It does, but it also still circumvents any balancing measures on ship power that Schine might put in place down the road, and... really, now that there is no power capacity, I don't see any particularly valid use for the things. Turrets should just be main ship guns that swivel.
EDIT: Allowing reactors on turrets also inflates the size of turrets... and the last thing we need are big moving docked entities to bloat up collision calculations.
But nearly all of the biggest balance problems with the current power system come from docked, self powered weapon and shield systems. We should strike preemptively and just get rid of them now. Turrets should be treated as mobile parts of the main ship, not drones locked to a bigger ship. It would also make defense station designing require more thought.
Self powered turrets exceeding the limits of the actuall powersystem is a good thing
docked entities creating lag because of collision checks is a bad thing
Still this does not make turrets neither self pwoered nor power by host ship a bad thing
the bad thing is that the game engine slows down because of collision checks and that is something the devs need to fix.
Turrets are a game element one of the few that actually provide room for tinkering which is one of the core mechanics why some people actually play this game for it is a engaging feature that can keep you playing for long hours and creating loads of fun for those into this stuff.
Stop calling stuff bad because their implementation is not optimal. It still could be an awesome thing but sure it needs proper development to not be annoying anymore.
This just...looks so much more complicated than what we have in game now to me, and it may be my end, which is fine ive had fun for 3-5 years, i forget exactly. If the majority likes it though, then so be it
Still though, 1800 hours isnt to bad in a game for 5$ xD
i agree the "simple" thing got lost
I'm a little skeptical of this idea but I kinda like it. If done right, this could very well be the balance we've been looking for.
Target their weapons systems Mr. Worf.
View attachment 41867
If implemented poorly... Well... May whatever Cat God you believe in... heh... Have mercy on your soul...
View attachment 41868
I STRONGLY agree that multiple reactors should be allowed. Seriously; why the hell not?
Also, someone needs to stop tip toeing around popular sci-fi lingo and send their Star Trek/Star Wars/BSG/Babylon 5 techno jargon into over drive. Names other than tech points...
- re-route power - allocate power - power distribution - system override - divert power - system bypass - power coupling
- grid enhancement - phase induction - maglev cohesion - energize - system augmentation - system tuning - capacitance
- ...mix and match from the above
Agree it again depends a lot on the implenentation on top of what got criticised already.
How did schine manage to make this proposal even worse than the first one. You are making pointless simplifications that remove the challange for players. The only reason there is a playerbase is because the game is complicated enough for people to spend years innovating and still not reach perfection. You are removing many players point to playing this game all in the name of "intuitive simplifaction". And what the fuck is this tech points thing. Ok the reactor design is shit, but might be the only way to move forward. But this techpoints thing, what the fuck is even the point, you are removing complicated and calculated decisions in the ships manufacture, such as what effects to use and how much and how big your jumpdrive is and what size scanner and inhibitor and replacing is with a completly made up out of your arse system all in the name of simplification. If you want a simple game, go and play minecraft
Thank you for pointing out that lots of the fun comes from the "hard to master" aspects of the game i also agree the new proposal seems to lack such stuff
[doublepost=1495051177,1495050536][/doublepost]--- by
Lancake ---
Clarification
One active reactor per entity
At first there was no limit on here. Each entity would have a fixed number of Tech Points, let’s take 100 as an example.
Those Tech Points would distribute over all reactor groups respecting reactor size:
Example, 3 reactors on ship:
- Reactor 1: 100 blocks => 66.67% of total Tech Points = 66
- Reactor 2: 25 blocks => 16.67% of total Tech Points = 16
- Reactor 3: 25 blocks => 16.67% of total Tech Points = 16
Problem here is that adding more reactor groups or changing their size, will also change how many TP they have and require you to redo most of your chambers.
Another problem is, since power is scaling linearly, that there are no group related bonuses and only the need for chambers would stop you from making 1000 reactor groups with lots of empty space in between.
A ship without chambers is still completely functional though, so you could still do this but just not have any chamber because of the large amount of reactor groups.
If you’re able to put this many groups down, you would stumble upon performance and gameplay issues. Information warfare for example, falls apart completely if there are 1000 green dots to aim for, and destroying enough reactor groups to disable the target would take a large amount of effort and time (and luck).
There are variations on this, like a form of power penalty/inefficiency the more groups you add but we decided to opt for the current solution of 1 active reactor per entity. It also adds more opportunity to use logic controlled systems that automatically switch (using sensor input).
---
how about we use power instead and allow multiple reactors, problem solved...
also why not wire a reactor to a module directly? that could be fun...
