Brainstorm This Perfect turning system - no half-assed solution

[Planr]

Keep in mind that even though we have arbitrary things like server speed limits and friction coefficents we are still in space, and therefore our thrusters should be putting out FORCE, and the amount of force should determine ACCELERATION and not SPEED. The amount of thrusters on your ship and the mass of your ship factor into how quickly your ship can change its velocity, not the velocity itself. Remember a=v/t, basic high-school physics here.

The game already works this way. The thrusters on ships put out an amount of force, and the strength of the force in comparison to its mass determines how fast it reaches a certain speed (acceleration).

 

[Valiant70]

The game already works this way. The thrusters on ships put out an amount of force, and the strength of the force in comparison to its mass determines how fast it reaches a certain speed (acceleration).

There was talk of allotting speed to each direction rather than thrust with the thrust rework, but I don't think anyone liked the idea.

 

[Malacodor]

The game already works this way. The thrusters on ships put out an amount of force, and the strength of the force in comparison to its mass determines how fast it reaches a certain speed (acceleration).

Not for rotations.

 

[Lecic]

There was talk of allotting speed to each direction rather than thrust with the thrust rework, but I don't think anyone liked the idea.

Acceleration rather than max speed in a direction is a better choice.

 

[Planr]

There was talk of allotting speed to each direction rather than thrust with the thrust rework, but I don't think anyone liked the idea.

Yeah, I certainly do not like that.

Not for rotations.

True. Personally I prefer for a decently simplified game system, so I don't want to have to deal with such minute engineering details. It already takes me months to build a 200-meter ship.

 

[Valiant70]

There are gameplay reasons to have rotational force and acceleration, like being able to get a big ship rotating faster at the expense of having to realize that you have to move the controls back to the neutral position so the ship's flight computer can counter your angular momentum and stop at the desired angle. I played a game like that once and it added a nice skill/finesse element to piloting large ships.

 

[Planr]

There are gameplay reasons to have rotational force and acceleration, like being able to get a big ship rotating faster at the expense of having to realize that you have to move the controls back to the neutral position so the ship's flight computer can counter your angular momentum and stop at the desired angle. I played a game like that once and it added a nice skill/finesse element to piloting large ships.

That's nice, but that brings to mind something I mentioned in a previous thread on ship mechanics.

Most of the suggestion threads i've seen for these kinds of complicated proposals for ship systems come from advanced-gameplay users that want more out of the game. That's fine, but they have to remember that most people who play Star-Made are not as advanced. You have to remember that this game needs to be functionally playable for new players, and you're going to make this game a lot more difficult for them with this system. For those who just know how to put a few reactor chunks down with some engines, make some angles with blocks, and call it a ship, this is just going to be another difficult obstacle that prevents them from simply building a ship that works and lets them play.

Those less advanced players are going to be the ones that suffer most from a system like this, and it's merely to satisfy the desires of a handful of advanced users who are not satisfied with the current depth of ship engineering in the game. Most of the people who use Starmade Dock are experienced/veteran players of this game, and most of the everyday ordinary players can only be found on the servers. I've witnessed the frustration those kinds of players have. The more complicated this game gets, the more it becomes confusing for them. The more it becomes confusing for them, the more they don't want to play any more because building a decent battleship is just too dang hard.

If you want to have this kind of system as an add-on mod, that's fine, but we need to remember that the vanilla game has to be playable and less complicated for less skilled people. That is something that I think some users who post these kinds of suggestion threads have forgotten, and it's why I feel that my suggestion for a simpler mass-based turning system is the best of both worlds.

 

[Malacodor]

That's nice, but that brings to mind something I mentioned in a previous thread on ship mechanics.

Most of the suggestion threads i've seen for these kinds of complicated proposals for ship systems come from advanced-gameplay users that want more out of the game. That's fine, but they have to remember that most people who play Star-Made are not as advanced. You have to remember that this game needs to be functionally playable for new players, and you're going to make this game a lot more difficult for them with this system. For those who just know how to put a few reactor chunks down with some engines, make some angles with blocks, and call it a ship, this is just going to be another difficult obstacle that prevents them from simply building a ship that works and lets them play.

Those less advanced players are going to be the ones that suffer most from a system like this, and it's merely to satisfy the desires of a handful of advanced users who are not satisfied with the current depth of ship engineering in the game. Most of the people who use Starmade Dock are experienced/veteran players of this game, and most of the everyday ordinary players can only be found on the servers. I've witnessed the frustration those kinds of players have. The more complicated this game gets, the more it becomes confusing for them. The more it becomes confusing for them, the more they don't want to play any more because building a decent battleship is just too dang hard.

If you want to have this kind of system as an add-on mod, that's fine, but we need to remember that the vanilla game has to be playable and less complicated for less skilled people. That is something that I think some users who post these kinds of suggestion threads have forgotten, and it's why I feel that my suggestion for a simpler mass-based turning system is the best of both worlds.

Maybe it's just me, but I find your system harder to understand than "like in real life".

 

[Valiant70]

That's nice, but that brings to mind something I mentioned in a previous thread on ship mechanics.

Most of the suggestion threads i've seen for these kinds of complicated proposals for ship systems come from advanced-gameplay users that want more out of the game. That's fine, but they have to remember that most people who play Star-Made are not as advanced. You have to remember that this game needs to be functionally playable for new players, and you're going to make this game a lot more difficult for them with this system. For those who just know how to put a few reactor chunks down with some engines, make some angles with blocks, and call it a ship, this is just going to be another difficult obstacle that prevents them from simply building a ship that works and lets them play.

Those less advanced players are going to be the ones that suffer most from a system like this, and it's merely to satisfy the desires of a handful of advanced users who are not satisfied with the current depth of ship engineering in the game. Most of the people who use Starmade Dock are experienced/veteran players of this game, and most of the acutal players can only be found on the servers. I've witnessed the frustration those kinds of players have. The more complicated this game gets, the more confusing it becomes for them.

If you want to have this kind of system as an add-on mod, that's fine, but we need to remember that the vanilla game has to be playable for less skilled people.

If it proves hard to control ships, it shouldn't be too much to add in a configurable vector-governor setting to limit max turning speed to something manageable. It would be set per-ship. The value (slider or whatever) would be a relationship between rotational thrust and max turning speed, and the default values would be novice friendly, allowing a ship to start turning and stop turning on a dime. Once players learned how to change their vector-governor settings they would experiment and find what they like best. Advanced pilots might switch the settings to very high values in order to perform extreme but difficult maneuvers. Overall this would give more room for pilot skill to shine and give more freedom to pilot preference.

 

[Planr]

If it proves hard to control ships, it shouldn't be too much to add in a configurable vector-governor setting to limit max turning speed to something manageable. It would be set per-ship. The value (slider or whatever) would be a relationship between rotational thrust and max turning speed, and the default values would be novice friendly, allowing a ship to start turning and stop turning on a dime. Once players learned how to change their vector-governor settings they would experiment and find what they like best. Advanced pilots might switch the settings to very high values in order to perform extreme but difficult maneuvers. Overall this would give more room for pilot skill to shine and give more freedom to pilot preference.

Again you're not understanding what i'm saying. Also, there is no such thing as "rotational thrust" in this game. And if I am reading you correctly, you're proposing that people be able to set a ship's turning speed to whatever they want? Do you have any idea how unbalanced and gameplay-breaking that is?

Once players learned

This is the problem right here. The system you're supporting adds on another thing players have to learn in order to have a good ship. I don't even understand this whole deal of vectors and governors that you're proposing (I don't even know what those terms mean), but if I as a veteran player and advanced shipbuilder don't understand it, think how lost an ordinary player would be with this extremely complicated system of yours.

Ultimately, SCHINE will decide what gets added into the game. Like I explained to you in the last thread we talked in, they're interested in what's practical, for both gameplay and the engine. They are not interested in adding complicated micromanaging mechanics just for the sake of "realism" or whatever it is people appeal to these days. I highly doubt your proposed system will ever be implemented in the default game. It'll probably be made as a mod, though.

 

[Valiant70]

Again you're not understanding what i'm saying. Also, there is no such thing as "rotational thrust" in this game. And if I am reading you correctly, you're proposing that people be able to set a ship's turning speed to whatever they want? Do you have any idea how unbalanced and gameplay-breaking that is?


This is the problem right here. The system you're supporting adds on another thing players have to learn in order to have a good ship. I don't even understand this whole deal of vectors and governors that you're proposing (I don't even know what those terms mean), but if I as a veteran player and advanced shipbuilder don't understand it, think how lost an ordinary player would be with this extremely complicated system of yours.

Ultimately, SCHINE will decide what gets added into the game. Like I explained to you in the last thread we talked in, they're interested in what's practical, for both gameplay and the engine. They are not interested in adding complicated micromanaging mechanics just for the sake of "realism" or whatever it is people appeal to these days. I highly doubt your proposed system will ever be implemented in the default game. It'll probably be made as a mod, though.

