Map Objects, Part 1

posted on April 13th, 2012, 3:24 pm

there's no expectation that all stations are built in a common way at all. such a thing would be silly, as in space you can approach from any direction you like. stations should always be the right way up because the camera can be anywhere in space.

posted on April 13th, 2012, 3:39 pm

Stations should always be the best way for cinematic effect, TV is largely visual. Viewers see from a third-person perspective, which doesn't always match the angle the characters see.

Space is always shown as a 2D ocean on TV, putting all stations right way up just reinforces that.

posted on April 13th, 2012, 4:15 pm

tbh, imo it looked good lopsided. and without maneuvering thrusters keeping it in place surly its going to wander from its point of origin and axis. so it makes sense to me.
as for the camer angle differs form the station, surly its angle is in place with the characters, and the seemingly universally recognised "right way up" that all ships/stations seem to have.

p.s i love lamp 

[Anonymous]

posted on April 13th, 2012, 4:15 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on April 13th, 2012, 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

stations being shown the right way up on tv is 100% as you would expect, as the camera in space can be wherever it needs to be. that is exactly what i've been saying all along about empok nor.

there is no sense in saying they should be built all along a common plane. in fact that would be impossible in space due to 3D space not being a 2D plane. building these stations and what way they face when built is irrelevant as no matter what rotation they are built at, the camera can still be positioned to have them look right way up.

EDIT:
thrusters don't matter, there is no "down" or "up" in space.

there is down on earth because that's where gravity is telling us to go. but in space there isn't.

empok nor's "point of origin" could be fixed in relation to a planet or star or something. but what axes we draw through it are irrelevant. there is no "right way up" in all of space. stations being shown the right way up on screen makes sense because we can position the camera anywhere we like in relation to these stations.

posted on May 4th, 2012, 5:11 pm

why would a decades old (even by ds9 times) station be strong?

i don't envisage it as some defensive station/big turret/perimeter thing, in fact i'd imagine it would be pretty weak, but provide something else. can't imagine what it would have to offer, though. it's junk by the fleetops time, maybe it could be a repair dock that can repair more than 1 ship at a time, due to the docking arms.

obviously 6 arms is a lot, maybe just have 1 purchase to get the top repair dock working (1 repair dock using all 3 top arms) and a second more expensive purchase to get the bottom arms working to have 2 repair docks.

posted on May 4th, 2012, 5:24 pm

ds9 like stations may be old, but perhaps it could be upgradable(isnt that what the feds did to ds9?)  parts where you could build on extras like sensor platform, shield enhancements, phasor platforms, torpedo launchers, (or team specific stuff?)

done in the starbase way of 2 of each upgrade
or
like a borg ship, you have a certain amount of slots so it could be an allrounder, a brilliant sensor station or an armoured fortress

how about the ability to dock a ship so the stations shields protect it and repair (but at a slower rate than yards do)6 arms so could protect up to 6 at once.

posted on May 4th, 2012, 6:54 pm

ds9 like stations may be old, but perhaps it could be upgradable(isnt that what the feds did to ds9?)  parts where you could build on extras like sensor platform, shield enhancements, phasor platforms, torpedo launchers, (or team specific stuff?)

done in the starbase way of 2 of each upgrade
or
like a borg ship, you have a certain amount of slots so it could be an allrounder, a brilliant sensor station or an armoured fortress

yeah they did, but presumably this cost them large sums of money. it may have even cost more than building a new station, maybe they decided to upgrade the existing station because of time constraints with approaching conflicts.

ds9 was the most strategically important place in the quadrant at that time too, dictating a need for higher spending. this sort of thing i believe is out of reach of ingame activity.

posted on May 4th, 2012, 7:36 pm

DS9 was probably in better condition than Empok Nor, considering they likely weren't forced out of that one and had more time to wreck it.

posted on May 23rd, 2012, 5:38 am

Cool stuff. 

I could see there being minigame-style maps in the future with these additions, like some people did with the map editor in Halo 3.

posted on May 23rd, 2012, 12:45 pm

I've always thought about this, and I think there is an up and down in star treks sense, at least, there is a plane.  Our galaxy is largly disk shaped, so one could argue there is a flat plane that could be standardized.  Though, weather one side is up or down would be in question, you could still say there is a plane.  Who knows, maybe ds9 was upsides down the entire time. 

However, in the case of most Fed stations, they were seen in orbit around a planet, which would completely change everything. 

posted on July 29th, 2012, 10:32 am

Just got another idea. What about movable asteroids? Tractor beam lock and there you go releasing the huge beast to cover your dil expansion.... and oh wonder! You can even establish an asteroid colony giving you a tiny rate of supplies once it is placed into the sensor range of a mining station.

posted on July 29th, 2012, 4:19 pm

i like the sound of moving asteroids over to block your expansion and obviously the enemy couldnt just fly through them you would have to blow them up or fly around them. a free "defence" for you. and the mining colony on the asteroid sounds kinda cool dont know how it would be implamented though.