A Solution To Flying Spaghetti Monsters

[Zyrr]

You can increase the density of a spread out ship immensely and it's still nearly as effective. How do you account for docked entities? Turrets? All sorts of problems with this idea.

 

[Dire Venom]

You can increase the density of a spread out ship immensely and it's still nearly as effective. How do you account for docked entities? Turrets? All sorts of problems with this idea.

Since you understand the issue better than me, how would you fix it:? What limitations could be put in place that only affect select designs:?

 

[Ratchet Hundreda]

This whole new power system 2.0 debacle is so frustratingly stupid.

The original design concept was to make players build ships which are actually 'ship formed'. They wanted to change it so over densified block or brick designs are not as effective which would inspire players for more creative designs.

Not only did they NOT achieve it by this new design which resulted with similar over simplified meta shapes which are just as stupid as the blocks and bricks but the whole approach was BIZZARELY flawed.

1st.: You force players to build differently with a whole new power system which requires the entire redesign of not just the concept but the code as well which handles the mechanic WHEN WE STILL HAVE SHIP CORES WHICH CAN NOT BE PLACED ELSEWHERE ON THE DAMN SHIPS. Which EVIDENTLY prevents players building creatively because of its stupid restrictions.

2nd.: When you design a new mechanic for a game players will try to optimize their playstyle around it. When as a developer you think of a new game mechanic you HAVE to keep that in mind. OBVIOUSLY 5 or 10 developers can NOT think of every single possibility of how a new mechanic can be optimized. Maybe not even a 100 can. HOWEVER a player base of even around just 1000 if slowly but surely will find the most optimal approach to that mechanic which will create a meta. THIS IS INEVITABLE. There are ways to creatively build around this fact but the original approach from the devs were clearly not one.

3rd.: The drive to listen to the players and accept their opinions as devs on the matter is a healthy approach which at least is something which is happening. HOWEVER i see WAAAAY TOO MUCH influence taking place between the two parties. Not only is that problematic it creates a pretty awkward outlook for you as a game developing studio.

This whole global argument over this new power system of the player base is a messy one due to the facts i mentioned above. I decided to comment about this on this thread because it is a great example for this. A somewhat healthy discussion is taking place on the matter HOWEVER it is absolutely not something which is necessarily the best solution in fact i even theorize it may result with players building dense blocks and bricks again.

This whole thing created a stalemate in development because of the countless revisions over-complicating the already messed up situation.

What i ask for is that when you want to redesign how players approach specific mechanics in your game like for example how players build ships think of all the other steps which need to be made in terms of helping creative player design. Like the issue of ship core placement which is a way more prevalent and simple one than the faulty power system.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

I'm not sorry for this rant. I wanted to get this off my chest for a while so yes, my little soul can now be at peace.

 

[Zyrr]

Hard to do - it's not a simple problem and there isn't a simple fix. The best way to force players to do something you want is to give incentives to your path, not punish their path. Almost without fail there is always a way around obstacles, but encouraging someone to do something else properly works most of the time. It's a more underlying issue with how the systems in this game work.

The easiest solution is to give buffs to systems requiring factors of 1) how many of that systems blocks are adjacent to eachother & 2) how large that mass of adjacent blocks is. Encourages larger, all adjacent groups of systems but prevents players from spamming small lumps of blocks that get the adjacent bonus by requiring that system lump to be larger.

That's not really where Schine wants to take their game though, actually quite the opposite according to statements made in relation to power 2.0. So here we are, lol

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

Hard to do - it's not a simple problem and there isn't a simple fix. The best way to force players to do something you want is to give incentives to your path, not punish their path. Almost without fail there is always a way around obstacles, but encouraging someone to do something else properly works most of the time. It's a more underlying issue with how the systems in this game work.

The easiest solution is to give buffs to systems requiring factors of 1) how many of that systems blocks are adjacent to eachother & 2) how large that mass of adjacent blocks is. Encourages larger, all adjacent groups of systems but prevents players from spamming small lumps of blocks that get the adjacent bonus by requiring that system lump to be larger.

That's not really where Schine wants to take their game though, actually quite the opposite according to statements made in relation to power 2.0. So here we are, lol

Carrots and sticks both have their place in design, even though carrots naturally feel better than sticks.
I think that the best carrots and sticks are ones that have a "natural" as opposed to "artificial" in-universe reasoning, that is they work by giving you another thing to use (like a bubble of shielding) that intuitively works best with the preferred sort of approach as opposed to just saying your ship needs to be small to receive X stat boost.
In relation to what they've done in power 2.0, the reactor HP system is IMO the most obvious thing to use as a carrot or a stick (beat up the ships with exposed or near-exposed systems), but it just seems to be an afterthought that will make armor worthless again. Stabilizers are one of the most unintuitive sticks around, and I'm hoping they don't beat everyone into spaghetti.

In regards to both power systems, the way to make a proper reactor is counterintuitive in both. The old power system basically means you build out a giant thin cross or something and put a ship around it or fiddle around with maze-cubes. The new one basically means you build out two big balls far apart and you put a ship around them that has far less inside than it should.

 

[Zyrr]

Armor was never worth anything.

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

Armor was never worth anything.

Which is one of the big problems. Spaghetti meta is all about not having defenses because defenses aren't worth having.

To meme it up a little.

 

[Batavium]

Spaghetti ships are so great because of how they use the ships health system. Power has nothing to do with it.

An other example on the other end of the spectrum is the Derelict Delta station. The station that looks like a Space Ship. It has almost no system blocks try shooting that until it overloads. Should take a good long while before you hit the few system blocks that it has to get its rating below 50%.

 

[Zyrr]

Power has everything to do with it. Power working the way it does specifically encourages building ships like this. Please don't comment if you don't understand unless you're posing a question.

Which is one of the big problems. Spaghetti meta is all about not having defenses because defenses aren't worth having.

You can add defenses to a spaced out ship. You're not losing anything, you're just not gaining a whole lot. Not being hit is always a better strategy than being hit, pretty much regardless of how strong defense is.

 

[Batavium]

Please don't comment if you don't understand unless you're posing a question.

Ha so I hit a funny bone there. O dear we do not want them to fix the REAL problem now do we.

Every ship regardless of shape uses power. This Spaghetti ship is no different. What is different is that the other guy has no weapons to effectively target the very much spaced out systemblocks on a Spaghetti ship. That is the only reason it out fights a "normal" ship.

 

[Ratchet Hundreda]

This current discussion actually proves my point even further that how far some player's opinions are apart from each other when it comes to what the underlying problem is whit the system. Which is why again it is not necessarily a 100% healthy discussion.

The underlying problem has roots in many places. Many arguments are valid to some degree like the point that armour is useless or the problem with the optimal setup of the power system. Both problems can be approached differently both have many different solutions BUT the POINT is to approach the problem properly, building up from simple ones and then dealing with the more and more complicated ones WHILE keeping mind the original design concept.

 

[Zyrr]

Ha so I hit a funny bone there. O dear we do not want them to fix the REAL problem now do we.

Every ship regardless of shape uses power. This Spaghetti ship is no different. What is different is that the other guy has no weapons to effectively target the very much spaced out systemblocks on a Spaghetti ship. That is the only reason it out fights a "normal" ship.

Noting that power has everything to do with a spaced out ship isn't mutually exclusive to the fact that it's difficult to hit. Again, you're not understanding. The most efficient power setup is very long, thin lines - is this ringing a bell yet?

If you think the only reason a spaghetti ship outfights another ship is that its hard to hit, you've more than completely missed the point - the idea of a spaced out ship combines a ton of principles to make a very powerful ship for its mass. Speaking to the contrary is silly. It's not "healthy" to discussion, as mentioned before, and it's also misleading and muddies the point to someone with no prior knowledge trying to make sense of it all.

I think as it stands, it's really funny to see everyone and their mother on the Dock become an expert in "spaghetti meta" after the handful of us told you all about it

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

This current discussion actually proves my point even further that how far some player's opinions are apart from each other when it comes to what the underlying problem is whit the system. Which is why again it is not necessarily a 100% healthy discussion.

The underlying problem has roots in many places. Many arguments are valid to some degree like the point that armour is useless or the problem with the optimal setup of the power system. Both problems can be approached differently both have many different solutions BUT the POINT is to approach the problem properly, building up from simple ones and then dealing with the more and more complicated ones WHILE keeping mind the original design concept.

It's just that there are multiple different reasons for spaghetti meta, so not everybody is going to want to attack it from the same angle; it's certainly not possibly to please all of us, but most up us can be pleased with a few steps taken to reduce spaghetti effectiveness. Shield bubbles are a good start that's been implemented in the dev builds.

 

[Zyrr]

As an aside, shield bubbles don't stop spaced out ships at all. lol. It actually exacerbates some problems with docked hulls that have been mostly forgotten by the majority of the people around here

 

[GnomeKing]

well thanks for "telling us" Zyrr- for a minute there i was thinking that is an idea which occurs to many system-focused builders, who decide instead to follow a more civil, less game-breaky, and less ugly approach -

Nebulon is right - many strands (as it were) to spaghetti...

however i also thought area-effect shields would help, but in the current Dev I am not so sure > now main spaghetti reactor/stabilizer shield groups may not be depleted by hits to the periphery (or even each other), and the huge size of meta-spaghetti means non-core shield groups could be easily rolled into the line fire, giving the main group chance to recharge ... :/

 

[Zyrr]

Now you're on track, that's a big portion of it.

