A sane idea how to avoid time paradoxes in multiplayer (once it arrives)

[Wjolcz]

I see people trying to solve problems about the time warp in multiplayer. They imagine it to be a space race. I think it should be cooperation just like Portal 2 and/or role-based like TF2, Evolve and probably many other games.

Anyway, here's the original post:

I always imagined multiplayer to be role-based. One vessel. One guy controls the pilots, the other engineers/scientist. The pilot flies and can time warp while the other guy welds stuff together/does sience. That way if two people were in the same vessel both wouldn't want to grief or else they would completely fail the mission.

Let's say both of them choose theur roles at the beginning of the mission. The pilot has types of missions for pilots, like "fly there, make a report/land there take a sample". The scientist has something like "check the sample/take a science report at X spot, etc." The engineer would need KIS/KAS abilities: "weld this with that, connect X and Y with fuel pipes, then pump the fuel."

No space race. No multiple space programs. Pure cooperation. No need to figure out the time paradoxes.

Edit: And multiple missions could be ran at the same time that way. Just jump between them with some sort of voting system.

"Player X wants to switch focus to vessel Y. Choose YES/NO"

...or something.

Edit2: Scientists could also get some sort of mini-game when entering the lab. "Pour Mystery Goo on Duna surface sample to see how it reacts *cool visualization by DanRosas* DING! Science!" <-- that way the scientist guy would have something to do while the other would rove around and gather surface samples for him.

Edit3: Space races are stupid. Cooperation and friendship is what should be showed in this game. The only way you can succeed is to share the success with someone else.

That's how ISS was built, wasn't it?

Edit4: Now the unmanned flights become problematic with this idea.

Remember Telemachus mod?

One player controls the unmanned vessel, the other is the mission controls. Mission Control tells you to slow down and tries to overall help you to make the mission not be a failure. You forgot what's the speed of the reentry? Ask the ground crew! Need assistance with docking? Ask mission control to take over the control of the probe you're trying to dock to! Not sure how to set up a manouver node to be most efficient? Let someone else do that!

TL;DR: THERE'S NO TL;DR! Read the whole post!

It's kind of messy, but hopefully clear enough to understand.

Feel free to criticize and ask questions, post your own ideas.

QUICKEDIT: Of course it doesn't have to be 2-people only.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Veeltch

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

I mean, the time paradox thing isn't really a problem at all. The devs have said multiple times it's not, and the mods for multiplayer work around it really well.

[Wjolcz]

I mean, the time paradox thing isn't really a problem at all. The devs have said multiple times it's not, and the mods for multiplayer work around it really well.

Oh, reaaaaally?

Player A and Player B decide to have a race to see who can claw and capture a particular asteroid first. Player A uses a low energy intercept and timewarps aggressively. Player B plots a higher energy intercept but timewarps less aggressively. Player B will intercept the asteroid first in game time, but because of Player A's aggressive timewarp his ship arrives at the asteroid first in real time and claws the asteroid. Who won the race, according to the game? Who should have won?

[r4pt0r]

Oh, reaaaaally?

Red Iron Crown's statement there is not a problem in your Utopian "No space race- No multiple space programs- Pure cooperation- No need to figure out the time paradoxes" universe, thus rendering it moot.

[Wjolcz]

Red Iron Crown's statement there is not a problem in your Utopian "No space race- No multiple space programs- Pure cooperation- No need to figure out the time paradoxes" universe, thus rendering it moot.

How so?

[r4pt0r]

How so?

You literally say "Pure Cooperation". There would not be any races to an asteroid if they are cooperating.

[Wjolcz]

You literally say "Pure Cooperation". There would not be any races to an asteroid if they are cooperating.

Oh, okay. Sorry for my moment of confusion then. It's a bit late here.

E: I just thought TheCanadianVendingMachine meant that KMP deals really well with time-warping players, which in my opinion isn't true.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Veeltch

[r4pt0r]

No worries mate, just like to spark discussion. Timewarp in MP is going to be tackled at some point, I wonder how squad are doing it on their in-house MP builds?

