StarMade News - November 9th 2015

[RabidBat]

With the increases required for space on ships, for cargo and soon AI crews, I think it's high time Schine looked at reducing the amount of blocks required for systems. I had suggested in another post that a way to do this is for example increase the mass and cost of blocks so say 1 block weighs and costs the same to make as 100 blocks or similar. E.g for power caps and thrusters etc. This would have a number of benefits outside of just adding space to ships imho, like being able to design smaller 'reactors' and ships that make a bit more sense than having half your ship filled up with system blocks to get it to the power levels and such it needs.

The weight and costs remain balanced as it takes you the same amount of time, cash and resource gathering to achieve the same results as having 100x more blocks. If you tried to spam the empty space with the same amount of blocks to get some kind of OP ship for the same block count the weight increase would penalise you with a ship that flew like a pallet of bricks.

Another upside to this I think is less blocks for the game to render meaning a performance increase as an offshoot and less reliance on laggy logic and docked entites from people trying to spam fill ships with generators etc to counter the current filling half your ship with power caps to get the power both in energy and weapons you need.

If you're going to be removing space from our ships and adding weight along with reducing our carrying amounts then it needs to be countered. I really do think this is a smart way to help people make better designed and more detailed ships.

Look at other space games or most sci-fi, They usually have reasonable sized reactors and power storage etc on most ships.
I seriously can see more pros than cons with doing such in the game.

 

[StormWing0]

Or people could just learn how to use the same amount of blocks over a smaller amount of space.

That said they've said they don't want people to feel like they have to build bigger just to keep up with things yet they keep adding things that do otherwise. >_>

In any event we need some kind of solution and preferably one that doesn't cause things go out of balance. The thing is though some people are going to build big just because they can or don't give a rip they don't have too.

 

[RabidBat]

I'm also concerned for how storage will work. Our factions one of the largest on our server and we're going to require decent storage space for each player. This is going to drastically change our stations design and might even make it redundant. Not so bad if we only had one or 2 players, but we're equipped currently for at least 10 players to each have 5 storage boxes. Even then that is barely enough for most of us due to how many slots each box has vs the amount of resources in the game.

Now add a decent sized storage room for each crate and the space of our station is going to change drastically. (as it is it's already half filled with just power caps to keep our base defenses operational.) So this new method of cargo really concerns me. I can understand the aspect of realism on ships, but going to be a nightmare for most with established stations I think.
[DOUBLEPOST=1447990113,1447989058][/DOUBLEPOST]

Or people could just learn how to use the same amount of blocks over a smaller amount of space.

That said they've said they don't want people to feel like they have to build bigger just to keep up with things yet they keep adding things that do otherwise. >_>

In any event we need some kind of solution and preferably one that doesn't cause things go out of balance. The thing is though some people are going to build big just because they can or don't give a rip they don't have too.

I honestly think it's a bad counter argument for it, especially as I stated the added weight and costs offset going large, also the game just in itself prevent it. Most I have spoken to directly have told me they think it's a good idea.

For example the server I play on people tend to build ships 1:1. But as Starmade is made in Java and isn't fully optimised, or is as optimised as it may ever get, we've noticed ships of certain sizes, especially when you have groups of them drop frame rates and cause lag when online, I have seen even small ships (250m) with a bunch of turrets, generators, logic, drop frames big time when you look in their general direction, ad especially when you have a fleet of ships along with you (most of ours are around 500m long.) When ships get so big that they start to lag they become unplayable, and in the case of our server the admins advise people to delete them or they themselves will.
Much of the problem comes from block count. And requiring less blocks for the same results would fix a lot of these issues.

I have an i5 3570k with a GTX 970 and 8gb of ram, and even that can struggle in a lot of circumstances, perfectly fine when mines the only ship on the screen, and even the 200,000 block max 'draw distance' doesn't cut it when you have a large station with a whole faction of ships docked at it. And we honestly design our ships well based on what we have to work with. So we reduced the block count even further to a smaller space and our ships become even weaker and slower. We'd like our ships to perform and look as there 'real life' counter parts.

So to convince me you'd need a better argument than 'use the same blocks over a smaller amount of space' I mean you do realise that doesn't even make sense right?

1000 blocks still takes up the same amount of room as 1000 blocks regardless of the layout......

But once again, the increase in mass and the lag factor along with decent admins will counter anyone just building massive ships for the sake of building ships. I mean you show me a server where you can have 3 or 4 1km ships in the same sector at the same time let alone 500m ones that are 'optimised' without lag or drops in frame rate and I'll be impressed and start believing there is a god.

Hell, I see people with mid range GPU's that build small ships that cannot see a 500m frigate 5 foot in front of them because they need to turn down their draw distance/block count to be able to fly or do anything. A reduction in block count imho is a benefit to all.

 

[StormWing0]

Wasn't an argument just too tired not to make it sound like one. XD

Good idea just you seem to forget there are people that are going to feel they have to build bigger to have an edge. Just like people in RPGs that feel they need to have 10x max level items just to have an edge.

Other than that it's a good idea.

 

[Lecic]

With the increases required for space on ships, for cargo and soon AI crews,

Most people aren't going to be making larger ships. They're just going to replace something else with crew. A battleship isn't going to be getting larger to store cargo, either. People are just going to say, "well, not storing things on my battleship unless I want to sacrifice something else now."

 

[RabidBat]

Most people aren't going to be making larger ships. They're just going to replace something else with crew. A battleship isn't going to be getting larger to store cargo, either. People are just going to say, "well, not storing things on my battleship unless I want to sacrifice something else now."

Not sure about that, many I know have salvagers on their 'battleships' to loot their kills. (I like to build mode salvage ships myself and have storage for loot, both for player and pirate kills.) But I do agree many aren't going to make larger ships, they're just going to sacrifice systems or hull to make the needed space unless their ships already have crew quarters and such built in. Or like myself they may increase their ships beyond their original design to compensate, many I think won't want to do that, they want their ships to remain authentic looking, I myself tend to favour outside looking legit over interiors as I rarely have others on board.
My ship currently doesn't look like it should or have a decent interior due to needing to keep it competitive on an active pvp server, been massively modified to get shields power and thrust to where they should be mostly due to the many re-balances over this year. After flying the same ship for about a year, I'm working on a larger one, which will hopefully counter most of my problems,having basically the same damage,shields power and thrust, while allowing me room to make the inside prettier and allow for cargo and crews, but sadly it's going to turn and fly like a brick as a consequence. :D

Anyways just trying to put an idea out there that I think makes some logical sense and to help make this game better,both aesthetically and performance wise. Heck I have even tried optimised power cubes etc, but that just lags up my entity menu to the point the game crashes as it seems the game can only record so many entities on a single structure instead of showing all entities as a type as a single unit. :p
[DOUBLEPOST=1447991857,1447991667][/DOUBLEPOST]

Wasn't an argument just too tired not to make it sound like one. XD

Good idea just you seem to forget there are people that are going to feel they have to build bigger to have an edge. Just like people in RPGs that feel they need to have 10x max level items just to have an edge.

Other than that it's a good idea.

Apologies, bit tired myself.
Of course people will try that, but I think they will only do so until they realise how it actually works against them. Some do have to learn the hard way sometimes lol.

 

[StormWing0]

lol me for example I try and fit the highest amount of anything I need or think I need into the smallest amount of space I can. :P

 

[kiraen]

The game isn't even 1/5th of the way complete. The paradigm will shift many more times, and ships will be rebuilt every time there is a shift.
You complain that your systems will become weaker because you have to cut out blocks to make space for NPCs. This is true. But you are forgetting three things.

1. NPCs will add there own benefits
2. You do not have to use NPCs and sacrifice the blocks
3. Everyone will be going thru the same thing

Yes, your ship will become weaker. So will mine. So will everyone elses.
The whole idea is that you are not supposed to have one huge ship that can do everything better then anyone. If that actually happens then the game balance is broken. (Think of it like a game of rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock.) A generalized ship is always weaker then a specialized ship of comparable mass within that specialty. The pilot of the specialized ship will always try to manipulate events to emphasis their specialty. And the generalized ship will always have a weaker counter. It's simple math.

