Ship Contiguity

[EtherEel]

[I hope I'm not the first to raise this subject, but one can only backtrack through the fora so far...]

I find it exceedingly odd, absurd really, that a "Ship" (or station) can have disconnected parts/pieces/systems/weapons that continue to function. (Even more so that you can intentionally make a ship/station of non-contiguous parts.)

Currently you can completely destroy the connective structure between parts of a ship or station and there is no consequence. I think this may be the single most illogical, "I am unable to suspend my disbelief" aspect of Starmade. It just doesn't happen, of course in reality, but in any imaginary universe. Hallucinations, maybe -- not in anyone's rational thought.

So therefore my suggestion:
►►► A ship (or station) needs to be contiguous. Any parts, large or small, that are not physically connected to the part including said ship's (station's) core should at least go "dead" and no longer function. They should really at least drift away and even explode (if containing "powered" elements), but I'll grant that there is some lurking technical/code reason why, even now, disconnected parts act like they're still connected. And don't be cute and say they're linked telepathically....

Yes, I understand that technically it's possible to have the shell of the hull not touch any of the internal structure. But you know what I mean (and that should be corrected, too!). Parts "blown-off" by damage should become non-functional.

~ee

P.S. Sorry if this has been addressed a long time ago, if so maybe it needs re-examination.

 

[Criss]

I don't understand. Do turrets not drift away for you if the docking modules are destroyed? They will stop working if they have no power. And I see no reason why they cannot move about and aim if they have a thrusters attached. Aside from that, the only possible way to detach a piece of a ship is either by blowing it to bits or or enabling breakoff. In both cases those pieces are useless to the ship.

 

[Crusade]

You can enable break-off in server.cfg. It buggy and crashes the game in it's current form.

 

[kupu]

I think Starmade did away with "realism" a long time ago in favour of creative gameplay options / convenience.

I've seen a lot of ships with really awesome floating plate designs, or others map out large projects by placing blocks at intervals then deleting the rest leaving a frame to work within.

I don't see any quality of life / fun gameplay changes to the game by disallowing non connected blocks. It would be a nuisance to a lot of people, however.

And don't be cute and say they're linked telepathically....

I've actually seen builds using crystals that "levitate" portions of a ships / stations. Catering to the widest possible amount of applications seems like the best way to go for a sandbox game right?

 

[SkaireKrough]

There is a setting in the server config for 'breakaway' which allows disconnected blocks to drift away from their parent entity.

In single player I tried it out with collision damage set to on and set the number for collision damage above the server max speed. Hopped into my novice salvage ship and proceeded to harvest rocks.

Noticed that any blocks separated from the main rock would drift away and some would collide with other rocks, it wasn't too long and I was playing a 3D version of the old arcade game of asteroids. One eventually hit my ship at a fairly slow speed. I watched my ship come apart then died.

After respawning, I shut the game off and turned collision and breakaway back off. When I continued the game I found that the sector that I died in had a multitude of small asteroids, some as small as one block. Area was very laggy. Built new salvager and decided to clean the mess up. While doing so I came across parts of my old ship which I salvaged just like the small rocks. Next time I played I happened to cross that same sector, small rocks and ship parts ( game listed even ship parts as 'rock') were all over that sector again. Cleaned it up. Next day, same thing. Repeated process until I'm more than certain that I've collected enough ship parts to build several copies of my original ship.

I don't go to that sector any more in that game world.

So yes the feature you want is in the game but use it at your own risk

 

[Groovrider]

Sorry OP, but you need to read more sci-fi. The genre is filled with ship that are partially or completely composed of force fields and clusters of technology bound in a web of force.

 

[EtherEel]

You can enable break-off in server.cfg. It buggy and crashes the game in it's current form.

So yes the feature you want is in the game but use it at your own risk

Which is why I don't use it. If it crashes the game then it isn't really "part" of the game is it?

- - - - -

And you all are completely/intentionally missing the point. If I blown-off your shoulder with my high-powered rifle, your disembodied arm should not behave as if still connected. (No, I'm not referring to dislodged turrets, either.)

I think Starmade did away with "realism" a long time ago in favour of creative gameplay options / convenience.