[Hobbes Novakoff]

If I had a rep point for every thread rehashing this over and over until people realize "Hey, don't we have a mod that handles multiplayer time warp in a perfectly good way?", I would already be in the Light Green Group. To quote my post on another thread:

It's strange how people fret about timewarp and say that this is some sort of insurmountable or game-breaking issue, when we already have not one, but two mods (KMP and DMP) that add multiplayer. In fact, KMP was the mod that turned stock multiplayer from an impossibility into a reachable goal. 0.24 broke ground for multiplayer (under the hood, not gameplay-wise) and there are now several devs working on multiplayer, according to the devnotes. Point is, SQUAD already has a system for timewarp in a multiplayer scenario, and unless someone can come up with one that somehow places no restrictions on player timewarp while somehow allowing them to interact at any time without creating a hopeless bowl of event-bubble spaghetti (This is probably impossible, but hey, that's what everybody said about space travel), that system is KMP's system.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Hobbes Novakoff

[logan2611]

Alright, so here is how DMP does timewarp in case anyone wants to know(and I think it is a pretty good idea):

Player 1 timewarps ahead into the future, he is then selected as the reference frame for the server for time.

Once Player 1 is done timewarping, players may at will sync with his time, doing this will teleport you to where you would be when you get to the time Player 1 is at.

[Wjolcz]

Alright, so here is how DMP does timewarp in case anyone wants to know(and I think it is a pretty good idea):

Player 1 timewarps ahead into the future, he is then selected as the reference frame for the server for time.

Once Player 1 is done timewarping, players may at will sync with his time, doing this will teleport you to where you would be when you get to the time Player 1 is at.

Which is a pretty bad system in my opinion. This kind of time warp management still can lead to paradoxes If one of the players refuses to warp 30 years ahead only to sync with someone else.

Also think about contracts. Say bye to your rep and money if you're playing on a career server.

Edit: If that wasn't enough, then think about life support. If we ever get it and will be enabled in multiplayer, then think what would happen to all crew members of other flights if you synced. You would have to send supplies to all of your stations/flights while your friend that really wanted to make that station with you would go make himself a tea and watch TV until you're done resupplying all your missions for the next 30 years. What I'm trying to say is that you have to juggle all your flights before doing something cooperative. You need to make sure to check for SOI changes of every flight you have got.

I say: one flight at the time with KAC-like warnings for both players in the same vessel. That could lead to interesting ship management of different crew members, too!

@Hobbes Novakoff: are you trying to prove that the way time warp works in DMP is perfectly fine and works well?

Edited July 30, 2015 by Veeltch

[logan2611]

Which is a pretty bad system in my opinion. This kind of time warp management still can lead to paradoxes If one of the players refuses to warp 30 years ahead only to sync with someone else.

Also think about contracts. Say bye to your rep and money if you're playing on a career server.

Edit: If that wasn't enough, then think about life support. If we ever get it and will be enabled in multiplayer, then think what would happen to all crew members of other flights if you synced. You would have to send supplies to all of your stations/flights while your friend that really wanted to make that station with you would go make himself a tea and watch TV until you're done resupplying all your missions for the next 30 years. What I'm trying to say is that you have to juggle all your flights before doing something cooperative. You need to make sure to check for SOI changes of every flight you have got.

I say: one flight at the time with KAC-like warnings for both players in the same vessel. That could lead to interesting ship management of different crew members, too!

@Hobbes Novakoff: are you trying to prove that the way time warp works in KMP is perfectly fine and works well?

You do bring up pretty good points. Maybe perhaps have a vote system so that players that are in the middle of something can choose whether or not to timewarp ahead?

Edited July 30, 2015 by logan2611

[Dodgey]

So instead of having a system where each player is free to do as they please and are not forced to do anything you want a vote system where everyone is forced into using the same time warp system. What? Look we have to admit that no system is perfect. In my opinion the way the KMP does it is the best of both worlds. It allows you to play with your friends as well as striving off on your own without affecting anyone else (aside from asteroids Red Iron Crown).

Speaking of which the only real issue that cannot be fixed with the race idea is the human factor. Everything else still works.

So let's say you race to an asteroid or ship or what ever it is. Someone time warps faster than the other and takes a slower route. Getting there first IRL but later according to the in game clock. How do you stop them moving the asteroid before the other person gets there IRL? Simple, by making a rule about saying that they can't do that.

There are no paradoxes because the only people that can interact with something are the ones who are synced with it. The only problems come from either poor communication or from people being poor sportsman in the case of someone syncing forward a station just as someone is about to dock. (Which doesn't physically move the station by the way).

These threads keep coming up but the only other ideas aside from the way KMP does it are have a voting or admin control system or have everyone controlling one ship (which I'm still not sure on how it would work by the way).

So aside from people not playing nice what are the actual problems with the way KMP does it?

Edit.

Wait why would you have to sync all of you ships 30 years ahead? You only have to sync on a ship by ship case when you want to interact with that ship.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Dodgey

[logan2611]

So instead of having a system where each player is free to do as they please and are not forced to do anything you want a vote system where everyone is forced into using the same time warp system. What? Look we have to admit that no system is perfect. In my opinion the way the KMP does it is the best of both worlds. It allows you to play with your friends as well as striving off on your own without affecting anyone else (aside from asteroids Red Iron Crown).

Speaking of which the only real issue that cannot be fixed with the race idea is the human factor. Everything else still works.

So let's say you race to an asteroid or ship or what ever it is. Someone time warps faster than the other and takes a slower route. Getting there first IRL but later according to the in game clock. How do you stop them moving the asteroid before the other person gets there IRL? Simple, by making a rule about saying that they can't do that.

There are no paradoxes because the only people that can interact with something are the ones who are synced with it. The only problems come from either poor communication or from people being poor sportsman in the case of someone syncing forward a station just as someone is about to dock. (Which doesn't physically move the station by the way).

These threads keep coming up but the only other ideas aside from the way KMP does it are have a voting or admin control system or have everyone controlling one ship (which I'm still not sure on how it would work by the way).

So aside from people not playing nice what are the actual problems with the way KMP does it?

Edit.

Wait why would you have to sync all of you ships 30 years ahead? You only have to sync on a ship by ship case when you want to interact with that ship.

In DMP, you can interact with ships whether or not they sync or not.

The system where players sync to each other is flawed because syncing may drain a significant amount of resources(TAC Lifesupport) and thus might kill your kerbals

[Red Iron Crown]

It allows you to play with your friends as well as striving off on your own without affecting anyone else (aside from asteroids Red Iron Crown).

There are cases other than asteroids, it's anything that can be interacted with. Imagine two players are playing with spaceplanes supported by a propellant depot in LKO. Player A ascends to space after takeoff and does a Munar flyby, warping through the transfers, then docks with the propellant depot and drains it. Player B flies around the atmosphere at 1x speed while Player B is flying to the Mun and returning, then ascends to orbit to dock with the depot. Player B arrives ahead of player A in game time, but behind in real life time. Should player B be able to refuel from the depot?

So let's say you race to an asteroid or ship or what ever it is. Someone time warps faster than the other and takes a slower route. Getting there first IRL but later according to the in game clock. How do you stop them moving the asteroid before the other person gets there IRL? Simple, by making a rule about saying that they can't do that.

That works fine as long as everyone is cooperative and rule-abiding. Results may vary.

There are no paradoxes because the only people that can interact with something are the ones who are synced with it. The only problems come from either poor communication or from people being poor sportsman in the case of someone syncing forward a station just as someone is about to dock. (Which doesn't physically move the station by the way).

Either the station will move relative to the vessel when syncing or the player gets a free velocity change.

These threads keep coming up but the only other ideas aside from the way KMP does it are have a voting or admin control system or have everyone controlling one ship (which I'm still not sure on how it would work by the way).

So aside from people not playing nice what are the actual problems with the way KMP does it?

Sync issues, as described. Any multiplayer timewarp implementation I've read about has either sync issues or waiting issues and I don't see a way the problem can be solved without one or the other. Of the two, sync issues are probably less of a problem than waiting, but it's not right to say there are no issues at all.

[Wjolcz]

You do bring up pretty good points. Maybe perhaps have a vote system so that players that are in the middle of something can choose whether or not to timewarp ahead?

Yeah, I guess some sort of warp voting system would be necessary. Even if the gameplay was based on my "coop" idea with different roles for every crew member.

After some thinking I came to conclusion it could be more like "Hey, I'm in the middle of my Duna mission. Want to join and help me split the roles?" than a server full of people.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

Your suggestion is nice, but as the devs said, we are going to have multiplayer. It's up to them how they solve it. I think we should have a co-op too, like the one you described.

The only problem is early-game, where you mostly use 1 simple kerbal. The others would just spectace?

I especially like the idea of doing advanced science in the lab manually, by moving test tubes around and pouring liquids everywhere and making a mess. It would also be better to have more scientific experiments to do, wich for you would have to do something different from clicking a button. Like carrying the materials bay around, and putting it in water to see how X;Y reacts, or making measurements and collecting samples from different landmarks in EVA. Mission control could specify the tasks that with you can earn the most science, also forcing the player with this to explore. For example, get to the bottom of that abyss, there colllect samples from X;Y, take photos of X;Y, or use your plane (they maybe tell you what you might need?) to fly down in that valley, than return to your landing craft before the sun sets. This could be done in that rts-style. Mission control could specify the site to land, guiding you to the most beautiful, interesting site, that you can reach, where the terrain is especially detailed, and there are interesting landmarks, such as a waterfall, or geysers, caves, or just the mountains or the transition of the biomes is awesome.

Of course, first things first. All planets should be more detailed, as there isn't much more than a large, flat area as your landing site, where there's nothing special, explorable in your range. They are only interesting from orbit. Maybe some people could be hired to make the planets especially detailed, while keeping their style. Also, making some extra-special places, wich may be your future landing sites, based on your tarjectory, and wether you have the equipment to explore most of it. Of course, your system couldn't handle such celestials, that's why it has to be made much more efficient first. May Unity 5 help us. Currently, more than 70% of what the game loads is invisible to you. Than why it has to be loaded? Much more graphical options are also necessary, including much more graphical efficiency, and better textures. Also, about the parts. That's another weak point. Couldn't my 8 fuel tanks, stacked on each other, be simulated as one, long, flexible (that's still stupid. it should be brittle) fuel tank?

And to add something to the topic, my idea is to give identical contracts to the players (at least terminating the luck factor), so they will go on identical missions. Solving multiplayer is easier, if your subjects are trying to accomplish the same. Of course, that won't work on long-term.

Edited July 30, 2015 by CaptainTurbomuffin

[logan2611]

Of course, first things first. All planets should be more detailed, as there isn't much more than a large, flat area as your landing site, where there's nothing special, explorable in your range. They are only interesting from orbit. Maybe some people could be hired to make the planets especially detailed, while keeping their style. Also, making some extra-special places, wich may be your future landing sites, based on your tarjectory, and wether you have the equipment to explore most of it. Of course, your system couldn't handle such celestials, that's why it has to be made much more efficient first. May Unity 5 help us. Currently, more than 70% of what the game loads is invisible to you. Than why it has to be loaded? Much more graphical options are also necessary, including much more graphical efficiency, and better textures.

I think that something that should be done to the planets before we get multiplayer is more of them( and Jool be less buggy ).

Edited July 30, 2015 by logan2611

[Dodgey]

There are cases other than asteroids, it's anything that can be interacted with. Imagine two players are playing with spaceplanes supported by a propellant depot in LKO. Player A ascends to space after takeoff and does a Munar flyby, warping through the transfers, then docks with the propellant depot and drains it. Player B flies around the atmosphere at 1x speed while Player B is flying to the Mun and returning, then ascends to orbit to dock with the depot. Player B arrives ahead of player A in game time, but behind in real life time. Should player B be able to refuel from the depot?

No Player B would not be synced with the propellent depot, Player A would have pulled the depot forward into time in order to interact with it, if Player B wants to interact with the depot then he would have to sync forward into time before being able to interact with the depot. Is it fair? No but what are you going to do, In a game where one of the main mechanics is time manipulation compromises have to be made somewhere.

That works fine as long as everyone is cooperative and rule-abiding. Results may vary.

I imagine multiplayer being run on private servers between 3-4 friends at most for the vast majority of the time, in a game like this griefing is going to be a very big issue, if someone doesn't want to play by the rules than I don't think that there is much the devs can do about that aside from giving players the tools to prevent it themselves (such as being able to set ships to private and the such).

Either the station will move relative to the vessel when syncing or the player gets a free velocity change.

Syncing doesn't physically move the ship involved, all it does is skip time forward to match that of another ship or player. Basically time warping.

Sync issues, as described. Any multiplayer timewarp implementation I've read about has either sync issues or waiting issues and I don't see a way the problem can be solved without one or the other. Of the two, sync issues are probably less of a problem than waiting, but it's not right to say there are no issues at all.

I have no arguments here, my opinion is that there are no physical problems with the time sync method (paradoxes), the only problems are from the interaction of multiple players (not a major problem in my opinion) such as someone syncing forward a station just as someone else is about to dock. I really need to stop saying "no problems" and instead say "no major problems".

[Whirligig Girl]

I have to say that this idea sounds insanely boring. Sure, cooperation should be a goal, but why limit it? The pilot would be the only one who gets to do anything fun in this model. The game should be a free sandbox. Time paradoxes are no problem, DarkMultiPlayer already kind of solved it.

I want to be able to save my friend's stranded Kerbal from Minmus, dock station assemblies in orbit, chase aircrafts in the atmosphere and shoot them with missiles, and even friendly competition to see who can get to Duna and back first.

EDIT: Okay, maybe time paradoxes are still a problem. How about this solution? Everything's position is the same for everyone in real time. If a player timewarps, you see them timewarping, jumping out of Kerbin SOI, and going to what appears to be nowhere. They reach their apoapsis, and they've teleported into Duna's SOI. To them, it was a natural transition. It only looks strange because you, flying your plane at 1x speed on Kerbin, have your Duna in an entirely different location.

Once the person drops out of timewarp to wait for your rendezvous at Duna, and you go into the same orbit of Duna, rendezvous can happen as normal assuming you were to have timewarp control linked between the vessels (in a mutually agreed upon manner.)

Edited August 5, 2015 by GregroxMun

[Wjolcz]

I have to say that this idea sounds insanely boring. Sure, cooperation should be a goal, but why limit it? The pilot would be the only one who gets to do anything fun in this model. The game should be a free sandbox. Time paradoxes are no problem, DarkMultiPlayer already kind of solved it.

I want to be able to save my friend's stranded Kerbal from Minmus, dock station assemblies in orbit, chase aircrafts in the atmosphere and shoot them with missiles, and even friendly competition to see who can get to Duna and back first.

Well, the problem with cooperation being boring and limiting is only because the already existing crew roles system is boring. We have all those kerbal classes (three) and they are kind of useless. The only things they can do now is right-click things and reset the Mystery Goo/ repair wheels. They should be enhanced. For example: The pilot flies (duh), the engineer plots the manouver nodes, welds stuff and monitors life support and the scientist sits back in the lab and cooks things, or whatever a scientist in kerbal universe can do (some sort of lab minigame would have to be included, I guess).

EDIT: OK, let's say players can switch roles whenever they want. Bam! Now everyone can do the docking!

I have nothing against flying in formation. That is 100% fun, if you ask me, though the space missions should be locked to only one at a time. I know it sounds limiting, but think about it: You send one piece of your station, then you send another. Just like in singleplayer, except with someone who can occasionally switch the control over the two vessels in range and re-align them in case something goes wrong.

EDIT: Okay, maybe time paradoxes are still a problem. How about this solution? Everything's position is the same for everyone in real time. If a player timewarps, you see them timewarping, jumping out of Kerbin SOI, and going to what appears to be nowhere. They reach their apoapsis, and they've teleported into Duna's SOI. To them, it was a natural transition. It only looks strange because you, flying your plane at 1x speed on Kerbin, have your Duna in an entirely different location. Other than that they could help each other out. If the scientist needs help he calls for the pilot to make him eat something, or monitor his health.

Once the person drops out of timewarp to wait for your rendezvous at Duna, and you go into the same orbit of Duna, rendezvous can happen as normal assuming you were to have timewarp control linked between the vessels (in a mutually agreed upon manner.)

I don't really get it. So Player 1 fools around the KSC with his jet and sees Player 2 go out of the Kerbin SOI superfast, and then teleports to Duna? Then you go there and agree to sync with him? Can you see him but not interact, or what? How does that differ from DMP? The only different thing I can see here is the fact that you can see Player 2 timewarp.

EDIT: I swear no more editing! :I

Edited August 6, 2015 by Veeltch

[mattinoz]

Oh, reaaaaally?

Call me crazy... but I don't see how this is a problem.

Clearly game time wins the day if I wrap ahead of that it's at the risk someone will invalidate my time line.

Indeed this to me only adds to the strategy.

So Player A wraps ahead grabs a window and goes and catches the asteroid.

Player B then has a couple of options seeing they hold the game time control.

1) find a faster path to win the race and seeing they control game time make it impossible for player A to win.

2) put something in player A way to invalidate their timeline but in the process hand them control of game time.

Then the situation reverses.

Good clean competitive fun.