Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Home of discussions about Ultra Starfire (5th edition) and its predecessor Galactic Starfire (4th edition).

Moderators: SDS Owner, SDS Members

Forum rules
1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby Cralis on Sun 02 Aug 2009 13:25

This topic deals with warp points, asteroids belts, and the combination thereof.

Normally WPs do not interact with asteroid belts or planets, as per the rules. However, there is an anomaly system type that does create a "WP in an asteroid belt" as a rare phenomenon. I don't like this because it requires changing an already generated system in a way that is not normally generated. Ie. Its not part of a normal generation process. While this is the way anomalies should work, I'd like to propose that this can be handled with regular system generation.

1. WPs SHOULD interact with asteroid belts. If a WP is in the same LM distance as an asteroid belt, then it should automatically create the anomaly condition.

2. WPs SHOULD interact with planets. They should rip them to pieces during the planet generation process. If a WP is generated at the same LM distance as a planet, it turns the planet into an asteroid belt. Goto #1.

3. Then I'm going to propose a change to the anomaly table, removing the WP/AB anomaly and replacing it with "long distance companions". I'll explain that one in the next topic.

Thoughts? Comments?
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11232
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby Crucis on Sun 02 Aug 2009 14:03

Cralis wrote:This topic deals with warp points, asteroids belts, and the combination thereof.

Normally WPs do not interact with asteroid belts or planets, as per the rules. However, there is an anomaly system type that does create a "WP in an asteroid belt" as a rare phenomenon. I don't like this because it requires changing an already generated system in a way that is not normally generated. Ie. Its not part of a normal generation process. While this is the way anomalies should work, I'd like to propose that this can be handled with regular system generation.

1. WPs SHOULD interact with asteroid belts. If a WP is in the same LM distance as an asteroid belt, then it should automatically create the anomaly condition.

2. WPs SHOULD interact with planets. They should rip them to pieces during the planet generation process. If a WP is generated at the same LM distance as a planet, it turns the planet into an asteroid belt. Goto #1.

3. Then I'm going to propose a change to the anomaly table, removing the WP/AB anomaly and replacing it with "long distance companions". I'll explain that one in the next topic.

Thoughts? Comments?


I think that there's a certain distance "bias" (?) built into the WP generation system that places them on even 1 sH (12 LM) orbits that seems to make #1 seem a bit "off".

However, having said that, I like item #1. It's a very rational way of getting WP's into AB's.

OTOH, I don't like #2. I just don't see WP's as having that level of gravitational influence, regardless of where they are.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby PracticalM on Sun 02 Aug 2009 14:41

I think this increases the anomaly for WPs in an AST belt more than it needs to be. Though I can't remember the last time I've had a WP be at the same distance as a AST or Planet.

Unless the system generation sets this up automatically it would be too much work. If it was just a change to the system generation program then it wouldn't bother me either way.

In the amount of work versus benefit I would say more work than really necessary. The odds of introducing bugs into the system generator seems too high for the expected benefit.
--
Jeffrey Kessler
PracticalM
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed 15 Jul 2009 10:27
Location: Long Beach, CA

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby Cralis on Sun 02 Aug 2009 15:18

I've had mine working this way for years. I actually added it during my time away from the list, thinking I had seen it in ISF, but was mistaken. So I can say "yes its very rare"

(there are only 19 out of 281 ranges on the W6.03 table that WP distances and orbits will coincide, or about 6.7% of ranges. you have to have both a planet (or AB) and a WP in that location, and for WP that is 1 of 30 locations or 3.3% not counting the actual roll percentages. I'm not great at stats, but the numbers are dwindling here, and without taking any further refinements we are talking about any particular distance having about .002 or .2% chance of happening. the actual percentage is smaller obviously because I've skipped some things like certain WP ranges only have a 1% chance of happening instead of 3%).

Through the anomaly table it is 1% chance of an anomaly, 25% chance of the WP/AB result. So that is about a .25% chance of occurring.

This change should make it sufficiently rare.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11232
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby Crucis on Sun 02 Aug 2009 15:22

Jeff, part of the problem that Matt and I see with Ultra's "Anomaly systems" is that they aren't all "systems".

Coronal WP's and AB WP's are not systems at all. They are rare, anomalous, oddity (pick the term that floats your boat, Matt) situations. But not star systems.

Now, I agree that there may be other issues, such as are they worth the hassle, yada-yada-yada... but perhaps these two would be better handled in the oddity rules.

I think that the goal that Matt has in mind is making the "Anomaly systems" section cover only items that are truly "star" systems.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby BillW on Mon 10 Aug 2009 20:16

Cralis wrote:This topic deals with warp points, asteroids belts, and the combination thereof.

Normally WPs do not interact with asteroid belts or planets, as per the rules. However, there is an anomaly system type that does create a "WP in an asteroid belt" as a rare phenomenon. I don't like this because it requires changing an already generated system in a way that is not normally generated. Ie. Its not part of a normal generation process. While this is the way anomalies should work, I'd like to propose that this can be handled with regular system generation.

1. WPs SHOULD interact with asteroid belts. If a WP is in the same LM distance as an asteroid belt, then it should automatically create the anomaly condition.

2. WPs SHOULD interact with planets. They should rip them to pieces during the planet generation process. If a WP is generated at the same LM distance as a planet, it turns the planet into an asteroid belt. Goto #1.

3. Then I'm going to propose a change to the anomaly table, removing the WP/AB anomaly and replacing it with "long distance companions". I'll explain that one in the next topic.

Thoughts? Comments?


This all sounds good to me. This will keep WPs in AB quite rare and gets rid of another odd change to a system from the anomaly table.
User avatar
BillW
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue 14 Jul 2009 22:31
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Sysgen Series: WPs and Asteroid Belts

Postby BillW on Mon 10 Aug 2009 20:20

Crucis wrote:Jeff, part of the problem that Matt and I see with Ultra's "Anomaly systems" is that they aren't all "systems".

Coronal WP's and AB WP's are not systems at all. They are rare, anomalous, oddity (pick the term that floats your boat, Matt) situations. But not star systems.

Now, I agree that there may be other issues, such as are they worth the hassle, yada-yada-yada... but perhaps these two would be better handled in the oddity rules.

I think that the goal that Matt has in mind is making the "Anomaly systems" section cover only items that are truly "star" systems.


I too think that the "Anomaly systems" table should only contain anomalous systems. Other types of oddities should be handled differently.
User avatar
BillW
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue 14 Jul 2009 22:31
Location: Pittsburgh, PA


Return to Ultra Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests