[GZG] FT vector movement systems

["Richard Bell" <rlbell.nsuid@xxxxxxxxx>]

        I just played a short game of Attack Vector: Tactical.  At first glance, AV:T seems to be proof positive that geeks will indulge in all manner of cerebral abuse if it is labelled as a game.  The movement system is vector based, straightforward, 3D, on a hex map, and actually playable.  What really surprised me was that acceleration chart and movement segmentation is a very good approximation of newtonian dynamics, as applied to big nuclear rockets.  The vessels accumulate vectors as they accelerate continuously.  Accelerating in a straight line produces the results  expected from your physics class:  thrusting at A, for time T moves you a distance of 
0.5AT^2 and you end up with a velocity of AT.  Restricting the facings and vertical angles to 30 degree increments allows a simple chart to resolve where the ship under acceleration ends up (unfortunately, this is only tangentially related to the player predicting where he goes).  Changing facing is also a time consuming process, as the ship builds up angular momentum, swings towards the new facing, and comes to rest.  If you can understand what will happen, you can save some time during a course change by thrusting while pivotting, but this really complicates predicting where you end up.  Having a degree in Mathematics is not necessary to use the movement system, and I am not even sure that it helps; however, an introductory level physics course is a definite asset.  
                                  
Compare this to vector movement from FB1.  Ships change facing instantaneously and the main drive applies thrust as a Dirac-delta function (infinite thrust applied for a duration of zero, but with a finite change in velocity).  Even cinematic movement has infinite  impulse drives.  Not that there is anything inherently wrong with infinite impulse drives (as a game mechanic).  It is much easier to predict where your ships end up, so your tactics are built on the formations that you want, not the ones that you can manage.

All that it would take to adapt this into an even more optional movement system for FT is a set of pivot tables for changing the facing of the ships, possibly based on a combination of thrust and mass points-- large, low thrust ships take the longest to come about and small, high thrust ships pivot fastest.  But all ships should be able to swap ends in the space of a turn.  Kra'Vak and Sa'Vasku ships would only need to pivot to bring weapons into arc, but they would need to record the direction of their thrust axis.

The scenario I played was simply to explore moving the ships. It was a race to build up velocity from zero and then accomplish a zero velocity, zero distance rendez-vous with each of two markers.  We stopped after I hit the first marker as my opponent had realised he was way out of position and had built up too much of the wrong vector.  At a future date, we will race Car Wars style.  Eventually, we will gain enough intuitive understanding to think tactically, as we move.


_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l