Built-in Jump is... Weird.

[Valiant70]

While it makes sense enough for something tiny like a shuttle or a fighter, having the jump drive built into the core is really strange for anything with significant size. Something that provides a very important function has no physical representation. There's no way that little box can send a frigate through hyperspace, much less a Titan.

My point is, it's weird, and I would prefer that jump be represented by a physical system. That is all.

 

[Lancake]

It's supposed to be built-in with the reactor, not the ship core but it's hard to see a distinction there. Would it feel better if the jump drive is enabled through a chamber before you can tweak it even further with other chambers?

And does it feel the same for the built-in scanner?

 

[GnomeKing]

jump drive/scanner "built in with reactor" rather than an actual built system of some kind... :/

enabled with chamber at least sounds like 'built as a system', although chambers for 'everything' (ie with just one type of simplistic block rules) sounds dull ...

 

[FlyingDebris]

It's supposed to be built-in with the reactor, not the ship core but it's hard to see a distinction there. Would it feel better if the jump drive is enabled through a chamber before you can tweak it even further with other chambers?

And does it feel the same for the built-in scanner?

I think the individual systems would be a better idea, allows for targeting specific (vital) components later on down the line and makes it more interesting from a design standpoint. It feels weird having them all put into the reactor like that.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

Yeah, I find it difficult having these functions apart of something else, almost like a byproduct. It makes no sense to me having a something that should be a system or technology in it's own right as a part of something else.

How they were as individual systems made sense.

The whole new reactor concept is odd from the point of view of, what is the reaction that is occurring in the reactor chamber?
After all, a reaction chamber is merely a sealed environment for a reaction to occur that we somehow derive energy from. Which by nature is describing a fuel mechanic.

 

[OfficialCoding]

While it makes sense enough for something tiny like a shuttle or a fighter, having the jump drive built into the core is really strange for anything with significant size. Something that provides a very important function has no physical representation. There's no way that little box can send a frigate through hyperspace, much less a Titan.

My point is, it's weird, and I would prefer that jump be represented by a physical system. That is all.

Yeah me too

 

[Dire Venom]

I see why you would want ships to have an inate jump drive, but surely it would be something you can physicaly interact and add on too:?
Adding a jump drive to a ship previously was as simple as placing a couple of blocks, anyone could do that.
-_-

 

[Arcaner]

Is it just me who has noticed that Chain Drives will not be a thing now?

 

[Dire Venom]

Is it just me who has noticed that Chain Drives will not be a thing now?

From what I've heard they will likely be a Jump Chamber you can add on to your ships.

 

[Snowtiger256]

From what I've heard they will likely be a Jump Chamber you can add on to your ships.

There is such a chamber. In the chamber tree, under FTL chambers, look for MultiCharge chamber. This is supposed to be the replacement for chain drives, because it supposedly allows you to charge the jump drive multiple times.

 

[NeonSturm]

Personally, I like that it makes ship simpler without these computers.
And I also like that there will be no more chaindrives surpassing warp-gates in functionality.

But I think the core should be the direct controller of such placeable systems without the need for a computer.
Placing such systems could buff them by 50% (recharge time, power efficiency, jump distance or all).

 

[OfficialCoding]

I just hate how their making everything so complicated. Just leave the jump drive computer in.

 

[NeonSturm]

I just hate how their making everything so complicated. Just leave the jump drive computer in.

And I think it's less complicated in the dev-build. I have no hard time figuring out how much jump modules I need.​

 

[Cluwne]

It also worth noting that having a "built-in" jump drive eliminated any and and all hope for a less rеtаrdеd and more practical FTL engine.
Instead of adding new mechanic they removed most of the old one. Sure, it had it's downsides, but this is just too much.
In addition they killed the chain-drives as well, because everyone loves wasting time going through boring empty space from point A on one end of the galaxy to B on the other, right?
I mean, it gives you time to appreciate the devs' work and take in the sights... sights like the boring as fuck systems with marginal differences and goofy planets, sights like NPC ships and stations that might as well be not be there for all the exciting gameplay they provide, or the breathtaking spacetime anomalies that function as naturally occurring indestructible warpgates, if warpgates were completely useless for their intended purpose.

What they could have done instead is to subject the FTL engine to the same-ish treatment reactors got - separate it into two distinct blocks and use FTL engine-specific (or maybe just reuse reactor's?) chambers for the bells and whistles like interdiction and energy consumption optimization.
That way you have the FTL engine core aka "battery" and a charger. More chargers - more energy dumped into battery. Bigger battery - longer range for jumpdrives, higher speed for warpdrives, with mass acting as a multiplier for the "FTL charge" needed.
Hell, you could add a chamber that increases energy cost but negates N-strength interdiction, allowing creating of blockade runners.

Oh well, at least we don't have to bother with jump drive modules, I guess.

 

[lupoCani]

I too disagree with the removal of jump drives, on perhaps an even broader front.

Chambers are an interesting mechanic, but a jump drive - the ship's actual long-distance propulsion - seems as though it would be an actual system, like thrusters. Valiant is right, too- a physical representation is a good thing. We're building space ships, dammit, hyperdrives are supposed to be machines that sit and whirr in the center of a ship.

I'll go even farther, though. Non-built-in drives were a good thing for shuttles and fighters too. They required a bit of space, and ate most of the power. That is, they possible, but impractical, and there was a gain to not having them. That seemed like a natural balance and trade-off to small ships.

 

[kikaha]

I think built_in jump drive are fine.

Your power system for your space entities is something strange in itself because we in the 21st century don't yet understand its mechanics yet. But such amount of power can certainly open rifts in space and allow some mass to go through it.

So stop bitching too much about this and that and enjoy the future ! (At least a vision of it).

 

[Antikristianos]

yea most ppl here didnt even read the infos about the chambers the devs provided OR tried them out in the dev build...

the new jump drive mechanik doesnt take anything away... "except the computer and module blocks you placed priviously... but you cann add some chambers to it now...)

Chaindrives still a thing with the chamber system... faster charge time... autocharge... all there... and you even get higher jump range...

just stop complainig before you read all available info AND tried out whats already there.

 

[FlyingDebris]

I did, and I prefer to have to place down a proper jump drive.

 

[Valiant70]

It's supposed to be built-in with the reactor, not the ship core but it's hard to see a distinction there. Would it feel better if the jump drive is enabled through a chamber before you can tweak it even further with other chambers?

Yes, that would make more sense. It would also add one more possibility for customization, by leaving out jump in favor of a very short-range ship with extra power in another area.

Alternatively, you could rename reactors "warp cores" or something similar, as this functionality seems very similar to Star Trek. Obviously you can't just steal the name, but the gist of it fits.

And does it feel the same for the built-in scanner?

This isn't as much of an issue since a scanner is an electronic system and suspension of disbelief is easier even when it's very tiny. However, cramming a high-end sensor suite into that little magic box is still pretty weird. They certainly don't need to be large, but some physical representation would be preferable for higher-end sensors.

I think the best solution would be to give all ships a very basic scanner but require a chamber to make it do anything beyond the most basic functionality.

The same could be said for stealth drive. Any ship could change settings to minimize emissions and make itself harder to spot with basic built-in sensors, but even that wouldn't work terribly well and couldn't hide you from any sort of upgraded sensor suite.

 

[lupoCani]

I think built_in jump drive are fine.

Your power system for your space entities is something strange in itself because we in the 21st century don't yet understand its mechanics yet. But such amount of power can certainly open rifts in space and allow some mass to go through it.

So stop bitching too much about this and that and enjoy the future ! (At least a vision of it).

Realism in Starmade is a complicated thing. Obviously, true realism is out of the question, but there is still a... logic to things, I guess you could call it, that is neccesary to maintain immersion. Yes, we can think up technobabble to explain it, but the point stands, it's contrary to what our sci-fi intuition would have us expect.