Breakable - 17 May 2010 07:17 PM

Matt’s example seems to be pretty good.

Yes, indeed. Only 3 variables. Maybe an “Experts” tab with as many as 10 variables if so desired…

I am just wondering if the input function (curve) should be generated each time randomly for unlimited game-play, or should it be static.

Breakable - 17 May 2010 07:17 PM

Matt’s example seems to be pretty good.

I agree: this is the sort of simulation I was talking about. Issue is, can someone work out the variables and the math involved?

Aeronaut - 17 May 2010 07:57 PM

Only 3 variables. Maybe an “Experts” tab with as many as 10 variables if so desired…

I see this as secondary, it can even be left out for the first version (KISS, you know?): what we want (always IMHO, of course) is making something easy to understand for people that don’t even know what fusion is…

If this could be done at all (I don’t worry about programming it, obviously, more about the math), what I envision for something like that could be:

Overview
Present the different types of proposed fusion device (Tokamak, Polywell, DPF, ...): maybe it’s even worth to throw a classical fission device in, to outline the differences. The purpose is getting as much efficiency and lower cost per watt, given the different fuels and taking in account the initial cost for the plant and processing of the waste.

Detail Level
I’d keep it very simple, maybe sample plants with all the necessary gear that can be customized in a limited and controlled way: of course, better points for good shielding (when needed), lower for unnecessary waste, and so on.
I think this would show very well the advantages of DPF over the other devices, especially when geared for aneutronic: it would be stupid not to notice the elegance of the principle and lack of complex ancillary systems that would make the solution cheap and secure at the same time…

Education
Each simulation should be completed by a brief description and history (animation, maybe?), with links to relevant sites: this would generate interest and traffic, and of course awareness in turn. In my experience, I’d also make possible to have an online scoring system.

Graphics
Yes, it could be started simple, but I wouldn’t make it too simple! People is used to get astounding graphics for games, even on mobiles, something that doesn’t catch the eye, as well as the mind, is unlikely to get much attention…
This, together with the math, is my main concern (as I have horrible graphic skills myself): could some good illustrator be involved? On the site we’ve nice animations, could something similar be planned for the game?

Entertainment
That’s difficult to define, and I’d appreciate any contribution in this direction. Maybe we don’t want to build up a community, as we’re not living out of it, a casual game has less stringent criteria but should still be intriguing enough to last more than a few seconds on the user device… Looking at users’ reviews is a telltale sign!

Sounds like an excellent grasp and framework, epimenide. Especially the linking plan. The math and graphics can come after a flow chart details their requirements in better detail.

Aeronaut - 18 May 2010 10:51 AM

The math and graphics can come after a flow chart details their requirements in better detail.

Well, what I can try to do then is drafting out some simple schema & chart, so we can start thinking over a common base: it’ll take a few days, as I have a day-to-day work to do, but of course if someone else has ideas related to this approach, they’re more than welcome!

Here is a related idea. It seems to me that risk is an important element of gaming, but what would be the risk with a DPF device? Electrode erosion? High voltage? Beryllium poisoning? Random cars jumping off the road and crashing into the vacuum chamber? North Korea copying your design and producing it first?

epimenide - 15 May 2010 01:26 PM

FarmVille: As it has been said, it’s quite dumb: no real knowledge of how a real farm is built, it will not get any better while you proceed in the game, nor there’s any connection with real-world agriculture as a whole… Still, people like to play it (and its clones): why then? Well, my personal answer is that there’s pleasure and entertainment in the sheer beauty and harmony of your creation! Showing it off to the other players, and searching cooperation for the most difficult tasks, is part of the “social” side, still the small adjustments here and there have little purpose other than make everything look as pretty as possible to one’s own eye.

This is an overlooked facet here.  There are hundreds of reactor designs and I’m sure that for an initial, broad-based appeal game, just tinkering with reactors will be absorbing enough.  (And we need a “wilt” equivalent.  If you don’t keep tinkering with your reactor - it will…short circuit?) 

Here’s a paper by Simon Woodruff that lists the hundreds of machines out there.  Another thing I’m thinking about is baseball cards so we can keep track. 

Here’s another Woodruff summary of ICC’s.  This one has pictures.  Both files are pdf’s

Fusion “Top Trumps”

Hi All,
  I’ve finally found enough time to draft something down, based on the simulation hypothesis that came out a few days ago.

You can find my basic ideas in this PDF sketch: it’s just a general overview and it definitely needs some work, but could be something we can start on building, assuming the simulation approach is worth pursuing. The risk, as it happens far too often, is to talk a lot and get nothing done: feel free to add / remove / modify any of the concepts in there, the faster we get to a defined outline, the better it is…

Looks good, epimenide. Lots of ways for a simple game to inform and support some sponsor ads to help fund the engineering phase.
How would player(s) fund their first reactor(s)?
Something for the data sheets might be the increased insurance, real estate, and disposal costs of dealing with D-T operations. I’m also thinking that we should weave Next Generation Fission into the options, since in some aspects their operations resemble tokamak operations.

Aeronaut - 28 May 2010 01:37 AM

How would player(s) fund their first reactor(s)?

I wouldn’t worry for the first release (that I’d try to keep as simple as possible, awareness is the target): if the actual score is a ratio between output power and costs, spending billions in the BOM list will probably get you higher in absolute wattage, but far lower in the leaderboard!
For the future (release 2?), we could add cost management, starting with bank loans and competing price per kW (taken from the other players in the leaderboard? That would be “social gaming” at its best, and add that “risk factor”), that assumes you’ll have to repay in a given time or bust, and resource management, that brings back to the “wilt” factor mentioned before: fuel gets burned in all cases, but, while pB is cheap and ready in no time, fission fuel would need difficult mining, enrichment, waste processing, thus is far more expensive and time consuming to get (leading to the need for careful planning to keep the plant running), and D-T would get in between the two.

Aeronaut - 28 May 2010 01:37 AM

I’m also thinking that we should weave Next Generation Fission into the options, since in some aspects their operations resemble tokamak operations.

Absolutely: I wouldn’t go to the full “hundreds of devices”, but focus on the few (4? 5? We definitely want DPF there, of course) that are actually being developed with some chances to get somewhere…

On more practical issues, we still need:
- A good designer / illustrator, would be perfect if with game experience
- A skilled physicist to work out the math behind the simulations (not a problem on this forum, I suppose?)

epimenide - 28 May 2010 07:57 AM

On more practical issues, we still need:
- A good designer / illustrator, would be perfect if with game experience
- A skilled physicist to work out the math behind the simulations (not a problem on this forum, I suppose?)

... and a eye-catching name, of course!

epimenide - 28 May 2010 08:03 AM

epimenide - 28 May 2010 07:57 AM

On more practical issues, we still need:
- A good designer / illustrator, would be perfect if with game experience
- A skilled physicist to work out the math behind the simulations (not a problem on this forum, I suppose?)

... and a eye-catching name, of course!

Glad you asked. This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LANwIgpha7k

Aeronaut - 28 May 2010 10:56 AM

epimenide - 28 May 2010 08:03 AM

... and a eye-catching name, of course!

Glad you asked. This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius

Good candidate!    Any other takers?

Pocket Plasma