site banner
ArjinFerman  Tinfoil Gigachad  1yr ago (text post)   Edited 1yr ago   893 thread views

The Motte Moddes: HighSpace (July 2023)

Since the original thread fell of the main page, I figured I'd turn this into a monthly thread.

The goal of this thread is to coordinate development on our project codenamed HighSpace - a mod for Freespace 2 that will be a mashup between it and High Fleet. A description pf how the mechanics of the two games could be combined is available in the first thread.

Who we have

Who we need

The more the merrier, you are free to join in any capacity you wish! I can already identify a few distinct tasks for each position that we could split the work into

  • developers: “mission” code, “strategic” system map code

  • artists: 2D (user interface), 3D (space ships, weapons explosions)

  • writers: worldbuilding/lore, quests, characters

What we have

  • Concept art for a long range missle cruiser, curtesy of @FCfromSSC

  • A proof of concenpt for “strategic” system map we jump into on start of the campaign. It contains a friendly ship and 2 enemy ships, you can chose where to move / which enemy ship to attack.

  • A somewhat actual-game-like workflow. Attacking a ship launches a mission where the two ships are pitted against each other. If you win, the current health of your ship is saved, and you can launch the second attack. If you clean up the map you are greeted with a “You Win” message, or “You Lose” if you lose your ship.

  • *New:* a “tactical” RTS-like in-mission view where you can give commands to your ships (see more in comment below)

What's next

The fun stuff can now begin:

  • The system map is only a proof of concept, for one, it's not really a map of a star system. Also, the enemies cannot move, your ship is instantly teleported instead of moving gradually as time goes by, etc.

  • Missions start with the player in control of a default fighter craft, because we need a mission file, and a mission file needs a player ship. An easy way to solve it is to turn the single ship in the system view into a group containing a fighter wing, that the player will be in control of. A more complex solution is a bit more crazy, but I think it might work - the mission files are just text, and the lua API has read/write access to the file system. I think it should be possible to dynamically rewrite the mission file to setup the player ship to be the one that was moved from the system map

  • The “tactical” view is also pretty rudimentary. The camera cannot be moved, only basic right-click commands can be given (move / attack / protect), wheras the game supports pretty complex stuff (disabling, disarming, attacking specific subsystems). As battles grow in scope, finding a way to show what the hell is going on in a clear and simple way would also be useful.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

@ZorbaTHut, I think I have a +1 on @naraburns' complaint in Kulak's thread.

Originally when I posted the thread, I couldn't see it from main, and when I pasted the URL in incognito, the comments showed up, but it said the post is deleted by the user. The latter is no longer true, but I still don't see the post on main. It does work with other types of sorting though.

Edit: Eh, nevermind everything is fine now. The thing that still seems weird to me was the "post deleted by user thing" I saw at the beginning. You guys still have to hand-approve posts, or something?

Yeah, top-level posts really do still need approval. Comments don't, once you're a regular, but top-level posts always do.

I think we actually just recently changed how that works and it should no longer display "deleted by user".

On this note, how long does it take for a moderator or admin to review a post? I wrote a post approximately a day ago and have been waiting for approval or feedback on why it may or may not fit the rules.

It's fine if it hasn't yet been examined, however the lack of feedback is disconcerting, especially as a first-time attempt at a post.

For what it's worth, the actual answer to "how long does it take" has multiple answers:

  • A few hours, usually, though sometimes longer
  • Longer than it should take
  • I've got some ideas for improving this but they take a good deal of implementation time

So yeah, issue acknowledged, you're not wrong; it's something I would have fixed in a week with a small cadre of programmers, but it'll likely take longer as-is.

I was trying to point out was that there's no indication that a post needs approval, on either the post-creation page or on the sidebar.

While I'm sure a programmatic fix would be the best option for optimizing the time until a moderator approves it, it was mostly that I didn't know the post was in limbo until I checked the front page, saw it missing, and did more investigation.

A simple note of: "All posts for now require moderator approval before being visible on the front page and it may take X-Y hours before a moderator approves it. Contact one if no feedback is received in that timeframe." on the Post creation page would resolve my question (and potentially future posters' questions) with minimal programmer work needed (hopefully).

Honestly, a good part of that is intentional. Most people never notice - it's meant to be a completely hidden process. It's meant to be part "don't put up another barrier for people who want to post", and part "don't tip off trolls or flamers that this is going on". I think this would overall work out great, if we approved stuff faster.

There was a bug with filtered post visibility to moderators, so things were getting left in filter much longer than they should've. Think we just patched it up.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats