A concept to fundementally change warpgate functionality.

[Sgtwisky]

Hum. Overall I like the idea. I think there could be a few things added though.

First I would add the ability to link multiple gates as "Exit Gates". These would have to be gates that are ether your faction's or an allies faction. Maybe neutral gates but I'm not sure about that one. There could be a max linked gates value that could be changed in the server config. any number less then zero would mean unlimited gates. And of course if a linked gate were destroyed or your faction relationship changed the link would be rendered unusable.

Note: If station A has station B as an exit gate, Station B does NOT need to have Station A as an exit link.

If/When you use a linked exit gate It drastically reduces the power requirements compared to a jump without a linked exit gate.

If/When you use a linked exit gate you also do not have the ship debuff's that would happen otherwise.

The above I feel would encourage people to build exit/return gates to frequently visited things, or for strategic purposes like helping defend an allies base. Incentivizing players to expand their infrastructure in order to move large ships, long distances without having to wait over an hour and 6 minutes before someone else can make the same jump. While not punishing anyone that doesn't want to bother building out a gate network.

Also remove the map lines. If someone wants to know where my gate goes, they need to ether be given access to use it (and thus can see exit points) OR destroy the faction block and then access the gate.

 

[NeonSturm]

I agree with all but:

Also remove the map lines. If someone wants to know where my gate goes, they need to ether be given access to use it (and thus can see exit points) OR destroy the faction block and then access the gate.

map lines are not the issue. the issue is station protection not being balanced.

Maybe just get rid of warpgates, and adapt the existing wormholes to fill this gap (e.g. a wormhole computer that must be programmed with your destination, and also have adequate power to "focus" your jump). Having chokepoints in the game would certainly add an interesting twist for interactivity. Interdictors would also be quite nifty.

As a server option it could be … interesting to see what the community comes up with.
I am not convinced that this would be better for everyone.

 

[MacThule]

map lines are not the issue. the issue is station protection not being balanced.

Yeah...

This is what so many of the core, long-term problems in StarMade Multi-player comes down to again and again. Station defense under current conditions is hopeless. It's the real cause behind gates being under-used, the main thing inhibiting any true PvP from happening, and the main thing keeping players locked down in their one base that IS safe almost all the time (ruining interaction). All these ideas for fixing gates are great, but really they come down to working around the fact that stations are 1) indefensible and 2) highly visible to any player from any location.

Having an omni-directional single gate for long warps is enticing to us all because then we could actually have warp gates... or at least ONE warp gate on our ONE safe station, because currently any warp route we set up in MP has a very short life expectancy.

Now I'm thinking of going back and bumping one of the threads for fixing station defense, because that's what this is about more than anything.

 

[NeonSturm]

Having an omni-directional single gate for long warps is enticing to us all because then we could actually have warp gates... or at least ONE warp gate on our ONE safe station, because currently any warp route we set up in MP has a very short life expectancy.

Exactly!​

Local governments being hire-able to protect gates, discussed here together with lively hub-sectors.

TG gate-network - A setup by NeonSturm 2 Agrees, but I'd like more feedback - I put a lot of effort in it, not just when I wrote it.

The many small free gates would still encourage large player-built gates and could promote PvP.
But large gates are required to quickly move big fleets with enough firepower for killing stations (that's why the gates are so small in this suggestion-thread).

​

But here is a new idea:

Every faction set to enemy can only attack 1 station every week.
They can choose which, but just 1.
​

You have to set a faction to enemy to be able to attack them, but then they can attack you too.

 

[Madman198237]

Stations do need extreme buffs, but it can be difficult to find a non-claimed-system station...unless it has the warpgate line going out from it...which is just OP as can be.

 

[lupoCani]

But:What if it works not from a gate to open space, but vice versa - the gate catches your ship's FTL-jump?

That would be a really interesting mechanic to add.

I think there's very much room to extend this idea. In terms of general purpose and function, I think it's agreed that the role of gates is to be powerful, and the role of drives is to be mobile. If we want to give mobility to warp gates, as we're doing now, how about we integrate them with drives proper?

Insofar as I can see, a jump consists of a hyperlaunch and a drop-out. Technically, these are just decoration, but they do seem like a solid foundation for a system. Currently, if you were launched by a drive, you have to be dropped out by a drive, and the same holds true for gates. A jump is either drive-drive or gate-gate. Suppose we lifted this restriction.

This would leave us with four kinds of FTL:

• Drive-Drive, "hyperjump". This is the current standard jump procedure. Weak launch and weak drop-out, but completely flexible.
• Drive-Gate, "jump to beacon". A jump that's started by a shipboard drive, but received by a gate. Weak launch, but with a powerful drop-out. The range is longer than that of a regular jump, but the destination is fixed to one with a functioning warp gate.
• Gate-Drive, "boost jump". A jump that's launched by a gate, but the ship drops itself out of hyperspace. Strong launch, weak drop-out.This means the destination is anywhere, and the range is better than Drive-Drive, but limited compared to-
• Gate-Gate, "gate jump". Launched by a gate, received by a gate. Strong launch and drop-out, maximal range, so long as there's a gate on both ends. Of course, the ship is not required to have a jump drive.

Maybe this a suggestion of it's own, but do think this is a valid approach to the issue at hand.

 

[Madman198237]

It might be for a suggestion of its own, but it would be nice (If the OP agrees) if this were edited into the OP as a revision of the suggestion. If the OP disagrees, then it gets its own suggestion. I like the idea of integrating various forms of FTL, and think that this mechanism makes sense and would be fun to use.

 

[Jaaskinal]

That seems like a logical way to approach it, but I'd be interested in seeing the differences between the strong factors and the weak factors. Perhaps there would be some disruption mechanism that stems from either jump-inhibitors, or something like them?

Besides that though, I love this idea.

 

[NeonSturm]

This would leave us with four kinds of FTL:

Actually more:

gate-gate-gate
jump-gate-jump
gate-jump-gate
gate-jump-gate-gate-jump-gate
…​

How about: you can plan your jump through any sectors in a straight line to some destination or through gate-sectors and even 100 sectors long without any gate on that path.
But where you drop out is dependent on your FTL-power which is calculated before the jump and can be extended by gates on the path.

I think gates should refill your jump energy and dropping-out should cost nothing.

Or who likes to be trapped in hyperspace until your power refills?
Wouldn't this allow either infinite jumps or implode your ship? (Yesss, FTL-space implodes your ship!)
​

FTL-blocks add jump-charges to your ship. The more you have, the longer you can remain in FTL without going through a gate.

Whenever you travel through a gate sector, your jump power is refilled by 10% of the remaining power of that gate.

if the gate has 2000 jump-power at the time you put your lock on the gate and start your jump
and you used 100/900 jump-power in your ship, the gate offers you 200 power and you can take 100 of that
​

When you jump from gate to gate, up to 4*16 sectors are powered by the source-gate, 4*16 sectors by the destination gate.

But the gate has to have 10 times that amount in storage, or you have to have the missing amount stored in your ship.
​

Code-wise, you have to check the gate ownership before entering jump and put a lock on the gate's power which expires automatically if it isn't removed earlier.

(you reserve that power for you, other ships will see the power remaining without the power reserved by you and are thus only able to reserve 10% of 90% remaining).

90%, 81%, 73%, 64%, 58%, 52%, 47%, 42%, 38%, 34%, 31%, 28%, 25%, 22%, 20%, 18%, 16%, 14%, 13%, 12%, 11%, 10%​

The more peoples which use the gate, the less power it has for everyone.

Actually, it charges between the locks too, so it may remain "stable" near 10% or near 52%.
​

You do not have to load the whole gate/sector, only xy size, capacity for power, power regeneration and permissions.
And power-regeneration is checked only when a new lock is added based on the time elapsed.

The lock itself has an expiration time of 90 seconds, so you have to refresh it every 60 seconds.

(but that could be a server-option depending on the amount of gate-locking by jerks and server-power or gate-setups)​

The lock basically subtracts capacity and re-adds it when the timer expires or the lock is used or freed.

(the timer is a safety measure to avoid most perma-locking bugs)​

 

[MacThule]

LupoCani's solution is fun and elegant. There is a lot of fine tuning to be done with it, details up for debate, but stitching the two together would be just fantastic.

Gate->drive jumps would likely still have to result in a ship with no jam, no cloak, zero power, zero shields, and weapons all starting cool down cycles to prevent abuse.