A governor setting is a setting that limits some aspect of a device or system. It might be used to make a system safer or more controllable for example. A vector governor is obviously a governor that controls a vector, in this case rotational velocity.

You can't just set a ship's turning speed. You can set your MAXIMUM turning speed. Ship design will determine rotational thrust and therefore the maximum angular acceleration of the ship. You can set your max speed to infinity on a Titan, but it still won't turn like a fighter. It will still turn like a fat slug. The difference is that silly settings would allow it to eventually get itself spinning like a top, flinging crew into the walls and squashing them to jelly (unless they happen to be Saiyans of course).

So why is this useful? Say I have a battleship and I want a newbie to be able to control it and aim the forward weapons. I'd give him one with the default vector governors which limit max turning speed to something that can be cancelled out on a dime so he won't swing past the target. He won't be able to maneuver very fast, but hey, he's a novice pilot so he has to start somewhere. Now say I give the same ship to a MLG pro. I might want the ship to be able to continue accelerating for 180 degrees and reach a very high rate of rotation. He'll have to anticipate angular acceleration and return the controls to neutral halfway between his initial and desired rotations to land on target. I would use something in the middle, taking about 1 second to start and stop rotating.

At this point it sounds like a pain, but it really wouldn't be. Right now, moving your mouse to the edge of the screen causes the ship to rotate at its maximum speed, and putting it part way over causes it to rotate at less than that. It would remain that way. To make a nice, easy turn with my settings, I'd push the stick about halfway over. To make a panic 180 in battle, I'd push the stick clear over until the ship has rotated to about 1 second before being on target, then release it and let the ship glide into position facing the new threat and open fire with the forward batteries.

Ultimately, SCHINE will decide what gets added into the game.

They are not interested in adding complicated multi-do-this-and-that system just for the sake of "realism" or whatever it is.

Ohai Schema. I didn't know Planr was your alt account.

 

[spacie]

Concerning complexity, using actual inertia with something similar to thrusters but for rotation should be quite intuitive.
All the "complicated" mathematics would all be in the background. An average player would only need to know three things, basically:

-making a ship wider/longer/taller makes it slower to rotate
-making a ship heavier makes it slower to rotate
-adding "rotation thruster blocks" makes it faster to rotate

The first is already somewhat part of the game (just the boxdims though), the second I'm not sure about, the third is basically the same system as the current linear thrusters, but applied to rotation. It shouldn't be that to grasp.
This is all assuming you don't use something like woohplah's option 2 from earlier, but a simpler method.

The actual hard part would be implementing it into the game and determining constants to keep play balanced.

 

[PizzaPress]

I think it would be best if we went back to mass-based for no-

Great news!! center of mass is now real center of the ship in dev:D

D-does that mean...
No more boxdims? If so,

I am going to put a long sticks out of every direction of my ship and no silly turn-rate nerf is going to stop me.

 

[Valiant70]

I think it would be best if we went back to mass-based for no-

D-does that mean...
No more boxdims? If so,

I am going to put a long sticks out of every direction of my ship and no silly turn-rate nerf is going to stop me.

I sure hope so. That boxdim turning factor has been the bane of my ship design career (along with the old docking system which I do NOT miss, and the lack of a non-core control center).

 

[Ithirahad]

I'm pretty sure turn rate is still calculated the same way. The only thing that changes now is the old core-as-a-turning-axis and the resulting stupid physics.

 

[PizzaPress]

I just want mass-based turning.
It's what we had before, it was better, and it's simple...
It's not perfect, but it's much better IMO.
;_;

 

[Valiant70]

I just want mass-based turning.
It's what we had before, it was better, and it's simple...
It's not perfect, but it's much better IMO.
;_;

I could live with that. I really could. We just need the HP update and massless or low mass decorations. Of course, we need those anyway.

 

[Lukwan]

I wont pretend I followed all of that. Or most of it. Maybe not very much at all but it sounded good to me. I would like the physics to reflect as much of my design as possible so that there is more variation in handling between ships like car-racing games have.

 

[nightrune]

Isn't this implemented now?

 

[Malacodor]

Isn't this implemented now?

Turn rate still seems to be a fixed value, so angular acceleration isn't in, yet. Regarding the inertia tensor itself I'm not sure, I asked but didn't receive an answer.