Quite a long list of mistakes throughout history made in the name of convenience.
If this game hopes to go beyond beta with non-contiguity, people will find it weird and silly, and decide on something else. It's not "creative."

The genre is filled with ship that are partially or completely composed of force fields and clusters of technology bound in a web of force.

And if a part of this force field/ web-of-force and its cluster of tech is severed from the main, does that part continue to function as though it were not severed?

 

[Crusade]

No, it is a part of the game, because it's there ready to be used - like many other features in the game it needs work.
As far as I can tell it is exactly what you are asking for - it does work, you just can't break off too many parts at once, or the game will crash. You can split large ships in half, if you are careful enough to not break off too many 'bits' at once.

The bit that came off the ship is no longer usable, you cannot reattach it and it's unable to be used independently.

Happy?

 

[CyberTao]

Which is why I don't use it. If it crashes the game then it isn't really "part" of the game is it?

- - - - -

And you all are completely/intentionally missing the point. If I blown-off your shoulder with my high-powered rifle, your disembodied arm should not behave as if still connected. (No, I'm not referring to dislodged turrets, either.)

That option exists for a reason, it's for those that want it. It's legit what you are asking for, it's just unfinished more or less. The game is alpha, meaning some parts don't work, it's buggy and unoptimized, and core features are missing.

At the end of the day though, both Break off and Collision damage were added as side projects by Schema iirc, which is probably why they got to this level of buggy.

 

[Groovrider]

And if a part of this force field/ web-of-force and its cluster of tech is severed from the main, does that part continue to function as though it were not severed?

Some stories yes, some no, some in between, some can't be severed at all. Some parts exist in different expanded dimension and only by destroying the main ship will those sections deactivate. It's a pretty big universe as far as books are concerned. If your next question is to ask me to name some, I will say: I've done my reading, it's your turn.

 

[kupu]

Quite a long list of mistakes throughout history made in the name of convenience.
If this game hopes to go beyond beta with non-contiguity, people will find it weird and silly, and decide on something else. It's not "creative."

So most of the reply was baseless and can be answered by my previous post, but one thing did need addressing.
"It's not "creative".

Well, i beg to differ. There are loads of great examples of which your continuity request would hurt player creativity.

 

[EtherEel]

That option exists for a reason, it's for those that want it. It's legit what you are asking for, it's just unfinished more or less. The game is alpha, meaning some parts don't work, it's buggy and unoptimized, and core features are missing.

At the end of the day though, both Break off and Collision damage were added as side projects by Schema iirc, which is probably why they got to this level of buggy.

Happy?

Not until "break-off" becomes non-ctd-inducing. Obviously I'm living with it currently. You all just don't really care about it anymore, and are accustomed to "that's just the way Starmade is..." I do realize everything can't be a top priority.

Some stories yes, some no, some in between, some can't be severed at all. Some parts exist in different expanded dimension and only by destroying the main ship will those sections deactivate. It's a pretty big universe as far as books are concerned. If your next question is to ask me to name some, I will say: I've done my reading, it's your turn.

cf. Rhetorical Question

- - - - -

To kupu: You are intentionally missing the point. It's like we're having two separate conversations.

 

[Crusade]

Actually, a bug-free break-off system is something I've wanted for a very long time. I've just accepted that it isn't a priority at the moment, and will wait patiently till it is stable enough for use on servers.

I've told you it's current limitations. Work with them or stop complaining just because a feature isn't where you want it to be at the moment. Just wait, it'll get some love eventually.

 

[kupu]

To kupu: You are intentionally missing the point. It's like we're having two separate conversations.

I've been replying to this point predominantly.

I find it exceedingly odd, absurd really, that a "Ship" (or station) can have disconnected parts/pieces/systems/weapons that continue to function. (Even more so that you can intentionally make a ship/station of non-contiguous parts.)

Hopefully that makes more sense of my answers.

I've not touched upon the damaged / break off stuff because our current option to enable that is buggy and could't be considered a 100% working solution or even a proposed default mechanic.

 

[the guyver]

I personally would not enable break off on my server when it does become stable,

I see the lack of ship continuity more as a feature rather than an issue

many of my ships have floating, disconnected cameras so i can have a fixed chase view, and a views for overseeing docking which will become even more important with the new docking system if you have to align your ship to the docking point

 

[Criss]

And you all are completely/intentionally missing the point. If I blown-off your shoulder with my high-powered rifle, your disembodied arm should not behave as if still connected. (No, I'm not referring to dislodged turrets, either.)

Aside from turrets, I fail to see exactly what you are talking about. Power is useless on a separate entity. Shielding is useless. Weapons are useless. If any of these parts are removed from a ship, then NONE of them are capable of benefiting you in said ship in any way. If you cannot provide an example besides a turret then I really don't know what you are referring to, as a dislodged turret is quite literally the only thing that fits the description to your situation.

 

[CyberTao]

Aside from turrets, I fail to see exactly what you are talking about. Power is useless on a separate entity. Shielding is useless. Weapons are useless. If any of these parts are removed from a ship, then NONE of them are capable of benefiting you in said ship in any way. If you cannot provide an example besides a turret then I really don't know what you are referring to, as a dislodged turret is quite literally the only thing that fits the description to your situation.

He's not talking about separate entities, he's talking about 1 entity that is separated. Like a ship that has a free-floating warp ring or one that just got blown in half, yet the front end is mysteriously still held in place by magiks. Basically break-off.

 

[Criss]

He's not talking about separate entities, he's talking about 1 entity that is separated. Like a ship that has a free-floating warp ring or one that just got blown in half, yet the front end is mysteriously still held in place by magiks. Basically break-off.

There goes literally every forerunner spaceship I ever planned.



That is of course if this type of functionality was removed from Starmade. If this is what OP means then I am against it. Nobody is forcing players to build floaty bits on their ship. I do not even see how this is an issue.

I was also under the impression that collisions were going to get reworked and that this would make collision damage and break off much smoother. From what Cal told me at least. They won't keep break off in such a terrible state forever.

 

[Runeseer]

[I hope I'm not the first to raise this subject, but one can only backtrack through the fora so far...]

I find it exceedingly odd, absurd really, that a "Ship" (or station) can have disconnected parts/pieces/systems/weapons that continue to function. (Even more so that you can intentionally make a ship/station of non-contiguous parts.)

Currently you can completely destroy the connective structure between parts of a ship or station and there is no consequence. I think this may be the single most illogical, "I am unable to suspend my disbelief" aspect of Starmade. It just doesn't happen, of course in reality, but in any imaginary universe. Hallucinations, maybe -- not in anyone's rational thought.

So therefore my suggestion:
►►► A ship (or station) needs to be contiguous. Any parts, large or small, that are not physically connected to the part including said ship's (station's) core should at least go "dead" and no longer function. They should really at least drift away and even explode (if containing "powered" elements), but I'll grant that there is some lurking technical/code reason why, even now, disconnected parts act like they're still connected. And don't be cute and say they're linked telepathically....

Yes, I understand that technically it's possible to have the shell of the hull not touch any of the internal structure. But you know what I mean (and that should be corrected, too!). Parts "blown-off" by damage should become non-functional.

~ee

P.S. Sorry if this has been addressed a long time ago, if so maybe it needs re-examination.

So you like DOOM CUBEs... cuz this is how you get DOOM CUBEs.

No more sleek nacelles or bridges on conning towers. No way! Can't design a ship like that, too easy to blow parts of the ship off.

Please! No hyper realism in my creative block game. And as a SCRUM master, the functionality you ask for is too complex.

I am happy with the "realism" in StarMade... it is a voxle based game!!

Did you stare at you Legos and wish they were round and squishy???

 

[starhaiden]

So you like DOOM CUBEs... cuz this is how you get DOOM CUBEs.

No more sleek nacelles or bridges on conning towers. No way! Can't design a ship like that, too easy to blow parts of the ship off.

Then the people in the bridge will float away. One of the problems with bits breaking off is multiply separate entities use a lot more processing than one ship the same mass as the multiply separate entities. I think maybe schema should focus on trying to make smaller ships less resource intensive instead of large ships.
Another problem is people can't build ships that contains separate parts and have to connect anything to a tiny core.