So, multiply the stats on the blocks. It doesn't matter. Your ship will be 10 times more powerful. So will mine. And in three months both ships will be obsolete again.

 

[GaeasSon]

Yes, your ship will become weaker. So will mine. So will everyone elses.

Noooooooooooo! Not my ship! (sobs) My beautiful ship! (sniffle)

 

[RabidBat]

The game isn't even 1/5th of the way complete. The paradigm will shift many more times, and ships will be rebuilt every time there is a shift.
You complain that your systems will become weaker because you have to cut out blocks to make space for NPCs. This is true. But you are forgetting three things.

1. NPCs will add there own benefits
2. You do not have to use NPCs and sacrifice the blocks
3. Everyone will be going thru the same thing

Yes, your ship will become weaker. So will mine. So will everyone elses.
The whole idea is that you are not supposed to have one huge ship that can do everything better then anyone. If that actually happens then the game balance is broken. (Think of it like a game of rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock.) A generalized ship is always weaker then a specialized ship of comparable mass within that specialty. The pilot of the specialized ship will always try to manipulate events to emphasis their specialty. And the generalized ship will always have a weaker counter. It's simple math.

So, multiply the stats on the blocks. It doesn't matter. Your ship will be 10 times more powerful. So will mine. And in three months both ships will be obsolete again.

I understand the game is constantly changing and we need to allow for that. I do get Early Access game is early access game. But you've seemed to miss my main point. Which is not my ship get's weaker or stronger or whatever, but which is the current block counts on many ships is high, way too high, for the end results. This game is already poorly optimised from being in development and being that is uses Java, although it has come a long way I can admit. And my suggestion is to help counter this. Reduced block count = better performance and ability to render more entities for the game. Faster loading etc. 100 blocks is much quicker to render than 1000, and would have better results for all, especially those playing on toasters.

This for me is an issue of a technical nature, addressing making the game run better on every PC. Hopefully taking some load off of peoples CPU's GPU's and Memory.
I am not interested in rebalancing gameplay, it's about keeping the game as it is now while decreasing the amount of blocks required to build basic logic and systems to make the game run faster/smoother. Game engine performance. Reducing the fps drop on loading new areas like a station with a fair few large ships docked.

Game claims to the scalability to run on even older computers, yet scalability seems to be "turn everything down and not see further than 5 meters in front of you" to maintain 20 fps. (going by visitors at my base asking "what ship?" when I am talking to them about my ride and it's been right docked there in front of them for the last 10 minutes due to how the game renders and loads blocks in.
I've had people crash 5km from my base while coming to visit while my PC handles my base and all the ships docked there fairly fine.

I made quite a few points about why I think the reduced blocks in exchange for mass is a good idea. Many you overlooked. Common problem with forum discussions. We often tend to cherry pick what suits us and our view points.

My points about realistic sizes, or as realistic as a video game about spaceships can be. Heck even airplanes in an atmosphere are not 3/4 filled with just the equipment required to fly them. I understand a small fighter or transport will have just a cockpit or small area for a crew while 3/4 of the craft is filled with systems, it makes sense, but a frigate or destroyer should be almost 2/3 empty and still be tough as nails.

Let me give you an example with a popular scifi ship. Pretty much any scifi ship will be similar though if you can find a blueprint.

You can see the systems for weapons, power, shields and maneuverability take up a relatively small amount of space, most of the ship is open and filled with crew space areas. As seen in Star Trek a ship like the Enterprise can usually give and take quite a bit of damage. Takesa licking and keeps on kicking.
Now if you built the ship to similar dimensions in StarMade, it'd be lucky if it could move or accelerate let alone fire it's weapons,weapons that you'd be lucky if they could even scratch the paint on another ship if they did fire.

If you built the ship to specifications to have power shields thrust and weapons on par with it's TV and film counter part most of this ship would be filled with blocks leaving little for interior design and crew space.

Ships be they terrain based or space bound I feel need to have smaller reactors. Many other space sims where you can see a cross section of your ship or walk about in it and explore pretty much follow the same guidelines.

The whole idea is that you are not supposed to have one huge ship that can do everything better then anyone.

I'd have to disagree with that. I know of few people that do not want their ship to be better than another players when combat is on the agenda or in general. Games with PvP elements are always competitive. It goes hand in hand with the strategic elements, plus it doesn't need to be one huge multi role ship, a specific role support ship can still suffer from the same issues. Any way like my opinions here, that is just your opinion. Which I can at least respect even if I do disagree with it.
But for me it's like the Empire in Star Wars saying, hey we better weaken our Star Destroyers so them Rebels have a even chance......

You talk about balance, when it is exactly balance that I am after. Form and function combined with a dose of performance.
Also as I stated the 100 blocks weighs and costs the same as 1000 block type of mechanic counters and deals with any balance issues anyone may have. And once more, less blocks = more on screen at once, higher frames and faster loading.

I mean for all intents and purposes my current ship would behave and perform as it currently does, but I would have greater room for detailed interiors which would make boarding and ship combat more fun. I'm not looking or asking for "make teh game eezier for meez pluz."
And I acknowledge they have done great work on balancing weapons and shields etc number wise this year.
I feel if anything it would actually encourage better ship design and combat and add more thought to it. Several small power and shield reactors to protect against targeting vs running power and shields throughout your entire ship so it keeps on ticking after heavy damage? It'd make players think about design a lot more I imagine.

Hope this clears up any misconceptions you seem to have about my desires here.

 

[kiraen]

You seem to think that by increasing the output value of the weapons that people will reduce the number of blocks that they use.
"The cannon is 20% stronger now so I will get rid of 20% of my barrels and still have the same damage!"
Sadly, that is not the case. Most players will simple respond with "Cool, I'm 20% stronger now!".
Perhaps you think is is the mass that will make the difference. Nope. Some blocks will definitely be removed, but only to be replaced with thrusters.
Changing the values of the blocks will change the balance, but it will not effect the size of the ship. This has nothing to do with the game, it has to do with human nature.
"It doesn't crash my game, so it's not my problem."

Secondly, yes, everyone wants their ship to be the best in the galaxy. But this is a numbers game. What people want is completely irrelevant. There is a finite limit to the number of blocks that a ship can have. Whether it is defined by the config or by the server specs ( I know you understand this part).
If you spread your block allocations out so each system has an equal percentage, you will lose to the first specialized ship you encounter. The missile ship will overwhelm your PD/AMS in seconds. The beam ship will tear thru your shields like they were paper. The armor ship will just laugh as you try to scratch his paint. It is not possible to have one ship that is "best" at everything. It simply can not happen. This is not an opinion, this is math.

As for the UFP, they sacrificed a significant amount of systems space to allow for crew. The borg otoh built big and use only the most minimal of space for crew. The UFP got it's ass kicked, but hey still won in the end because of the crew and boarding parties.

Some people may sacrifice blocks for NPCs. Some people may not. It's all about play style. Changing the value of those blocks will have very little, if any, effect on that decision. Feel free to gild the lily.

An additional note, increased interior means increased exposed block faces. Which means an increase in rendering load. Say what you want about the solid-state ships, the gpu load is lower then if they were hollow.

 

[Ithirahad]

Yeah, the amount of polygons that would be in that Enterprise example is a bit ludicrous. I'd much rather someone have, eh, 5 decks in that thing (including engineering), than something canon-accurate that's filled from bow to stern with interior details. :\

 

[therimmer96]

Yeah, the amount of polygons that would be in that Enterprise example is a bit ludicrous. I'd much rather someone have, eh, 5 decks in that thing (including engineering), than something canon-accurate that's filled from bow to stern with interior details. :\

To be fair, a ship like that isn't all that hard to render. SM is much more optimized than MC, and I can get a decent FPS on any of the full RP builds over on minetrek.net.

 

[GaeasSon]

Wait.... IF I had built that particular ship.... to scale... based on blueprints and with all listed systems..... (rolls around on the ground for several minutes laughing)

http://starmadedock.net/content/star-trek-constitution-tos.75/

So no... I don't have all the decks. I also don't have a full crew compliment of 430 Daves.
I created the decks necessary for a role-playing experience. I created the weapons that I could, based on the remaining volume, balancing mass against thrust, against power.
balancing all of those requirements, including aesthetics and fidelity to the plans, to produce the best ship that I can... THAT is the heart of the game to me.

 

[therimmer96]

Why haven't you guys created the usual thread for discussing the update yet? Are we getting a dev blog aswell or something? :D

 

[Lecic]

I sure hope the game doesn't require THAT much crew space. Interiors cause more lag, and having to load that many crew is going to have issues as well.

 

[RabidBat]

I am not saying build a perfect replica, it's to stress the point of system sizes/scale and block counts vs performance. Really is it that hard to grasp what I am getting across here?

Honestly feels like I am saying the sky is blue, but everyone is replying as if I have said it is red.

Also do not know how many times I have to say it, but if you can only afford 1000 blocks for a ship now, you're not going to magically be able to afford 1000 blocks when 100 costs and weighs the same. Which will counter anyone spamming the now free space with more systems.

If they did they'd end up with a ship as heavy slow and bigger as if they'd added 10,000 blocks as the game is now which would work against them or the ship would become so laggy server admins would tell them it has to go.

I pray for the day people on forums or any text only form of interaction actually read entire posts instead of between the lines and do not take everything literally and learn what context is. It will be a glorious day for teh internets indeed and possibly a sign the apocalypse is upon us. :p
LOL

You seem to think that by increasing the output value of the weapons that people will reduce the number of blocks that they use.

No you seem to think that is what I am thinking. Your perception and what I actually think are two very different things. I didn't just state "Increase teh powers and nothing else." "givez me moar powerfool shipz!!!!"

Ah the joys of the tl;dr society the world has become. :D

 

[kiraen]

I am not saying build a perfect replica...

Actually, you did.

If you built the ship to specifications...

Honestly feels like I am saying the sky is blue, but everyone is replying as if I have said it is red.

I think you are attempting to compensate for your rose colored glasses.

Also do not know how many times I have to say it, but if you can only afford 1000 blocks for a ship now, you're not going to magically be able to afford 1000 blocks when 100 costs and weighs the same. Which will counter anyone spamming the now free space with more systems.

With regards to price this may be true initially, but eventually they will be able to afford more blocks. And then they will buy them and have 1k blocks. This just slows down the expansion of the ship. It certainly will not halt it.
More importantly, why is this is space suddenly free? People are not going to get rid of block just because they have suddenly gotten more powerful. It doesn't matter how much they cost if I already have them.

If they did they'd end up with a ship as heavy slow and bigger as if they'd added 10,000 blocks as the game is now which would work against them or the ship would become so laggy server admins would tell them it has to go.

Nope. This 1k block ship would be no more laggy then a 1k block ship is now. Block count has less to do with lag then actual surface area. A 10x10x10 cube will have to render 600 block faces A 1x1000 line will have to render 4002 block faces.
Slower, not really. You see, even tho the weight and mass have increased, so has the power of the thrusters. End result, no change in thrust.
As far as bigger, last I checked 1000 was roughly equal to 1000. I'm not a mathlete tho, so someone check me on this.

I pray for the day people on forums or any text only form of interaction actually read entire posts instead of between the lines and do not take everything literally and learn what context is. It will be a glorious day for teh internets indeed and possibly a sign the apocalypse is upon us.

No you seem to think that is what I am thinking. Your perception and what I actually think are two very different things. I didn't just state "Increase teh powers and nothing else." "givez me moar powerfool shipz!!!!"
Ah the joys of the tl;dr society the world has become. :D

With these two statements, one immediately after the other , I just don't know how to respond.


Moving on...

 

[GaeasSon]

Really is it that hard to grasp what I am getting across here?

Honestly? yes. The responses you have received were entirely appropriate for what you actually wrote. If they don't seem appropriate to the message you intended to convey, you may wish to re-check your communication as written. Are you carefully constructing an argument for a clear idea, or are you furiously waiving your hands at something you think should be obvious if anyone would just look?

 

[CaptainTaz]

I believe RabitBat is trying to say that we condense blocks basically. make 1 block = 10 in mass, power usage, cost, and weight, so that ships don't HAVE to be 90% systems to be functional.