Search results

Well it looks like specific discussion on the config in the OP has well and truly finished. Conversation has just devolved to general discussion on power 2.0

SMedit is very hard, if not impossible, to get running with an up to date install these days, so Vox2sm3 is a good tool to have/know about for anyone using that process. Just thought it would be useful info for anyone looking at this thread for what to use.

A visual layout would be much better for not misunderstanding you, but as the stabilisers are small relative to the reactors + chambers + thrusters, I'd say you end up with a ship that's "pointy" at one end, and big(ger) at the other, which sounds pretty trivial to make visually appealing. As...

Just pull the trigger and roll out power 2.0 already. The uncertainty and waiting is worse than any solid decision. This whole saga is like getting teeth extracted: first there's a whole lot of fear while you wait (about the unknown, and wild crazy imaginings of terrible consequences), <--...

That is a really nice adjustment to the current 2.0 system. Why are you so certain ships will end up as dumbells, Ithirahad? Perhaps you could show us a 2D systems layout sketch of what you think is going to happen?

They aren't, placement just increases or decreases efficiency (analogous to block placement increasing or decreasing efficiency in the current power system) Maybe I missed something here, but I can't see why not... Not only would it be possible, but assuming you made the ring radius large...

I have a second layout: Chambers are quite close to both reactors now, and spacing of reactors and stabilisers is good, I guess the weakness is that the secondary reactor is fwd of the main reactor so the majority of the time it has a higher chance of being destroyed before the main reactor...

Although it isn't an answer to your request, Vox2sm3 (2016) should be on your list as one of the tools that does this also. The quality and speed are good, but there's no colour control, and length is limited to 1500. .obj file ---> [Binvox app] ---> .binvox file ---> [Vox2sm3 app] --->...

It's good to know it's on your radar, and that you've already given it some thought. Really looking forward to seeing this project up and running.

Fair enough. If I understand correctly you've only put in secondary reactors and stabilisers because the rules required them. I can understand that for organised duels, but I think they have their place for ships in a persistent universe, they could let a ship survive its fwd or aft end being...

I'll write a blueprint exporter if there's plenty of demand for it. In the mean time you can create blueprints by pasting templates onto a ship core in SM. I think I will go ahead and generate guide blocks that can be pasted to the core to make placing the ship around the core in the correct...

Sounds very appealing - ships being (relatively) fast to design and build is very attractive for someone with little spare time...(me) I'm curious about whether you have any ideas/methods for creating a functioning economy - supply/demand, production/consumption. The default one in SM isn't...

Thanks for sharing zoolimar. Looking at this layout I'd say perhaps the primary and secondary reactors are too close together, and the same for the stabilisers. If the primary is destroyed it's likely that the secondary will be too.

I propose a thought experiment for anyone/everyone to participate in: Create a 2D ship layout of systems on a grid/pixel surface with the parameters defined below, in the best arrangement you can design, according to SM's systems and power 2.0 coding. Use any drawing method you like (ascii...

I wouldn't call it forced. It is some pressure, but there are other competing pressures also, and the existing power system applies pressure on hull shape too: towards "cube".

The pressure from power systems on hull shape then becomes towards "blob/sphere" though. Power 2.0 pressure on hull shape is towards "wedge" shape, which I quite like: long axis with main stabilisers fwd, and reactor aft with chambers and secondary reactors all close by, and secondary...

Possibly you're in the wrong thread then. This thread here is in response to another thread which is about concern over how ships will look with power 2.0.

I've made no comment on how "arrow" shaped ships perform compared to others whatsoever, and I have no plans to. If you’ll check the link in the OP to the original thread, and read the OP in that thread, you'll see that the discussion we're having was born from a concern about how ships will...

The new power system requires conduits between reactors and chambers, but only a build link between reactors and stabilisers. Requiring conduits between reactors and stabilisers as well (or an equivalent type block if not the exact same conduits) would achieve three things: There would be no...

If shape isn't driven (only) by power efficiency (which you agree is the case), then it doesn't follow to then say that ships with the new system will be sticks. As with the old system, their shape will be determined by a variety of factors, and won't simply be the shape of best power...