Children of a Dead Earth: realistic space warfare game

[regex]

First impressions, the game needs a few more options for controls, most notably reversing the view controls when dragging/using the WASD key. It's completely backwards from every other game I've ever played.

E: Patch addressed that, sweet, I can actually play it now. Tomorrow.

Edited September 28, 2016 by regex

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

N-Body fallout: An hour and a half of very early morning skype calls and MSpaint work.

We're pretty sure we figured out how it works. Now to install N-body KSP mods

[Superfluous J]

I will freely admit I've only watched this on YouTube, and I've only watched Scott Manley play it, but it seems that this game has fallen way short of its promise. It seems an interesting set of orbital mechanic and space warfare themed puzzles, but by no means does it just give the player a universe to discover what space battles will be like in the future.

[Ciber]

On 10/5/2016 at 9:04 AM, 5thHorseman said:

I will freely admit I've only watched this on YouTube, and I've only watched Scott Manley play it, but it seems that this game has fallen way short of its promise. It seems an interesting set of orbital mechanic and space warfare themed puzzles, but by no means does it just give the player a universe to discover what space battles will be like in the future.

The ship and module design is where this game really shines for me. It is a really detailed simulation. I made an entire ship out of diamond and gold and it was terrible but so shiney. Also I found out that tantalum and tungsten makes the best thermocouple.

[regex]

On 10/5/2016 at 7:04 AM, 5thHorseman said:

I will freely admit I've only watched this on YouTube, and I've only watched Scott Manley play it, but it seems that this game has fallen way short of its promise. It seems an interesting set of orbital mechanic and space warfare themed puzzles, but by no means does it just give the player a universe to discover what space battles will be like in the future.

This was definitely my first impression. I am kind of hacked off that the later features are "paywalled" behind these puzzle missions, especially when drones and missiles prefer to use all their delta-V as fast as possible (and the controls for determining their actions are ... lacking). The mission-based structure of the game was also a let-down, but I can see why it was done that way, especially with the given computer specs.

That being said, I don't mind funding the guy in the hopes that he continues updating and addressing these issues, even if I'm not really excited about the game.

[WinkAllKerb'']

On 29/04/2016 at 3:45 PM, Canberra_Gaming said:

The moment every single Battle Club member has a purpose in life that they've been preparing for.

:3

[cantab]

On 26/10/2016 at 1:27 AM, regex said:

This was definitely my first impression. I am kind of hacked off that the later features are "paywalled" behind these puzzle missions, especially when drones and missiles prefer to use all their delta-V as fast as possible (and the controls for determining their actions are ... lacking). The mission-based structure of the game was also a let-down, but I can see why it was done that way, especially with the given computer specs.

That being said, I don't mind funding the guy in the hopes that he continues updating and addressing these issues, even if I'm not really excited about the game.

There's an option buried in the Infolinks to "Unlock All" without having to play through the missions.

I've been enjoying the game. It's not exactly what I expected, and I'm not sure I'm all that good at it, but it's certainly challenging and detailed and I'm glad I got it. I doubt I'll put in the kind of hours I've done in Kerbal though, CoaDE doesn't have the same kind of "open solar system" gameplay to it.

[tater]

I'd grab it if it wasn't Steam.

[Eldrad_Ulthran]

On 11/6/2016 at 0:24 PM, tater said:

I'd grab it if it wasn't Steam.

Tell me about it. I have a satellite connection at my Australian house with only 20gb.

 

In response to the OP, this looks like it would give the BDAc team a run for their money. (My brother mounts lasers on my craft.)

[weissel]

19 hours ago, owenmaley said:

Tell me about it. I have a satellite connection at my Australian house with only 20gb.

This will not be a real problem. With 20 GB you can download the less than 150 MB of the game at least 133 times …

[Eldrad_Ulthran]

4 hours ago, weissel said:

This will not be a real problem. With 20 GB you can download the less than 150 MB of the game at least 133 times …

Thanks for telling me that it is only 150 mb. I'm really worried that it is drm-intensive because my family uses the amount in <1/3 of the month before it refreshes.

[NSEP]

I am not sure if getting this is a good idea, but the desigmer thing must be REALLY fun to play with.

[monstah]

Sorry to dig up the old thread, but I have a question.

Now that the game is out, and all speculation has given way to concrete gameplay (and the game still looks ugly as hell but I'm still interested), and several of you seem to have bought the game, I must know: how does it compare to KSP in terms of my computer's performance?

I play KSP on a laptop, moderately modded - as in, SCANSat, Chatterer and around 20 other mods of a similar or lesser memory footprint, nothing heavy like EVE - and it runs at around 15-30 FPS, maybe 10 during launch. Is CoaDE to be playable in my computer?

The graphics seem very simple, and the ship doesn't seem to simulate rigid body interactions, on the other hand the dev blog does mention how railgun performance is calculated by integration of the forces over the trajectory of the slug inside the barrel, so one never knows

[cantab]

Core i3-6100, 16 GB RAM, GTX 750 Ti. Doing 'normal' stuff the game was mostly fine, except that on occasion it basically locked up when it tried to project the orbits too far. Like KSP, I can bring CoaDE to its knees if I try crazy stuff, such as a salvo of a thousand missiles.

[monstah]

I was a bit afraid of the n-body predictions, but then I realized the game is mission-based and only tracks a handful of ships at a time - until you launch that salvo of a thousand missiles you mentioned, that is  

But even so it seems that they mostly travel as a single 'squad' unit, until the actual encounter, during which you probably don't need orbital predictions.

I might buy it, I'll have a month's vacation coming and a 30-day KSP marathon will definitely burn me out  

[Cydonian Monk]

Wow, I still have the top-rated screenshot for this game on Steam. Nifty.

I really need to go back and play it some more. I still think it needs _more_ in the campaign, or a randomly generated campaign, or something like that, but as it is it's fun to tweak and nudge designs until you get them right. (There's an amusing quip about the part designer in a Steam review - person said they went in to change a nuclear reactor part and then had to stop because they also needed to understand how a nuclear reactor worked first.)

Worth buying, even if you only put ten hours or so into it.

[Diche Bach]

As usual, I'm about 20 months behind on the "latest thing."

Any of you lot still play this or have any contact with it?

I picked it up recently and played it up to Vesta Overkill. At which point I hit "the wall" and grew increasingly frustrated with it

http://childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/30233/thread

[regex]

I played a few missions recently but got fed up with targeting multiple missile fleets. Unless I'm not supposed to do that and instead launch eight thousand at once. vOv

I find the engine pretty fun to mess around in as far as designing ships though.

[Diche Bach]

Yep. Pretty much same here: I've got my money's worth (>25 hours probably close to 50), but I don't know if I'll go any further with it. My main complaints.

1. He calls it a "realistic space warfare" simulator. Rather I think it is a "Space Combat simulator that attempts to be as naturalistic as possible based on a conservative set of assumptions, and some ridiculously constraining asssumptions (no stealth, no economy, no logistic, no population dynamics).

2. The lack of social /ecological/contextual dynamics severely limits the "realism" of any given simulation.

3. It doesn't perform so well when there are lots of fleets/missiles/drones traveling around.

4. The radiation effects of nukes seem to be highly underestimated. I've seen papers from the 1960s that estimated a 10kt bomb would irradiate everyone within 10+ miles and 1MT would extend that out hundreds of units of distance.

5. 

[KSK]

On 12/11/2017 at 9:36 PM, Diche Bach said:

Yep. Pretty much same here: I've got my money's worth (>25 hours probably close to 50), but I don't know if I'll go any further with it. My main complaints.

1. He calls it a "realistic space warfare" simulator. Rather I think it is a "Space Combat simulator that attempts to be as naturalistic as possible based on a conservative set of assumptions, and some ridiculously constraining asssumptions (no stealth, no economy, no logistic, no population dynamics).

2. The lack of social /ecological/contextual dynamics severely limits the "realism" of any given simulation.

I haven't played the game due to a complete lack of interest in space warfare (which in my opinion is a stupid concept on many levels) but I have followed the discussion here. You've neatly  summed up my gripes about its basic premise and the more extravagant claims that it 'let's you discover how space warfare will work.'

 

[NSEP]

Is it bad that i only play this game for the rocket engine building? I never really do the whole fighting thing.

[Diche Bach]

Sounds like an "arms race" to me. He with the biggest check book wins.

[p1t1o]

7 hours ago, FennexFox said:

Just stop being a nerd

Boy, are you in the wrong place...

Fact is, stealth is a MUCH different question in space than on Earth, the factors and consideration are all different. Are all different categories. The current "REAL MILITARY" does not and has never, fought in space. It is a reasonable debate.

But to be fair, you are totally correct.

[Hypercosmic]

On 11/20/2017 at 6:06 PM, NSEP said:

Is it bad that i only play this game for the rocket engine building? I never really do the whole fighting thing.

I like to make planets in CDE, and yes it's not bad at all that you don't fight.

[adsii1970]

On 11/20/2017 at 5:06 AM, NSEP said:

Is it bad that i only play this game for the rocket engine building? I never really do the whole fighting thing.

followed by...

11 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

I like to make planets in CDE, and yes it's not bad at all that you don't fight.

I've never played this game because of the "combat ratings". Yeah, there are enough of those games out there for those who like them. But to be honest, I prefer to build and explore rather than destroy, which is the main reason I haven't bought this game. Can you play it without going to war with AI opponents?