Question; WHEN are you going to do this power change?

[taisong]

Because timing is crucial on this subject.

Are you guys going to do it ASAP, or are you guys going to finish all the game mechanics, then come back?

This question is probably what everyone want to see answered.

Just tell us when you WANT to do this change. Not when it WILL change.
[doublepost=1487605143,1487604767][/doublepost]okay, I found the answer on one of the threads.
right before going into beta.

 

[kurosawa]

I think they just wanted to air there planes for the games for now.
but could you at least link the answer you found ?

 

[Gasboy]

Because timing is crucial on this subject.

Are you guys going to do it ASAP, or are you guys going to finish all the game mechanics, then come back?

This question is probably what everyone want to see answered.

Just tell us when you WANT to do this change. Not when it WILL change.
[doublepost=1487605143,1487604767][/doublepost]okay, I found the answer on one of the threads.
right before going into beta.

No, that was just one of the devs saying that his preferred choice of time for the change is when the game goes from alpha to beta. It makes sense to do it then, but that does not mean Schema is going to do it then. They have to first nail down the exact form of the change, and how all the other systems will be affected. Only then can they determine a timeline.

Have patience, you must.

 

[Panpiper]

So everything you design, build and learn with regard to ships between now and the end of alpha is basically a complete waste of time. Then at the end of alpha, so it's too late to actually fix major design problems, we'll have the opportunity to stress test the design, and discover if it too has ways to optimize builds. If it does, that will be perceived again to be a problem to be fixed, and if it doesn't, it will be as boring a plug and play system as anything Space Engineers has created.

I guess I will be playing other things until Starmade is out of alpha. Then I'll give it a look to see if there is anything left in the build system to be a challenge to master. If they have been successful in their redesign efforts, there won't be any such challenge left and I will be off to find a game with more meat.

 

[kikaha]

Pfff !!! Can no one read ?

They said in the original post that they were thinking about changing the way power works, not that they were going to change it for sure...

 

[Sachys]

Pfff !!! Can no one read ?

They said in the original post that they were thinking about changing the way power works, not that they were going to change it for sure...

THANKYOU!

I'm a bit sick of it all now - especially the blind "its going to happen" contexts.

Also, good to see ya!

 

[kingreol]

Pfff !!! Can no one read ?

They said in the original post that they were thinking about changing the way power works, not that they were going to change it for sure...

a lot of the posters, had a read-between the lines attitude. rightfully so given many know schema. and how development has worked in the past. plus we do not know how he Personally feels about his idea. we really need a devblog and feedback from schema on how he feels about the community reaction.. Indeciveness will strangle the community

some want the power update done ASAP just to get it over with, ie the announcement caused a stop to building and playing the game untill said update comes out. if it does.

its been a week and so far the ONLY posts have been about power overhaul. which is a community problem that needs to respected. we should be excited for the next major update to say fleets, npc, ai coming soon.

 

[DukeofRealms]

To tell the truth, no one at Schine knows when or if we'd be working on this system. We make proposals for systems quite often; some past proposals sat gathering dust for years before we eventually got around to them. We're simply opening up this process to the community.

A proposal that is so massive and far-reaching takes a lot of time to mature, as I've said this before in the thread. If we're going to rework power, the earlier we start planning for it, the better.

If a new system is designed, matured and approved, the next step would be finding where we put that onto our internal development maps. As I mentioned, our main focus for 2017 is to cover major ground towards beta, so core feature implementation. If it was approved, there would be a massive internal discussion and planning for when we start implementation.

I'm not sure where an overhaul would fit in our 2017 plans, in my own view, I see overhauls being right at the end of alpha, transitioning to beta (so after we've implemented all major features). From my brief discussions with other team members, there is no consensus on when we would begin implementation if approved. That's a large discussion we will have to have.