 

[Batavium]

I think as it stands, it's really funny to see everyone and their mother on the Dock become an expert in "spaghetti meta" after the handful of us told you all about it

Well i am no expert but i am terrible lazy. The thing is there is this group of people that likes to push the boundaries further then most others. I know about docked hulls and multi core ships but again i am lazy. As a pvp player i should use those techniques but i do not because for me it is simply to much effort.

Veilith and Komatodik have asked me to combat them more then once but i just can not be bothered and I target people with more simple ships instead. Because i not only lazy I am also nasty. Ignoring a strong opponent is by far the best defense. All hail the Home Base!

I do not care what a ship looks like. Everyone should just build whatever they like. Any rules or restrictions if at all needed should be placed by server admins not game mechanics. StarMade has no from or shape it is just blocks and space. The universe is made by players in whatever form they seem fit.

The only exception is when a build style threatens server health. Like multi core docked hull docked power ships. Than I wage war to get such builds ousted. But only because Schema could not code the game so multi core ships would not crash a server when they came apart.

Crystalline Entity Star Trek TNG.

 

[kulbolen]

Well, ok then Kulbolen - I would not enjoy flying something like that around for long - so i guess i revise my comments to "I myself" rather than the admittedly overstated "no player". Laggy builds with 'exploity docks' ect are/were explicitly banned in some places, or if not could be reported when problematic. > This remains an option for any admin, or community of players on a server (for example any uploads of the Fair And Balanced bluprint if it was a server problem, or construction of similar)

Highly exploitative builds like this which are explicitly militarized really have only one function - and since they are meta-ships without rivals that are not themselves very similar, they would of course generally be 'dry docked'. (if just for the sake of saving the universe from lag). Unless fighting a competitive rival, such a ship is only likely to be 'on the loose' on a sever if it is causing trouble...

Eventually 'trouble-makers', whether spaghetti, titans or whatever, piss-off server communities, and some get kicked by admins...(others just kill player numbers)
(i don't really care per se if people want to make these things - as long as they don't cause ridiculous game-load or completely disrupt server game-play...two criteria which are highly unlikely with a ship like this :/ )

Starmade sets minimal hard limits, allowing a player to build in highly exaggerated, extreme, cpu-crushing ways > in single-player it is just personal choice as to how much ugliness, lag and calculation load you will put up with before your enjoyment is reduced. Speaking for myself, I feel a responsibility not to be a dick and (knowingly) inflict this on other players on a server either.


In a way this a kind of moral choice - ie, In the end, I wont really enjoy the game myself if I am restricting the enjoyment of it for others.
(or it put it in modern talk - 'don't be a dick')

This is a basic rule of most community based online games, and whatever 'exploits' or 'disruptives' are found in game like Starmade (and there will probably always be some), this basic rule (either for ones personal games, or with other people) should be the final bar and balance to be applied, not matter the details or updates to the specific game mechanics.(which is a good,flexible thing and works very well when there are active admins and an interested community)



So super-titans are what most people want ? - maybe, but i am not so sure that really reflects the fundamentals of what many people want to get out of the game. They also seem to be the most common 'started-but-abandoned-for-something-more-achievable' type of ship. Anyway, if this is true, and if super-titans (or spaghetti, or whatever) are problematic (for servers) then it really must in the end be the responsibility of the server community and the admins to deal with it - unless we want to see all kinds of hard limits and arbitrary caps set into the basic game mechanics.

If some online players want SvS (spaghetti vs spaghetti) or WvW (whatever-new vs whatever-new) that is also fine, and probaly damn good fun - it can/should be moderated (as all online play ultimately must/should)

But ask this: Would the majority of people enjoy a using a spaghetti ship in their own 'single-player Starmade' game? (assuming some theoretical future single player content)

most of this stuff sounds great but is idealistic and doesnt ACTUALLY HAPPEN. all these musts, and woulds, and shoulds... end up nots.

also, "spaghetti ships" arent any harder on a server from a technical standpoint than any other comparably complex ship. theyre just cheesy to fight against in pvp.

 

[Dire Venom]

Time to re-vamp pulse into something useful eh:?



(hint hint AOE ball of death, high system damage, mitigated by armour)

Some great disscusion here.

 

[Batavium]

Some great disscusion here.

Had to get a YouTube link as Facebook does not run for me. So incase others have the same issue: