Well thats odd... A 450 Light Year 'Corridor' of stars

Michael Brookes

Game Director
And the Capella system could use some touching up, for that matter. Currently, it has Capella A and B, which should be renamed Aa and Ab, and Capella H and L (which should be about 5 million Ls from Aa and Ab) are missing. Unless, of course, Capella is actually listed in ED as Alpha Aurigae like Deneb is Alpha Cygni (which I didn't think of until reading talshiarr's post) and I visited the wrong system.

Adding stars is problematic as that changes the system and galaxy generation so it's unlikely we'll add these at this stage, especially for populated systems.

Michael
 
Adding stars is problematic as that changes the system and galaxy generation so it's unlikely we'll add these at this stage, especially for populated systems.

Michael

is it currently as problematic at adding new outposts-stations , or to turn terraforming candidates into terraforming active with terraforming outpost, say if the devs watned to drive by manual event an expansion of a faction into a virgin system. As part fo a leadup to automatic colony expansion at some unspecificed future date.
 
It doesn't necessarily mean that the density for the real stars is correct as distance data is often orders of magnitude wrong. So we use an initial mass function for the procedural generation along with a density map of the galaxy from various sources (like X-Ray maps). For general densities I think the procedural system is more accurate than the observational data for individual stars. Distant clusters in particular are a nightmare.

Michael

I'd love to see a youtube video from you guys explaining the process for creating the galaxy. Fill it with as much technical language as you like - don't give it to us in non-techie terms....just present as though you would to each other. Not just the galaxy, but the ships, the stations....I'm sure the creation process is as fascinating as it is challenging.
 
Adding stars is problematic as that changes the system and galaxy generation so it's unlikely we'll add these at this stage, especially for populated systems.

Michael

So are there any plans for a fix on this flaw? I mean, an accurate, or at least believable model of the milky way was one of the main selling points of the game. It would be a shame if we're left with something so obviously wrong.
 

Michael Brookes

Game Director
is it currently as problematic at adding new outposts-stations , or to turn terraforming candidates into terraforming active with terraforming outpost, say if the devs watned to drive by manual event an expansion of a faction into a virgin system. As part fo a leadup to automatic colony expansion at some unspecificed future date.

It's a completely different issue.

Michael
 

Michael Brookes

Game Director
So are there any plans for a fix on this flaw? I mean, an accurate, or at least believable model of the milky way was one of the main selling points of the game. It would be a shame if we're left with something so obviously wrong.

What we have is probably the best real time simulation of the galaxy you'll find especially when you consider all the gameplay that has to be kept in step with the galaxy. If you change a system what do you do with all the existing data that is reliant on the system being in a certain state? For unpopulated systems this is less of an issue - unless you start changing the mass distribution in which case you then start knocking out systems that once existed.

Michael
 
Heh, I imagine shutting down for the night and returning in the morning to find yourself in deep space with all the nearby stars out of range. :)

Can understand the problems with changing things. Have been wondering how you would deal with newly discovered exoplanets that are in populated systems.
 
What we have is probably the best real time simulation of the galaxy you'll find especially when you consider all the gameplay that has to be kept in step with the galaxy. If you change a system what do you do with all the existing data that is reliant on the system being in a certain state? For unpopulated systems this is less of an issue - unless you start changing the mass distribution in which case you then start knocking out systems that once existed.

Michael

Perhaps in terms of a commercial game you likely do have the best real time simulation of the galaxy. That said, I find Space Engine (at this juncture at least) is ahead in a few ways regarding procedural simulation of the galaxy/universe (specifically how you can seamlessly travel space), and I personally haven't come across any immediately apparent flaws, though I'm sure there are plenty since it's still heavily a work in progress. I understand that it's a complicated issue, and I'm not saying that ED's simulation is bad by any means.

Space Engine in case you aren't familiar with it
http://en.spaceengine.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rswRCT3097g
 
If the distance data is not correct anyway, would it not be possible to change the coordinates of these stars so that they are more dispersed? Or maybe this is more work than what it sounds like?

Seems like a good suggestion Defacto; as long as all those stars are in the Milky Way.
 
What we have is probably the best real time simulation of the galaxy you'll find especially when you consider all the gameplay that has to be kept in step with the galaxy. If you change a system what do you do with all the existing data that is reliant on the system being in a certain state? For unpopulated systems this is less of an issue - unless you start changing the mass distribution in which case you then start knocking out systems that once existed.

Michael

Perhaps you could use sudden supernova events as a way of removing and rebuilding big chunks of galaxy when difficult-to-fix problems emerge!
 
So are there any plans for a fix on this flaw? I mean, an accurate, or at least believable model of the milky way was one of the main selling points of the game. It would be a shame if we're left with something so obviously wrong.

Yeesh. It's a simulation, Spaceboots. There are 400 BILLION star systems in this game and a vast majority of them are procedurally generated; some stuff is not going to be 100% realistic in every possible way.
 
Yeesh. It's a simulation, Spaceboots. There are 400 BILLION star systems in this game and a vast majority of them are procedurally generated; some stuff is not going to be 100% realistic in every possible way.

There's a difference between having obvious concessions and having glaring, obvious flaws, that even an elementary student would recognize as being wrong. Space Engine, a project by one man, simulates the entire universe, which as you may know contains many, many more star systems than 400 BILLION. Incidentally, Space Engine doesn't have such an artifact, and typically when problems like that are found they are fixed and improved upon.
 
There's a difference between having obvious concessions and having glaring, obvious flaws, that even an elementary student would recognize as being wrong. Space Engine, a project by one man, simulates the entire universe, which as you may know contains many, many more star systems than 400 BILLION. Incidentally, Space Engine doesn't have such an artifact, and typically when problems like that are found they are fixed and improved upon.

Also, Space Engine doesn't have an entire game going on at the same time.
 
Back
Top Bottom