Polaris Map

A general area for the general things that generally happen in our server.

How do you feel about the Polaris map?

The map is good as-is.
6
21%
The map is fine with minor tweaks.
12
41%
The map needs a major overhaul.
11
38%
I want a different map entirely.
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 29

Polaris Map

Postby arokha » Tue May 10, 2016 9:29 am

We can discuss the map here, since the other thread was supposed to mostly be about the code itself. Suggest your changes and stuff!

Keep in mind we'll likely play with the stock map for a short while after porting so that people can actually get a feel for it and decide what they like/don't like rather than making assumptions on how it will work.

There's also a poll if you'd like to weigh in on that!

Map PNG: http://ss13polaris.com/files/map_4-24-16.png

My opinion is that the map is overall okay and just needs rearrangements inside departments. If you want to repost your opinion from the other thread, go ahead, since this didn't exist when you posted it there!
Last edited by Aces on Tue May 10, 2016 7:09 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: Made the poll allow re-voting.
User avatar
arokha
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:54 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby KiraAlitruss » Tue May 10, 2016 9:34 am

The map is HUUUUGE. It's almost as huge as your butt!

It needs some work done on it. Make it less enormous, less intimidating. It's not very easy for new players either, so it's not a good map in my opinion. Yes, it's large, it has plenty of 'features', but the important thing for a map is to be intuitive, to be comfortable to play on. After a few rounds on the map on various servers, I'd say it fails in most aspects. The only one it succeeds in is sheer size and feature-ness.
User avatar
KiraAlitruss
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 12:09 pm

Re: Polaris Map

Postby viveret » Tue May 10, 2016 9:38 am

What Kira said.

What worries me is the medbay, honestly. Once I play medical more often, it's gonna bother me so much with itz layout..
User avatar
viveret
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:49 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby viveret » Tue May 10, 2016 9:55 am

Make the fridge inside the medbay for the doctors
Swap cloning room with exam room
Distribute rhe surgery tools between the rooms
Seperate body scanner room, preferably by the OR
User avatar
viveret
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:49 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby Nightwing » Tue May 10, 2016 10:47 am

In addition to my comments on the other topic (which I'll repost here soon), the most important thing is that this map is not designed for our gameplay type with our population. It's too big, too spread out.
Nightwing
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:10 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby Zeke Sturm » Tue May 10, 2016 10:53 am

As Night said, too much space for too few people. In addition, there's way too much wasted space, in the form of asteroid chunks and space between, and in so far as I can tell there's only one construction space that doesn't require depressurization being risked.
Zeke Sturm
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: Polaris Map

Postby Zeke Sturm » Tue May 10, 2016 11:00 am

arokha wrote:
Nightwing wrote:An asteroid is far more dense than a space station, for instance. Just placing it in the same location as the current station is a great way to destroy all life on the planet below as the asteroid hurtles down and collides with it! The increased mass requires the asteroid be placed in a much more distant orbit, and even then needs to be accelerated around the planet to even begin orbitting in the first place.


That's not how physics works. The density of an object has no effect on the orbit, and an object in orbit will not change that orbit unless acted upon by an outside force.

If you put something in orbit with a SMA of 2,000km it will remain with that SMA of 2,000km.


Also, this

The problem with that becomes it won't just remain there, since gravity is affected by the weight of an object, which would certainly change if an object became much bigger, and also a rock. Not saying it'd be impossible to maintain an orbit, but it'd certainly be unnecessarily fucking difficult, given how much power would have to go into just jetting it away from the planet near-constantly.

I'll let Night post the relevant equations, he knows this stuff better than me
Zeke Sturm
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: Polaris Map

Postby Nightwing » Tue May 10, 2016 11:18 am

Zeke Sturm wrote:-snip-
I'll let Night post the relevant equations, he knows this stuff better than me


Indeed, there's more to it than just assuming it's already undergoing centrifugal force and thus orbital movement. I can post proper equations when I get home. I love calculating planetary orbits and such; maybe I'll even ask my astronomy professor for help n.n
Nightwing
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:10 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby arokha » Tue May 10, 2016 11:30 am

Zeke Sturm wrote:The problem with that becomes it won't just remain there, since gravity is affected by the weight of an object, which would certainly change if an object became much bigger, and also a rock.


No, the weight of an object is the RESULT of gravity. The mass of an object generates gravity. Once an object is in orbit above the atmosphere, it does not require thrust to stay in orbit. You may be thinking "Well the asteroid will have it's own gravity as well!" and sure, it does. So do you. So does everything. But the asteroid would need to be much, much bigger to have any sort of effect.

The best way to think of an orbit is to think of an object in perpetual free-fall, but 'missing' the planet constantly. It has sufficient forward velocity in the prograde direction to make the vector such that it never actually reaches the planet.

You might want to look at this page for a simplistic example of orbital mechanics Newton thought up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_cannonball

It would require more thrust to PUT it there, but considering one of our current ideas for mining gold and other earth-rare metals is to just go get asteroids and bring them to earth to mine them, it seems like doing this is not that far off. There are already several private companies attempting to work towards this goal, for example, the companies Planetary Resources, and Deep Space Industries.

... what thrust do you think is keeping the moon in orbit?
User avatar
arokha
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:54 am

Re: Polaris Map

Postby arokha » Tue May 10, 2016 11:31 am

Nightwing wrote:
Zeke Sturm wrote:-snip-
I'll let Night post the relevant equations, he knows this stuff better than me


Indeed, there's more to it than just assuming it's already undergoing centrifugal force and thus orbital movement. I can post proper equations when I get home. I love calculating planetary orbits and such; maybe I'll even ask my astronomy professor for help n.n


You should because the things you are saying are not true. @_@ Centrifugal force has nothing to do with orbiting bodies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_m ... s_of_thumb

"Without applying force (such as firing a rocket engine), the period and shape of the satellite's orbit won't change."

Once you put it there, it will just stay there.
Last edited by arokha on Tue May 10, 2016 11:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
arokha
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:54 am

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron