Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: New Sandbox Mission with more stations

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Germany, Hamburg
    Posts
    80

    New Sandbox Mission with more stations

    I edited the current sandbox mission to include more stations and thought I'd share it here if anybody is interessted.

    There are now 3 stations around each moon and 5 around each planet. They are mostly named after Nobel laureates in Physics.

    Since I don't want to replace Micheal's mission, I created a new file and named the mission "Ozzy Test Sandbox".
    Just extract the archive into your Rouge System folder and have fun with docking and undocking and ... docking and undocking.


    All credits are going to Micheal. I have mostly done copy and paste work .

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    215
    Wow, nice and simply. I'll give it a shot later!
    PS. Be sure to post this on the Steam Modding forum too!
    Can cantankerous cans candidly containing cancerous contaminants coexist considering conclusive conspiracies claim canning cantaloupes can cause comically concentric callouses?

  3. #3
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Quote Originally Posted by sampak View Post
    Wow, nice and simply. I'll give it a shot later!
    PS. Be sure to post this on the Steam Modding forum too!
    Yes, please do. It would help to promote the idea of player's being able to tinker and add missions within the bounds of available content...
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Brasil
    Posts
    173
    I hadn't seen this! Definitely I will give a try, thanks for this.
    I apologize in advance for any grammatical error or misuse of words, unfortunately my english is not good, but I've been working to improve it. Thank you all.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Germany, Hamburg
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    Yes, please do. It would help to promote the idea of player's being able to tinker and add missions within the bounds of available content...
    I will post it when I'm home tonight.

    Btw can you elaborate a bit on the task delay values? I followed your pattern and incremented the value for each flight but didn't understand the logic behind.

  6. #6
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    If you're referring to the start delay, I did that just to spread load of spawning ships over several frames, rather than all at once. It's really not that important now that I deal with that sort of thing in code--just sort of left-over from early on...
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    361
    Thanks for this!

    It has brought up a few potential issues:

    When multiple dockable bodies are nearby, you really have no visibility as to which you are talking to or asking to dock with. You won't know which one it is until you request docking with their approach and get a localizer, which gives you the required symbology to know. This requires you to ask to dock though, which is fine if you guessed right.

    It may be useful to have some means to identify what we're checked in to in such a scenario? Perhaps allow the player to elect one specifically? "Checking in with STC" isn't very specific, and declaring on approach is also vague - ideally we could specify what we're on approach to.

    Additionally, having a general "I AM HERE" localizer that you can request the freq from STC, that isn't suitable for docking? What it is suitable for is identifying exactly who you're talking to, and allow you to fine tune your approach - since otherwise you only get a general direction and closure rate without individual component vectors (eg the relative x/y/z velocities). It would also be helpful in cases where sensors were inoperable! Without them, unless you're a handful of km or closer, you have no hope of finding your way to them.

    This train of thought brings up another issue! If your VMS is down such that you can't see the station, while the localizer will let you dock, you can't really know if station components are in the way. It would be helpful to have some means of representing the station's "area" - perhaps data encoded in the localizer could tell your ship the characteristics of a cube or other primitive shape relative to itself, that would effectively inform you when flying blind where not to fly.
    Volunteer Rogue System Wiki Moderator
    Come visit the Rogue System Discord Server!

  8. #8
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Quote Originally Posted by draeath View Post
    Thanks for this!

    Only issue I see right now is the stations (at least where you start) are so close together which one you are checking in with for STC is ambiguous. Fortunately you did the sane thing and put them on neighboring channels, (eg start at 45.1.x, the neighbor I picked was 45.2.x). Though you won't know which one it was until you check in with their approach and get a localizer, which gives you the required symbology to know.

    MJ, it may be useful to have some means to identify what we're checked in to in such a scenario? Perhaps allow the player to elect one specifically? "Checking in with STC" isn't very specific, and declaring on approach is also vague - ideally we could specify what we're on approach to.
    We'll see where we stand once all the mechanisms for seeing who's who are in. One of the recent additions is to be able to check in directly with a ship if you know its frequencies. This, coupled with an IFF type of system, AND the upcoming Orbital Positioning System, may be enough to give us what we need (assuming all the info from these is properly displayed to the player)...

    If not, then yes--we'll need to address this, as it was one of the first things I noticed when testing it just now
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    361
    Oops, I added a concern while you replied

    The idea of docking blind, with no sensors or VMS camera feed, means you've got a good chance of trying to fly though the station. Some more details and an idea in the post itself
    Volunteer Rogue System Wiki Moderator
    Come visit the Rogue System Discord Server!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    142
    A slight derailment: I still want to try flying blind, however there isn't an option to turn off the cameras to simulate blind flight with the VMS active. I'm hoping this gets added soon so I can work on instrument only flights.

    Either way, this is the amazing work the community does to help us find future potential problems before they arise. I love this community.

Similar Threads

  1. Stations not answering open comm channel in sandbox
    By herne in forum Rogue System General Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-09-2016, 11:25 AM
  2. Finding stations
    By Shaamaan in forum Rogue System General Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-06-2015, 02:51 PM
  3. Possible bug : Disapearing stations
    By NyKo_F in forum Rogue System Bug Reports
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-04-2015, 05:06 AM
  4. [MISSION] Training rescue mission
    By Vantskruv in forum Rogue System General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-27-2015, 07:54 PM
  5. Sandbox Mission // 300% moar stations!
    By The_ConArtist in forum Modding
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-09-2015, 10:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •