If he is talking about reducing the distance requirement, then he does not get the concern.
He did say removing the distance would be possible and discussed.
If there was a more readable information panel that displayed everything, it'd be more accessible to all players.
I have no problem with multiple reactors. I very very much disliked the old power system. I thought it was stupid to wrap power lines through a ship. Maybe it would make sense if they were cables and they needed to connect or be near systems to power them, but that isn't the case. It's just how the reactor worked. I'd be annoyed if I shot at the cargo bay of a ship and the reactor took a hit because power lines were drawn near it.
.. Listening? Although honestly I don't really want proof at this point. It's clear why stabilizers aren't working.
If I have time I will mess around with them.
Removing what?
I disagree. Maybe in a MP server, but SP needs something to do as well. We are 100% interested in the PvE side of things. I think that is where StarMade can really shine. Of course we want combat to well tuned so that PvP works well and is fun. Similar titles kind of just stop there, or rely on mods, and then never explore the possibility of creating a universe with actual stuff in it. They feel empty and not worth exploring.
I can ask to remove them, not a problem. I don't know what their response will be honestly. It will be met with quite a bit of reluctance I am sure. I don't think the energy beam is anything more than a bandaid. I can't really imagine will ever work well with our builds and I am NOT redesigning those ships to accommodate that.
An imbalance arises when a characteristic of a ship can be exploited to gain an advantage over another ship. In the case of power 2.0 it is the distance requirement of stabilizers. To someone who doesn't care about distance, it can be used to gain a considerable advantage over someone who does.
Thank you for this Criss , we really appreciate this sort of response!
One word- Islands.Scientific Study on Systems
What is intended: Taking the case of a ship builder who chooses looks and interiors vs a lazy brick builder, it should be possible for both ships to have more or less the same tactical skills for the same mass. I talk not of extreme RP builders, but of people who want their ship to be pretty to an extent as well as good in combat.
How that can be achieved:
It is obvious that at least some systems should be spaced out. The thought follows that those who want interiors can fill it up (since interiors=space and ships with more inner space for same mass=a bigger target) and those who don't care can leave it....empty? NO. Mass is always a negative effect, there is a further change needed here, but we'll come to that in a minute.
- Spacing out just one system (Power, currently) doesn't work well. People will just space that out and fill the middle with other systems. This also favors one-dimensional ship expansion. Not desired for a multitude of reasons. Keep in mind, no ship shape must be preferred over any other.
- So, the conclusion follows- Systems must be spaced out- All of them, not just power. (By a much smaller amount of course). Each system creates a bubble (visible in HUD) depending on it's group size. No two bubbles should overlap. In case of overlapping, lesser the distance between the groups, lesser both their efficiencies. (Quite similar to the stabilizer distance mechanic currently in-game). Pretty straightforward. Take the example of a chain- Right now, the ships are like a stick, rigid. Simply because both the endpoints of the stick are defined. But, if we space out ALL systems, (by a little...not as much as stabilizers and reactors :P), ships will be like a combination of smaller sticks, hinged freely. (Each small stick represents small spacing between systems). This will mean they can aquire ANY shape with almost equal efficiency. (Like a mettalic chain, although made up of rigid metal parts, links in such a way as to allow maximum freedom in movement.
I made this representation to better explain what I am talking about...
Above image represents different systems and their spacing out bubbles...
(Yes, I know that's a horrible image, but I had to make that in hurry)
- Now, we come to the second hurdle: Addition of mass. Additionof mass must not be a negative thing. (up to a certain point of course). Why? Simply because brick builders will leave their ships empty in the middle whereas aesthetic builders would like interiors and the such. Yes, interiors are light but still, not enough. Addition of mass will mean slower ships. But what about increase in armor? This has got to be a joke. Armor is damn useless right now, unless you build layers of well thought out stuff. The only possibility is if the older HP system came back. Don't get me wrong- the new Reactor HP sure could mean some cool stuff but, it simply is not meant to be.
Salvaging the current code to apply these modifications:
Let's see what we got here...
- The system "bubbles" can be created and will be displayed on the same code developed for shield systems. (And yes, shield groups will display two bubbles now)
Authors-Arcaner
- The code developed to calculate reactor efficiency based on stabilizer size and distance will be now used to determine efficiency of all systems.
End notes- Merry Christmas folks
Sorry guys, I'm with Criss on that, we need PvE content. Single player is boring as hell, and even on multi, there should be a chance for who PvP players gladly call "carebears" to find something to do.
Totaly agree!
Gotta say tho, a PvP builder isn't a bad idea either. Why not both? I mean, it's the server owner's discretion whether NPC factions are enabled or not, but I might as well go further one step and take a look at the old, neglected, outdated battlemode and subject it to renovation.
How not to make any sense, by Schine, 2017
Try to think it this way: blocks buried inside the system blob = bonus. blocks at the blob's surface = malus. If you make a big square and extend it in the remaining axis you'll get more and more bonus from inside blocks, that'll make up for the surface malus. When you have a shitload of integrity piled up, you can be more creative with the shape of your systems.
So, f*** smaller ships with higher surface to interior ratios due to having fewer large cubic system spaces? How's that supposed to encourage building full interiors?Try to think it this way: blocks buried inside the system blob = bonus. blocks at the blob's surface = malus. If you make a big square and extend it in the remaining axis you'll get more and more bonus from inside blocks, that'll make up for the surface malus. When you have a shitload of integrity piled up, you can be more creative with the shape of your systems.
I don't think system integrity was made for that. It was made to punish spaghettis. It is a stupid backward way to do it and I called it
Enjoy patched shipdesign, fellow builder =(
