the Engineer to play with while other crew handle battling the enemy. The Engineer is responsible for making all of the other consoles play better, and communicating when and how he is boosting power is part of his job.
User McUser

Registered:
Posts: 123
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryleyra
You don't "dial in" 60 mph and the car goes to that speed, you constantly have to maintain the position of the accelerator to achieve that speed.


You don't have "Cruise Control" in your car? [biggrin]

I have no idea how the Warp Drive in Artemis is supposed to "work" but as far as I can tell the theory of the *controls* is based on the sort of throttles you see in old-school sailing ships that had a finite number of pre-sets that would be relayed to the engine room (eg: Like the one shown here <-Link) rather than the navigator having direct control of the engine output as one has with a car. The navigator is setting the throttle but some other system actually adjusts the drive output.

In Star Trek there is a pseudo-science/technobabble explanation involving power efficiency curves and warp-field dynamics that lends itself to a stair-stepping power curve of peaks and troughs that nicely delineate the different "Warp Factors."
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by User McUser

You don't have "Cruise Control" in your car? [biggrin]


Well, yeah, but you still have to achieve the intended speed and turn on cruise control to lock it. You can "bump" up or down the speed, but it's relative to the current speed. Although, most modern cruise controls do keep speed constant as you go up or down hill, so it is locking to the actual speed, and not the throttle position.

I'm thinking more about something like a Nitrous Oxide boost, though. You activate that, and the car suddenly lurches forward and starts going MUCH faster. You can compensate by letting up on the accelerator, but you don't suddenly add more travel to the accelerator.

Quote:
I have no idea how the Warp Drive in Artemis is supposed to "work" but as far as I can tell the theory of the *controls* is based on the sort of throttles you see in old-school sailing ships that had a finite number of pre-sets that would be relayed to the engine room (eg: Like the one shown here <-Link) rather than the navigator having direct control of the engine output as one has with a car. The navigator is setting the throttle but some other system actually adjusts the drive output.


Actually, that's a great example. Of course, in those days the dial actually didn't control anything, it was up to the engineer to read the dial and set the steam engines to the specified speed. Sailing ships didn't even have that much, you either sailed with the wind, which means you went as fast as the speed of the wind, or you sailed at an angle to it, in which case you sailed at a percentage of the wind speed. Even today, adjusting your speed takes adjusting the sails, which means you have to issue verbal commands to the crew.

Except for the fact that you have four "wind speeds", that might be a good way to visualize Warp Drive. When you engage Warp, you're carried along by the wave in space/time, and have no control over it except for how the engines are "tuned" to "catch the wave".

Conversely, Star Trek appeared to be able to attain fractions of Warp Factors with no problem, so I don't think the technology is a one-for-one comparison. Just for starters, Star Trek's Warp Factor is an cubic progression, while Artemis's Warp is linear. 

User McUser

Registered:
Posts: 123
Reply with quote  #14 
Well technically in space there's really no resistance to your forward momentum, so once you get up to speed you should be able to turn off the engines and coast until you need to slow down again.

I imagine in the future that sub-light engine fuel will be measured in relative units called "Delta-V", calculated for each vessel based on engine power and total mass. Each "Delta-V" represents the amount of fuel needed to change (Δ) a specific ship's velocity (V) by one velocity unit since that's the only way to have any control over your ship.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by User McUser
Well technically in space there's really no resistance to your forward momentum, so once you get up to speed you should be able to turn off the engines and coast until you need to slow down again.


Well, technically it shouldn't be possible to go faster than the speed of light, so you would have to accelerate to about 99.999999% of the speed of light and then turn off the engines and coast to your destination. Of course, because of the time dilation you would think you only took about a year to get to whatever star, but once you got there hundreds of thousands of years would have passed.

Going faster than the speed of light is just conjecture, and we have no idea how the actual physics involved would work. However, Warp Drive in Star Trek does not have inertia. When the warp engines shut down, the ship stops. Warp Drive does appear to have some momentum, as it takes time to accelerate and come to a stop, but forward "thrust" is required to maintain speed. It may be more properly described as the fabric of space providing a "friction" in the opposite direction of the Warp travel.

Impulse in Artemis appears to also lack inertia, as loss of Impulse power causes the ship to slow, and eventually stop. However, this may be an automated "governor" imposed as a safety mechanism by the drive system, just as the "top speed" of the ship is restricted by safety and practicality, not physical limits. It should be noted that even with no energy, the ship can still move at impulse speeds.

Quote:
I imagine in the future that sub-light engine fuel will be measured in relative units called "Delta-V", calculated for each vessel based on engine power and total mass. Each "Delta-V" represents the amount of fuel needed to change (Δ) a specific ship's velocity (V) by one velocity unit since that's the only way to have any control over your ship.


Going back to Star Trek again, it appears as if Impulse drive uses a negligible amount of power compared to Warp drive. A ship seems to be able to regenerate enough power to travel at Impulse indefinitely. (Again, like Artemis, where you don't need energy to travel at Impulse) Star Trek seems to limit sublight travel to about 10% of the speed of light, in order to avoid time dilation effects. Faster speeds are possible, say if the Warp Drive is crippled and you have to get to the nearest star, but it's avoided except in emergencies.

Star Trek's Impulse Drive also wasn't very realistic, although at least there was an intentional effort not to show any kind of conventional "rocket exhaust". It would probably be better to use Babylon 5 as an example, because it had much more realistic movement in space, using conventional (if highly advanced) thrusters.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.