Devblog May 30th 2017

[MrFURB]

The point still stands in that there is no reason to design ships differently, because the design requirement is totally uniform;

The readily apparent differences between specializing ships with the current proposal and with what we already have are rather small in my eyes. If you are a fan of placing things in chunks the replacement/respec process is exactly the same as it always has. The largest difference I can find is the ease of switching. Anything your ship is capable of can be chambered with a few simple clicks or block replacements followed by clicks... It's just a question of it being a good choice.

It would be ridiculously easy to switch chambers between different bonuses not dependent on having a high number of one type of block on your ship. The ability to have variants of vessels with different but still useful chamber effects could cause some waves and perhaps some homogenization but I believe people will still build new designs for any of a million reasons. I look forward to seeing what happens with that.

 

[Ithirahad]

You have one ship and if you simply replace one block with another the ship fits a completely different purpose. Why would you have more than one ship instead of just different versions of the same one?

Fairly certain that you can do that just as well with the current system. Just that all the required systems rearrangement makes it seem "not worth it" vs. just building a new and different hull for your new ship. Of course, there are exceptions, but there will likely be exceptions with the new system too.

 

[Brokengauge]

Why do real world navies build different ships, instead of simply outfitting identical hulls differently? Hull shape serves important functions. System to mass ratios have a lot to do with how your ship is specialized, and there won't be a single set of ratios that epitomize an "ultimate ship"

I look forward to gutting my ships and reworking them to this new system. THEN I'll decide if I hate it or not lol

 

[Ixalite]

I would just like to put out there that some server operators would like the ability to disable advanced build mode for players. This would be most useful for RP servers; forcing the players to do their building (and demolition) at shipyards.

 

[Criss]

Then you have never built anything remotely resembling a combat ship, so how would you know anything about it?

Maybe attempting to design truly unique ships in starmade is a wasted effort because the tools to do so are not really implemented and I have the foresight to see that. I could put an auto charging jump drive on my ship. But so can everyone else's ship. And it comes at no cost to anything else really. So it's a no brainer.

It is very clear that some weapons excel over others, and some weapon combinations are useless, so I can just ask other players what works best because why waste time accidentally putting something on my ship that is not as effective? Some of that may be balancing, but a lot of it has to do with the fact that the system may be fundamentally flawed.

I am excited for the chamber system because it will be a choice of how you spend points and internal space on reactor components that in turn determine how a ship functions in more specific ways.

 

[kurosawa]

while you guys argue, could you also look up an eta for when the new power system will be deployed, as before guestimates are fine

 

[Alphajim]

I would just like to put out there that some server operators would like the ability to disable advanced build mode for players. This would be most useful for RP servers; forcing the players to do their building (and demolition) at shipyards.

And how would you build a massive shipyard without the advanced build mode ? A la minecraft ?

 

[bobafetthotmail]

Why do real world navies build different ships, instead of simply outfitting identical hulls differently? Hull shape serves important functions.

Actually, they do. As long as the "new" ship they need is in the same size class anyway.
Also done with tanks, trucks, and most other vehicles.

 

[MaartenAll]

Hey Maarten, That sounds frustrating. We'll need to find out what's happening. Will you start a thread in game support so we can get logs and make a proper bug report for this?

I did a while ago. The person who helped me back then couldn't find a solution other than re-installing the game either. (I might have accidently reported this post instead of replying to it, sorry for that.)

 

[Brokengauge]

Actually, they do. As long as the "new" ship they need is in the same size class anyway.
Also done with tanks, trucks, and most other vehicles.

True, though that's a bit more specific than I was trying to get at. You wouldn't say...base a guided missile submarine from the hull of a cruiser. You wouldn't convert an LMTV into an aquatic landing vehicle...or even into a tank. There are millions of different roles, and no one vehicle can fill all of them, because so many are dependent on the physical characteristics of the ship/plane/truck/tank itself. It is feasible to have, for example a heavy or light cruiser on the same frame (or a cruiser on a destroyer hull!) But you certainly wouldn't try to convert a luxury liner or cargo hauler into a battleship.

The point I was trying to make is that even with a system that allows you to refit your ship into a different role quickly, it isn't going to entirely remove the need for radically different designs or types, because so much depends on the actual physical characteristics of the ship.

 

[nightrune]

I did a while ago. The person who helped me back then couldn't find a solution other than re-installing the game either. (I might have accidently reported this post instead of replying to it, sorry for that.)

I've had it happen as well. I'd appreciate a new thread, tag me in it. There is a small but annoying but that I run into (hard to track down) that requires a reboot and I'd love to see if that fixes it for you as well.

 

[Valiant70]

I'm very much looking forward to play testing the living mayhem out of this new system. I think I will finally be able to build ships the way I've always wanted to, with a more modular system setup that I can tweak as time goes on.

I think this will start to give rise to the same situation you see in games that have a limited number of premade hulls to choose from and upgrade. Shipwrights can create the hulls, and almost anyone with a brain can replace chambers, add extra ones, etc. and a good design may be very flexible depending on an individual's preference.

I still see room for a great variety in hull design. Placement of main system compartments, interiors, weapon bays, conduits, armor, turret mounts, etc. will all be things unique to each hull. Some hulls will inevitably work better for specific roles, while others are more flexible. Some hulls will probably be objectively better overall than others. Besides that, aesthetics will be just as varied (and probably more so) than before.

Raisinbat I see your concerns about things being too easy to change, but I'm fairly sure you're overlooking the finer points of hull design under the new system. I believe the items I listed above should still provide plenty of mechanical variation, while the chamber system will allow ship builders to reconfigure the minutia of ship systems optimization without having to gut an entire ship (or a huge chunk of it) and redo it. When all you're trying to do is defeat the other guy's ship, where you put systems, how you protect them, etc. is just as important as WHAT the systems are.

I think the possibility of modifying ships more readily will make the game more fun, and perhaps lower the entry barrier to the engineering side of things for people with poor spatial reasoning and aesthetic sense, and provide a more useful role for builders who can make pretty but can't make function. While one player may be great at making systems, another might be terrible at chamber trees and great at making pretty, sturdy, practical hulls to put things in. I expect that the ease of modifying systems will allow such players to work together more readily to produce better ships and have more fun doing what each player does best.

 

[Ixalite]

And how would you build a massive shipyard without the advanced build mode ? A la minecraft ?

I just have a problem with it on ships. The system of "Decayed" stations prevents salvaging breaking the game economy. I find it difficult to balance an economy when players can make more credits in one day of pirate hunting than they can make in several weeks of mining.

 

[Extholious]

I just have a problem with it on ships. The system of "Decayed" stations prevents salvaging breaking the game economy. I find it difficult to balance an economy when players can make more credits in one day of pirate hunting than they can make in several weeks of mining.

you can still salvage decayed station and get scrap and if you just got the blocks it would just break the economy colpletely since you would never have to mine asteroids but just find a fresh station, and there might be a good 20 per system you could salvage on some servers

 

[Ixalite]

you can still salvage decayed station and get scrap and if you just got the blocks it would just break the economy colpletely since you would never have to mine asteroids but just find a fresh station, and there might be a good 20 per system you could salvage on some servers

I am familiar with the system. The solution there would seem (to me) to be to carefully gauge the credit value of the materials of the largest station, then make the build block cost exactly that much. In that way, the player would not gain anything by putting down a build block and harvesting decayed stations. It would still be possible, but they would have to spend as many credits as the station is worth in scrap.

Custom recipes would also be called for to make the materials for the build block also cost nearly as much as the build block itself.

 

[Deserea]

True, though that's a bit more specific than I was trying to get at. You wouldn't say...base a guided missile submarine from the hull of a cruiser. You wouldn't convert an LMTV into an aquatic landing vehicle...or even into a tank. There are millions of different roles, and no one vehicle can fill all of them, because so many are dependent on the physical characteristics of the ship/plane/truck/tank itself. It is feasible to have, for example a heavy or light cruiser on the same frame (or a cruiser on a destroyer hull!) But you certainly wouldn't try to convert a luxury liner or cargo hauler into a battleship.

The point I was trying to make is that even with a system that allows you to refit your ship into a different role quickly, it isn't going to entirely remove the need for radically different designs or types, because so much depends on the actual physical characteristics of the ship.

we will however base a guided missile cruiser on the hull of a frigate/destroyer hull >.> God it doesnt work that well....doesnt work at all...just...so many issues..

But i agree with your point. having one ship try and do everything doesnt work(oh i wish we could realize this for reals.) Yes itll be a bit easier to specialize them in the new system, that isnt such a bad thing honestly.