Discussion Bringing bases alive

[wehaveaproblem]

Watcha peeps,

So after a few coments I've picked up from ar81, I have been thinking. Are there some simple ways we can dev some 'life' into a base?

So this thread comes in 2 parts.

1 - what would help your immersion?
This is perhaps the most important as, with the next generation of orbiter looming, a lot of this sort of work may be wasted on this version. But a discussion as to what would help regardless is always useful for the future.

2 - what ideas do you have to achieve that immersion with this version of orbiter?
Some initial thoughts to kick start things:
-Can we trick some AI movement of vehicles?
-Can we dev our versions of the default animated monorail, and still load it in the base config?
-Can we add smoke or dust without the need for a vessel?
-Is there any way we could cycle more than one night texture, or mimic that? so that lights come on and off randomly?

Worthwhile discussion?
WHAP

 

[tl8]

For a specific situation it is possible, the best method would be using a plug-in module. To get generic-ness may take a bit longer. I think that the scripting in the next version may or may out make some things obsolete. One thing is though, another config file will be needed to implement this, whether it is in addition to or separate from the base config.

I have ideas that may be 'easily' implemented, but I don't know if I have the skills needed.

 

[Arrowstar]

WHAP: I haven't thought enough about most of the points on here yet to give a detailed overview of my ideas, but I can say that the next version of Orbiter will have that scripting engine in it, and the best way to mimic AI movement of vessels will be to use that, I believe. Not saying it can't be done with another method, but why reinvent the wheel?

 

[pattersoncr]

One item that I would like to see as a "standard feature" on airless bases is the boarding ramp/docking tube discussed in the AIA Toehold Lunar Base thread.

 

[Dambuster]

I think that without a doubt, the most valuable feature that could be added to Orbiter to improve immersion (and I believe this would be an immense improvement) would be AI spacecraft.

Whilst I realise that this is a huge task, just seeing other spacecraft flying around would be amazing!

A step up from this would be the ability to interact with these spacecraft (I suppose docking with them would be the basic level of interaction, followed by UMMU). This final one is possibly a little far-fetched (I have no clue how complex/CPU-intensive this would be), but if we were able to create scenarios in which we could have 'missions', with moderately interactive AI, that would be just amazing.

 

[willy88]

A step up from this would be the ability to interact with these spacecraft (I suppose docking with them would be the basic level of interaction, followed by UMMU). This final one is possibly a little far-fetched (I have no clue how complex/CPU-intensive this would be), but if we were able to create scenarios in which we could have 'missions', with moderately interactive AI, that would be just amazing.

Having a sort of radio MFD would be really cool, like this:

 

[pattersoncr]

AI spacecraft are in my opinion, the biggest thing missing from Orbiter.
There are of course many types of AI craft that could be implimented:
Conventional aircraft flying from one base to another
Suborbital craft flying from point to point
Space stations in orbit
Launch vehicles from the surface to orbital stations
thake this as far as you want.

This would (in my view) require a robust interface to decide what AI craft to include. This also suggests the need for one (or more) "standard orbiter universe" that determines what AI craft to use based on MJD.

This is getting beyond the scope of this thread but it is probably something we, as an Orbiter community, ought to think about.

 

[dougkeenan]

I for one welcome our new artificially intelligent Orbiter addon overlords.

 

[Linguofreak]

Having a sort of radio MFD would be really cool, like this:

300 quid?

What about hazard pay for the poor driver?

 

[Urwumpe]

Having a sort of radio MFD would be really cool, like this:

I want to do something like that, the simple communication (MFD -> MFD) is no problem, but I think it would become better if it could be used for commanding bots around, or be able to expand the communication in the MFD with add-ons (like custom phrases). And such things are pretty tough. And I don't even want to think about exchanging data in multi-player games!

One additional idea I had for the concept was allowing data link communication, so vessels could exchange status information or orbit change commands without clogging the "voice" communication display.

The main difference to the concept in the communication plug-ins, I start and scrub twice per year: Instead of addressing vessels directly, you would talk over frequency channels and code multiplex, so all vessels using the same channel and code could listen to you or your data.

I would welcome any ideas there, I currently don't get much ahead with the SR-71 VC elements. I am a coder, not a mesher, Jim!

Like I image things in my basic concept as small story:

You are reentering with the DGIV and far off the landing site, additionally with some damages. Before you crash into the middle of nowhere, you send a SOS call over the emergency channel. Additionally, you enable the emergency mode of the data link, transmitting your status and position at high rate to all vessels around you. A coast guard station (bot) picks up your call and confirms you that it has received your call, telling you that help will arrive. It dispatches a search plane to your place, and decides that you are in range for a helicopter to pick you up. While your DG crashes and you parachute to landing, help is already flying to your likely crash site, prepared to pick you and your crew up.

 

[jedidia]

Having AI ships is definitely a nice thought... but should be next to impossible.

think of it: for an AI to fly around in a physical environment as complex as orbiter, the AI would have to have allmost all of the capabilities an AI would have to have to fly a REAL spacecraft. It COULD be done, of course, but it would take someone like Jarmonic to do it. basically, make an IMFD where you only have to put in your desired target and desired flight time, and the ship goes of and pilots you all the way there, including reentry, landing or docking, and you have your AI. Tough task!

But you're not quite there yet: you also have to make it work reliable under maximum time compression, since you don't want your game to be slowed down every time some AI ship makes a manouver.
Additionally, you have to take into account that an AI of that sofistication provides you with an autopilot that can do all the tasks by itself, potentially taking all the fun out of Orbiter in the process. It is therefore questionable if such a thing is even desirable. Apart from it being allmost undoable.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Great start to the discussion, chaps. I'm sensing I maybe should have named it "Bringing Orbiter Alive", as the net seems cast wider than just bases.

Keep it coming.

 

[Urwumpe]

think of it: for an AI to fly around in a physical environment as complex as orbiter, the AI would have to have allmost all of the capabilities an AI would have to have to fly a REAL spacecraft. It COULD be done, of course, but it would take someone like Jarmonic to do it. basically, make an IMFD where you only have to put in your desired target and desired flight time, and the ship goes of and pilots you all the way there, including reentry, landing or docking, and you have your AI. Tough task!

But can be done - maybe not as good as a human pilot could. But that is not the problem.

But you're not quite there yet: you also have to make it work reliable under maximum time compression, since you don't want your game to be slowed down every time some AI ship makes a manouver.
Additionally, you have to take into account that an AI of that sofistication provides you with an autopilot that can do all the tasks by itself, potentially taking all the fun out of Orbiter in the process. It is therefore questionable if such a thing is even desirable. Apart from it being allmost undoable.

You can always reduce the time acceleration for doing maneuvers by AI bots and return to what the player wanted... you would just need to coordinate the changes to the manual set time acceleration.

 

[pattersoncr]

Regarding AI ships, I think FS9 ought to be our model here.
In FS9, if you time-accel above 4x, all the AI traffic disappears. They reappear once you reduce time-accel.
AI flight routes could be set up as a pre-planned trajectory. At any given time, the AI ship is supposed to be at "x" point along the trajectory. If you time accel, orbiter stopd keeping track of the AI ships. once you slow down, orbiter looks up where they're supposed to be on the trajectory at that given time. Also only AI ships within a given distance are shown.

 

[jedidia]

You can always reduce the time acceleration for doing maneuvers by AI bots and return to what the player wanted... you would just need to coordinate the changes to the manual set time acceleration.

Of course you can do that, the question is, do you want that? reduce timeacc to 10 for a quarter hour while a bot is making a reentry somewhere? It might be a wiser option to let them cheat (let them set the attitude of their craft directly instead of having them use thrusters), but this still might require lower ta to at least 1000 for critical manouvers.

Or you could let them cheat the frontier way, simply putting them to their destination if they have to do a complex manouver and the game is in high ta. After all, if you run a high ta, you're probably not in the vicinity to spot it.

In FS9, if you time-accel above 4x, all the AI traffic disappears. They reappear once you reduce time-accel.
AI flight routes could be set up as a pre-planned trajectory. At any given time, the AI ship is supposed to be at "x" point along the trajectory.

The essential difference we have here is that in Orbiter, the darn destination won't stay in the same place. So setting up pre-planned routes gets enourmosly more complicated.

 

[pattersoncr]

...The essential difference we have here is that in Orbiter, the darn destination won't stay in the same place. So setting up pre-planned routes gets enourmosly more complicated.

It should be pretty straightforward to set up some sub-orbital and LEO flight routes. Perhaps Earth to moon as well.

 

[computerex]

-Can we trick some AI movement of vehicles?

Yes. Space is too vast for you to see many other ships around you, so implementing AI there is in my opinion useless. You will see the majority of the ships near a base. Implementing that is not too hard. I think that might be one of the features of the "vbase" I pmed you about .

-Can we dev our versions of the default animated monorail, and still load it in the base config?

Should be fairly easy to do. What exactly do you want inside a monorail?
Quick solution: Make the moonrail as a vessel, then use this
http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3009

-Can we add smoke or dust without the need for a vessel?

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2781

-Is there any way we could cycle more than one night texture, or mimic that? so that lights come on and off randomly?

Can happen with a vessel but as far as I know not a regular base.

 

[Andy44]

I always thought it would be cool to build a railroad on Mars or Luna. A nuclear-fired steam turbine or turbo-electric locomotive, with lots of shielding for traction in the low-G, running from base to base. Perhaps a bit too steam-punk, but these things come into my head from time to time, as I look for ways to combine my railfan interests with Orbiter.

 

[fort]

Immersion ?

Install the Cape Canaveral lighthouse with its few buildings. Give it a dll or do this with Spacecraft. dll (a movement in a loop) and couple this with a light.ini. We "only":rofl: will have to find a way to synchronize the configuration with the Orbiter clock to save a little energy during the day.

http://www.flashearth.com/

28.460304,-80.543657

I'll do it someday...

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Some great links there Computerex, cheers mate. I'm thinking that once the moon base is done I could release an AIA default scenario, full of random extra activity.

Stirred up some interesting thoughts, I do love the idea of having some active radio/atc type thing. And it seems AI vessels is the most popular request. I suppose one option, with bases in mind, would be to chuck a bunch of DG & support vehicle meshes into one mesh file and have them move around taxiways by use of animations. Crude, but it could actually work... slightly more elaborate monorail...