 

[Atas-Pelangi]

I have an alternative.
have 2 modes that can activate.
mode 1) have a set range one way jump that uses the same NAV CON as the jump-drive.
mode 2) link system. gates connected as they do now get twice the distance GATE To GATE

if no target is active going into the gate you go to the default.

example:
you can jump 4 systems (64 sec) in any direction or 8 (128 sec) point to point (current)


Warp Gate Computer - StarMade Wiki

 

[Jasper1991]

What what I am gathering from the Original Post....

I don't like this, simply because the method shown only allows one way travel.

Sure, you can travel anywhere you want, but how the fuck are you going to get back to your warpgate?

Unless you proposed something in the comments that isn't listed in the Original Post, this suggestion will need to be given much more thought.

Think about it for a second. If you use your warpgate you go to a sector 1000km away, how are you going to get back after your done in that remote sector?

Your going to use a logic drive that's how, and I am pretty sure this suggestion is so that people stop using logic drives.

 

[kikaha]

For me the problem with warpgates are the lines on the map.

Also, warpgates should have a range of travel at least 10 times bigger than jumpdrive by default.

Warpgate should have some sort of invulnerability like home base but this invulnerability would "deplete" slowly if the gate is "underused". Some sort of faction point system ? I mean the more your are present in the sector the more faction points you have in that sector hence tthe stronger you are in that sector. Thus protecting your assets more or less strongly relative to your actual phisical presence in a sector claimed.

 

[Nauvran]

What what I am gathering from the Original Post....

I don't like this, simply because the method shown only allows one way travel.

Sure, you can travel anywhere you want, but how the fuck are you going to get back to your warpgate?

Unless you proposed something in the comments that isn't listed in the Original Post, this suggestion will need to be given much more thought.

Think about it for a second. If you use your warpgate you go to a sector 1000km away, how are you going to get back after your done in that remote sector?

Your going to use a logic drive that's how, and I am pretty sure this suggestion is so that people stop using logic drives.

or you do what sane people do and take enough resources with you to make another warpgate so you can get back.

 

[Jasper1991]

or you do what sane people do and take enough resources with you to make another warpgate so you can get back.

Incorrect.

People are not going to sit there for 5-10 minutes in the same sector building a warpgate, waste resources and probably never use it again when they could easily just fit a logic drive and press a single button and wait 20 seconds to start jumping back.

 

[Nauvran]

Incorrect.

People are not going to sit there for 5-10 minutes in the same sector building a warpgate, waste resources and probably never use it again when they could easily just fit a logic drive and press a single button and wait 20 seconds to start jumping back.

those kind of people wouldnt have had the first gate to start with.

 

[Jasper1991]

I think a way this COULD allow for 2 way travel would be to have it function similar to wormhole stations in Stellaris

You can go anywhere you want, you can also remotely interface with the gate to take you back to it (obviously having a cooldown and the remote interface is preventable (jump inhibitors?) to ensure its not abusable or overpowered)

Although this method presents problems in itself, such as scanners not being able to tell where a hostile went

So like I said, this needs a lot more thought put into it.

 

[Nauvran]

I think a way this COULD allow for 2 way travel would be to have it function similar to wormhole stations in Stellaris

You can go anywhere you want, you can also remotely interface with the gate to take you back to it (obviously having a cooldown and the remote interface is preventable (jump inhibitors?) to ensure its not abusable or overpowered)

should rather be preventable when enemies are visible in the nav menu. or at least have a long charge up like the emergency warp in battlefleet Gothic armada

 

[Jasper1991]

should rather be preventable when enemies are visible in the nav menu. or at least have a long charge up like the emergency warp in battlefleet Gothic armada

If something like this what put in however, you would need some way for scanners to tell where they went (where the station is) so that targets cannot flee via this and never be seen again.

Perhaps scanners should have a way to detect "signatures" in the same sector of a recent use of these stations?

 

[Nauvran]

If something like this what put in however, you would need some way for scanners to tell where they went (where the station is) so that targets cannot flee via this and never be seen again.

Perhaps scanners should have a way to detect "signatures" in the same sector of a recent use of these stations?

well if we go with the battlefleet idea then the ships would have to stay still (as if you were reparin it) while it charges for X amount of time before jumping. this would give the enemy time to destroy the ship before it runs away and it makes it so that you need to be more tactical about when you try to retreat.
Just ideas floating around