I mentioned I would prefer to see overhauls implemented in late alpha. That certainly wouldn't mean the feature would be worked on in late alpha, it would likely be available as a secondary system activated by config for some time, for testing and balancing. My preferences matter very little, I believe that the majority at Schine have a different view of when it should be switched, if it goes through.

To answer your question, no one knows if or when it would happen. No one knows for sure when they think it should happen. We're at step 1, very early stages. A second proposal will be made, perhaps a third, even a fourth.

 

[Sachys]

its been a week and so far the ONLY posts have been about power overhaul. which is a community problem that needs to respected.

Can you expand on the context of your statement please? - because some of the titles and content here and elsewhere say otherwise: Suggestions

Though if you do mean in terms of community interaction, yes, the majority has been fixated on it.

 

[kingreol]

i was speaking mostly about general thread posts in the past week. at least some people are respecting not flooding suggestions. cause if we had every suggestion in the power overhaul thread make it there. it would bump out all the other non overhaul suggestions made.

 

[Lecic]

In any way resembling the current idea of heatboxes, minuscule system counts, and massive amounts of useless filler? Hopefully never.

 

[kingreol]

In any way resembling the current idea of heatboxes, minuscule system counts, and massive amounts of useless filler? Hopefully never.

why the opposition to minuscule system counts in of itself. is it simply because its anti-minmaxing and lessens the difference between poor design and We did a lot of Math on this design. the only change i see is the relative power between the pvp guys and pve, rp guys. how will this hurt the game for a wider audience? yes it would be dumbing the pvp side of the game down. but right now STEMlord level has to be reached to pvp.... how many players in this game have participated in faction based player vrs player combat vrs the ones that are not currently involved.. personally i feel its around 100 individuals. maby 150.

i agree with heatboxes. that just sounds like a pain in the ass to deal with.

 

[Lecic]

why the opposition to minuscule system counts in of itself.

Because I would rather have the blocks I'm placing matter than have them be a useless filler block. Beyond that, the general reduction of system counts will massively increase the amount of time it takes to kill or disable ships, because almost everything is filler.

EDIT- Also, reducing system counts does not reduce mixmaxing.

 

[kingreol]

no it would not stop minmaxing. as thats in every single game. the relative difference between someone not minmaxing and someone who is, is what is at the heart of many of the debates..... along with gigantism of course being the other issue players are split on (i dont blame em if battles with many 200-500k ships results in a crash, clearly wont look good for the game outside alpha)

i can see why schema would want to change the system. althou his solution isnt reducing the learning curve. which for starmade is really rather high for a game. and to pvp is very high ontop of the building aspect. and once a player gets there. he has to make choices against his aesthetic vision to be viable... its aesthetic building that drives people here still. Im not a big eve player, and do find that community toxic in many aspects. im happy schema has not just given up on this, specially since he is giving combat a big role in this game while still balancing that with the more voxel fanbase of being artists


i play magic the gathering and your sentiment kind of reminds me of the same one that happens when cards are banned. or they slow down the format (counterspell is now cancel) im pegging you as a modern player if you ever played :P standard being to slow and smaller card pool with more janky decks showing up..... except with starmade of course people cant take your designs and use them.

 

[NeonSturm]

I mentioned I would prefer to see overhauls implemented in late alpha. That certainly wouldn't mean the feature would be worked on in late alpha, it would likely be available as a secondary system activated by config for some time, for testing and balancing. My preferences matter very little, I believe that the majority at Schine have a different view of when it should be switched, if it goes through.

To answer your question, no one knows if or when it would happen. No one knows for sure when they think it should happen. We're at step 1, very early stages. A second proposal will be made, perhaps a third, even a fourth.

When an alternative power source IRL comes out, it's not optimized until further research.

