Children of a Dead Earth

[Yaar Podshipnik]

At least I'm glad that I paid less than a dollar for it. A half-assed price for a half-assed product looks like a bargain.

I don't say this often say this, but GTFO. Half of your comment is complaining about graphics. Really? That's what's important to you? Game is not pretty, but it quite good and displaying the basics you need to know, graphics are simple but not crude. In my opinion, for a programmer art (hey check out the credits:

, it's done by a single guy ffs), it's fantastic.
Lighting in the editor wrong, shadows wrong? It's a fucking editor. It's conceptual. If it was realistic, then you would have to model some kind of shipyard with gantries etc. It's not meant to be anything other than a tool, and making it flashy would distract from the main task of designing a space killing machine. Quit graphicswhoring ffs.

I agree that some quality of life things you got used to from KSP are missing, and it would be lovely to have them. I'm sure if CoaDE had a full team behind it, not a single dude, it would be much more streamlined (in a good sense). However, KSP does miss some nice things CoaDE has, like the cool orbit planning. KSP is very basic in that regard, and to approach what you have in CoaDE you need to install Principa.

Calling the game half-assed beta or even alpha as an insult. It is remarkably stable, and does what it's claiming to do extremelly well. As DraQ, Esq. eloquently stated, this is as much a game as a tool for exploring space combat concepts using near future technologies. CoaDE is great at it, in my opinion. With bigger budget, and bigger team it could been fantastic, but getting money for a super niche project like that is not easy. Mentioning typos as an indication of low quality in a game where text is largely unnecessary, is also a bit silly. Sure, the dev could get an editor, but I prefer he spends time, effort, etc., on core gameplay. Typos sure are annoying, but this is not an story-based RPG, so quit being a spelling nazi.

And for the last part of your quote, the one I have quoted. Monetary value is of course arbitrary, and you are the only one who can determine what is a good price for a product. However, for less than a dollar, you got an extremely deep simulation of what space combat might look like. You can tell the dev spent countless hours of research on orbital mechanics, weapon and propulsion systems. Even the campaign is quite fun, and the story (which you can ignore completely, so you don't exposed to those typoes) makes more sense that lots of "sci-fi" series of today.

TL;DR self-eject please, at least from this thread/forum section. I think you'll fit right in Prosperland.

 

[Demo.Graph]

DraQ

Spoiler

Intercept radius (think of it as "bubble") is based on weapon effective ranges. ... Sadly the game only accounts for 1v1 intercepts - it's a pretty painful limitation.

In that case I would've expected for that bubble to be expanded to include every object/fleet that might've flown into a combat bubble. It's a limit that, ahem, limits my tactical choices. And the one that should've been obvious during production because I've stumbled upon it after like a hour of a proper gameplay.

What happened is that about 2/3 of my cloud tried to aim at 2-3 outlying drones and others do some random shit, accelerating in random directions.

Probably 1-3 drones started burning their engines, trolling your missiles.

Exactly, it's obvious from a later screenie.

And yeah, missile guidance is pretty primitive.

I did expect more from a game about tactical AIs killing each other, I guess.

I don't even mention that the game lacks combat sandbox, without any stellar-body map whatsoever.

There is a checkbox for starting already in combat intercept.

I looked for it and didn't find it. I'm probably blind.
Well, I already deinstalled the game, but I'll keep it in mind in case I'd like to return to it later. Thanks.

Those are mostly for shaping armour. For example creating pointy nose to have good slope when orienting nose forward. Or creating a "slot" to let large turrets sink-in without creating a massive bulge.

I did get it. It still looks unwieldy to me. One of the many small inconveniences that made ship design unpleasant.

Arguably designing and testing ships and modules is THE core gameplay in CoaDE - it was built as a tool for exploring space combatc concepts first and foremost

Yes. But without a proper tactical AI or a proper strategic layer (that would at least tax dV budgets in a realistic way) I can't use the game in a way that I wanted.

I might be harsh in places. I'm still pretty disappointed. I had high hopes for the game.
Me ->

Yaar

Spoiler

Half of your comment is complaining about graphics. Really? That's what's important to you?

No. You might try rereading what I wrote.

it's done by a single guy ffs), it's fantastic.

Team size is irrelevant. I shit alone as well. I don't try to sell that product of mine.

If it was realistic, then you would have to model some kind of shipyard with gantries etc.

That wasn't the point of my criticism. You might try rereading what I wrote.

However, KSP does miss some nice things CoaDE has, like the cool orbit planning.

This's irrelevant because there's no strategic layer that I could seriously use those in.

Calling the game half-assed beta or even alpha as an insult. It is remarkably stable, and does what it's claiming to do extremelly well.

If it was unstable I would definitely call it an alpha. Or a technical demo.

so quit being a spelling nazi.

It's called "a grammar nazi".

And lastly...

I don't say this often say this, but GTFO. ... TL;DR self-eject please, at least from this thread/forum section. I think you'll fit right in Prosperland.

Stay classy, man.

 

[DraQ]

I looked for it and didn't find it. I'm probably blind.

It's called instant action.

Well, I already deinstalled the game, but I'll keep it in mind in case I'd like to return to it later. Thanks.

I didn't expect you to until at least bouncing off Vesta Overkill mission. Well, some people are quitters, I guess.
I suppose some also prefer polished turds to diamonds in the rough.

Half of your comment is complaining about graphics. Really? That's what's important to you?

No. You might try rereading what I wrote.

Except that's how it looks like. You spend a lot of time complaining about purely cosmetic shit.
"Ooh! There is a weird inverted shadow" "Aaah! the editor background kind of sucks" (it's literally an untextured bubble and probably meant to provide something unintrusive that isn't blackness of space).
"Feh! I want adjustable lighting!" - I mean I wouldn't say no, but do you honestly give that much of a fuck?

I agree about quite a few QOL things (believe me, once you start making the kind of shit I do the editor does get pretty fucking laggy) and, obviously multi-intercept thing, but you still seem to focus on pretty nitpicky shit in grand scheme of things.

Team size is irrelevant.

Now you're being intentionally obtuse.
Team size imposes an upper limit on the amount of work that can be done.
https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com/ <- this is basically the knowledge (and assumptions) that found their way into the game one way or another. Some were actually invalidated by the players, but there finite amount of stuff one guy can do especially if this one guy is busy figuring out how to model shit like coilguns and different material response to hypervelocity impacts rather than setting up prettier editor lighting.

I shit alone as well. I don't try to sell that product of mine.

Wake me up when your shit can model RCC bulkhead spallation after hypervelocity impact, with spall ricocheting down the hull and rupturing propellant tank, venting of which creates reaction spinning the ship up and killing the crew in forward crew module via acceleration trauma.

CoaDE is by no means perfect, but a one-guy project that sets out down completely untapped direction to do something as insanely ambitious as trying to realistically model near future spaceship to spaceship combat and largely succeeds is worthy of nothing but admiration.

If I had 10 different bullshit-free space combat simulators to choose from I might have been more picky, but I don't.
Instead I have* Elite "we have subsonic** speed limit in space" Dangerous and Star "So, about that game part..." Citizen, so I'm more than happy to have CoaDE.

*

As in: what's there on the market rather than what I've personally wasted money on. I have my standards.

**

At STP in air, not space, obviously.

I'd love to get my hands on the source, though.

Game is not pretty, but it quite good and displaying the basics you need to know, graphics are simple but not crude. In my opinion, for a programmer art (hey check out the credits:
View attachment 16709
, it's done by a single guy ffs), it's fantastic.

I actually don't agree about the game not being pretty. Sure, it's pretty evidently programmer art (everything is effectively parametrized primitives), but it does damn impressive job trying to convey realistic visuals and I have made quite few cool looking designs and took quite a few cool looking screenshots.

It is remarkably stable

Not once I get my mitts on it.

 

[Demo.Graph]

Well, some people are quitters, I guess.

I prefer to strain myself on meaningful problems (or on real life money), not on the bad interface and/or game process. It's not like I'm fighting that game for my life.

Half of your comment is complaining about graphics. Really? That's what's important to you?

No. You might try rereading what I wrote.

Except that's how it looks like. You spend a lot of time complaining about purely cosmetic shit.

Yes. Because they betray the sloppiness of the design. Coding away the shadow in the editor would've taken about 10 minutes. Coding in the lightning - maybe about half an hour. It's not about the shadow. It's about trying to make a quality product.
I also did spend a comparable amount of text on practical inconveniences that limit my game experience. You commented on some of them and skipped the others. Yaar skipped most of them and preferred to focus on a low hanging fruit. Both of you tried to act elitist on me based on that. It's a game, I don't care.

"Feh! I want adjustable lighting!" - I mean I wouldn't say no, but do you honestly give that much of a fuck?

Well, yes. It's a matter of convenience. Let me repeat my main point.

These and other things make a process of ship design uncomfortable for me.
I also can't find any coherent reason to design and optimize spacecraft as there's no strategic layer to use them in and sandbox missions' masturbation can only entertain for so long.

YMMV, of course. It's not like I'm trying to indoctrinate you into haters or something.

CoaDE is by no means perfect, but a one-guy project that sets out down completely untapped direction to do something as insanely ambitious as trying to realistically model near future spaceship to spaceship combat and largely succeeds is worthy of nothing but admiration.

Well, I do like the idea. Indeed, I was hyped for the game. I can't get far on hype alone.

If I had 10 different bullshit-free space combat simulators to choose from I might have been more picky, but I don't.

I'll choose the game from a different genre. Maybe in 10 years I'll have a quality product in this genre. I can wait.

https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com/ <- this is basically the knowledge (and assumptions) that found their way into the game one way or another.

Yeah, I've seen it several years ago.
You might want to check this.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/
I've been oscillating on and off that site for about 10 or 12 years. I even have a spreadsheet somewhere with a handmade ship designer based on the formulas learned from that site. But then KSP 0.17 appeared and I kinda dropped it. Ah, fun times.

 

[DraQ]

Well, yes. It's a matter of convenience. Let me repeat my main point.

These and other things make a process of ship design uncomfortable for me.
I also can't find any coherent reason to design and optimize spacecraft as there's no strategic layer to use them in and sandbox missions' masturbation can only entertain for so long.

And that's something I can't wrap my head around.
It's like trying to play Chess, but saying you can't find any coherent reason to try to checkmate your opponent.
I mean that's the whole fucking point of that game.
The whole fucking point of that game is that it's a tool that helps you figure out what such and such spaceship design would do in combat.
Yeah, it has limitations, but that's the driving force - creativity and curiosity - you come up with an idea, implement it, test it and maybe refine or discard it in favour of another.
What else do you need?
No, it doesn't have a whole 4X tacked on. It's limited in scope. It's a single dev game where that dev spent most of the time researching mathemathical models for stuff ranging from nuclear reactors, to rocket engines to hypervelocity impacts, then presumably fishing out numerical integrator errors and other bugs.

You might want to check this.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/

Funny you mention it because the sole reason I know of COADE is it getting a Seal of Approval from Atomic Rockets.

 

[Demo.Graph]

What else do you need?

A context. "War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." Combat doesn't occur in a vacuum (even when it literally does ). Future fleet composition would likely be determined more by resource availability, logistics and policy and less by armament optimization. In COADE you have no need to blockade, conduct interplanetary search and intercept, protect traffic, control an area from random assailants, do a hasty post-battle cleanup/salvage, etc. So craft design, obviously, should get overoptimized for short-term one-off point-blank engagements. If you're not constrained by resources or mission parameters the solution is always more dakka.
That's why I can't find an incentive to play. I don't try to persuade anyone. To each his own fun.
I have fun overoptimizing subassemblies in Factorio even if it won't have any really meaningful consequence on the end result. The game flow itself is pleasant in that game.

It's a single dev game where that dev spent most of the time researching mathemathical models for stuff ranging from nuclear reactors, to rocket engines to hypervelocity impacts, then presumably fishing out numerical integrator errors and other bugs.

Yes, COADE was made by one man. Off the top of my mind DF was made by two, Rimworld by two, FTL by two, Factorio by five, Dominions series by two as well. Yes, there were subcontractors.
For me, team size is not an argument in defence of releasing an unfinished product.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

It's like trying to play Chess, but saying you can't find any coherent reason to try to checkmate your opponent

I mean, I tried, but the game ends after that and I can't kill the remaining army.

 

[Norfleet]

So craft design, obviously, should get overoptimized for short-term one-off point-blank engagements. If you're not constrained by resources or mission parameters the solution is always more dakka.

The solution is obviously to create missions which chain together, so now you have to design craft that have to survive the engagement, with sufficient delta-V budget remaining to reach the next engagement or they won't be included. This would give a "campaign" of sorts, rather than just a one-off mission, without having to create an actual strategy layer on top.

You could also just treat this game as the combat engine, and worry about a strategy layer much later: the two are functionally different games glued together, and as such, don't need to be developed together, you just need an input pipe that lets you feed a scenario into the combat engine and output results. After all, isn't that what a strategy game with a tactical combat system basically is? A board game layer in which create and move pieces that are fed to a tactical combat engine that resolves itself and spits out aftermath to the board game. Every single strategy-like game that has a separate combat map functions this way.

I mean, I tried, but the game ends after that and I can't kill the remaining army.

You don't NEED to kill the remaining army, they give up and go home when the king is taken. Actually, that's one of the things I've always found a bit weird about vidya games: The sheer levels of death and annihilation, all seemingly pointless, created by units that don't know when to fold 'em, when to walk away, and when to run.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

You don't NEED to kill the remaining army

I WANT TO DAMMIT, I WANT TO.

 

[DraQ]

Yes, COADE was made by one man. Off the top of my mind DF was made by two, Rimworld by two, FTL by two, Factorio by five, Dominions series by two as well. Yes, there were subcontractors.

One difference is that what could be a fun mechanical quirk in any of those would be a killer bug in a realism oriented simulation.
Dorf physics, for example, is stuff of memes.

 

[Norfleet]

You don't NEED to kill the remaining army

I WANT TO DAMMIT, I WANT TO.

Look, let me tell you something: I am a psychopath. I feel nothing when I kill somebody. When even *I* am telling you that killing all those people is unnecessary and serves no useful purpose, I'm probably on to something here.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

You don't NEED to kill the remaining army

I WANT TO DAMMIT, I WANT TO.

Look, let me tell you something: I am a psychopath. I feel nothing when I kill somebody. When even *I* am telling you that killing all those people is unnecessary and serves no useful purpose, I'm probably on to something here.

Purpose is irrelevant.

 

[Demo.Graph]

also this