When you said that, I thought about a tiered system and experimental tiers which may break "when the gravity balance in the universe changes"

 

[Deserea]

i can see why schema would want to change the system. althou his solution isnt reducing the learning curve. which for starmade is really rather high for a game. and to pvp is very high ontop of the building aspect. and once a player gets there. he has to make choices against his aesthetic vision to be viable... its aesthetic building that drives people here still. Im not a big eve player, and do find that community toxic in many aspects. im happy schema has not just given up on this, specially since he is giving combat a big role in this game while still balancing that with the more voxel fanbase of being artists

I know my ships arent designed for PVP, but i see no reason *why* i would have to get rid of appearances to make a pvp ship, from everything ive seen from lecic, and others, aesthetics can help a ship in PVP, sure its systems may not be as optimized(and that may not even be the case. depending on *who* is building. ASM for example, when he was around. His ships even had interiors, that looked good. )

 

[Panpiper]

I know my ships arent designed for PVP, but i see no reason *why* i would have to get rid of appearances to make a pvp ship, from everything ive seen from lecic, and others, aesthetics can help a ship in PVP, sure its systems may not be as optimized(and that may not even be the case. depending on *who* is building. ASM for example, when he was around. His ships even had interiors, that looked good. )

It is not at all difficult for a PvP player to build a ship with interiors, good lines, textures and even greebles, and still have their ship 99% as capable of PvP as the same ship without such niceties. This assumes of course that the PvP player has both some artistic sense and a desire to do so, as it is virtually double the work for the same ship. The converse however is not true. No amount of artistic sense or desire will let an RP player who has only ever built ships for looks, build a PvP ship that can stand toe to toe with an equal mass ship built by a veteran PvPer. There is a lot of knowledge and expertise involved in being a good PvP builder that takes time to accrue.

Of course the same I suppose is true of artistic ability. I've spent the better part of a year of gameplay getting just barely to the point where I could acquit myself fairly versus veteran PvPers. After all that, which I dare say is a lot of play, the visual appeal of my ships is pretty bare bones.

Spoiler

 

[Deserea]

It is not at all difficult for a PvP player to build a ship with interiors, good lines, textures and even greebles, and still have their ship 99% as capable of PvP as the same ship without such niceties. This assumes of course that the PvP player has both some artistic sense and a desire to do so, as it is virtually double the work for the same ship. The converse however is not true. No amount of artistic sense or desire will let an RP player who has only ever built ships for looks, build a PvP ship that can stand toe to toe with an equal mass ship built by a veteran PvPer. There is a lot of knowledge and expertise involved in being a good PvP builder that takes time to accrue.

Of course the same I suppose is true of artistic ability. I've spent the better part of a year of gameplay getting just barely to the point where I could acquit myself fairly versus veteran PvPers. After all that, which I dare say is a lot of play, the visual appeal of my ships is pretty bare bones.

Spoiler

Huh, i guess i could see that being how it worked.

Hmm, im curious over how some of my designs would hold up now....

The closest one in that image, despite being as you said, barebones, i like the shape of it.

 

[Ithirahad]

I mentioned I would prefer to see overhauls implemented in late alpha. That certainly wouldn't mean the feature would be worked on in late alpha, it would likely be available as a secondary system activated by config for some time, for testing and balancing. My preferences matter very little, I believe that the majority at Schine have a different view of when it should be switched, if it goes through.

I'd assume that any dependencies will have to change when this switches to a mandatory state, and be created and maintained in parallel for both systems in the meantime... This including any and all ships/stations created by your de-facto building team or brought in from the community, any code that had to be written to support the old system for any reason... etc...

That being the case, why would it be preferable to make the switch later?

 

[nightrune]

I'd assume that any dependencies will have to change when this switches to a mandatory state, and be created and maintained in parallel for both systems in the meantime... This including any and all ships/stations created by your de-facto building team or brought in from the community, any code that had to be written to support the old system for any reason... etc...

That being the case, why would it be preferable to make the switch later?

More information known. Lessons already learned. Late alpha would/could signify learning what you could from earlier play tests. Ideally you do want fail early/fail often as silicon valley likes to put it. That's what alpha is for.