Search results

Solution? I didn't realise there was any reason to classify this as a problem. If ex-docked entities colliding is the justification behind considering this a "problem", that's something that can be solved with it's own specific solution: this and this for example, among others.

Oh, I didn't even realise taking away the docked entity aspect of ship design was a realistic possibility. :( I really hope that doesn't happen, docked entities create such a huge volume of design potential that wouldn't be possible without them. (I don't mean "bigger weapons/ships", I mean...

Ditto! Minding my own business at the spawn shop and some NPC drives his miner into it! :) Afterwards it became totally inactive. Just lay around like a beached whale... Really loving seeing some "life" around in single player servers, thanks for the update guys!

But that's true of any optimisation technique, not just using multiple entities. You have to allocate a reasonable mass to power capacitors, make your weapons the "correct" size, achieve a decent thrust to mass ratio, and so on. Just like Raisinbat will have already done ;) Personally I think...

As nightrune said, precision wouldn't be needed, you'd just use the bounding box. I don't dislike this, but it's drawbacks include not being able to shoot entities that are obviously intended to be "separate ships" off the ship they're docked to. It also sounds like a ship A shot off ship B...

When an entity that's docked to another gets shot off the lag caused by collisions between the two is problematic, especially when one entity was inside the other. For a solution, when one entity (the child) gets shot off another (the parent) allow the entities to collide for a short time (a...

Certainly collision lag is a problem that needs an answer, but I feel like killing docked power entirely removes some interesting aspects of design and combat. For example you wouldn't then see a ship with it's weapon reactor shot out but other reactors still online. I think a less intrusive...

You could instead have: Ship ---> turret \---> docked armour So the turret is docked to the ship, and the armour is docked to the ship.

Wouldn't this make armour act like shields? I.e. a single pool of potential damage no matter where the ship was hit? I think that would be less tactical and less interesting than location-specific damage.

Before or after the improvements from a couple of months ago?

I think this is becoming a little clearer: stored power can be pulled up (? I mean from rail to docker), but power generation can't. So consumers that need an instantaneous amount (weapons, anything else?) can benefit from downstream capacity (not generation) but consumers that consume over...

Ah I see, thanks guys. It only works if the power consumer on T is completely incapable of working otherwise. I guess this means only weapons can make this happen? Everything else will just settle for 1 e/s, because although it's slow it still works?

I suppose you could judge it the way CounterStrike devs judge gun balancing: if you have a roughly even distribution of top players using gun X and it's direct substitutes it's good. If everyone's using it it's OP. If no-one's using it it needs a buff. Armour is a great damage soak against...

I thought I understood the basics of power flow between entities, but I was wrong - turns out I'm clueless... I have entity S ("Ship" for example) and entity T ("Turret" for example): - S has a rail or turret docking point on it, and a large amount of power generation. - T has a docker, no...

I think it should only increase range or recharge, not both. I thought range would be preferable, but when I stared a thread asking about it, I got some great explanations on why recharge is better, and changed my mind.

I'd assume (although I don't actually know) that the downstream (docker side) entities wouldn't add 2 million to their own power, they'd calculate their power as though the upstream reactor groups were their own groups - so still softcapped at 2 million.

I'd be happy to pay something for a working product I could try, or at least see and read about before I bought (I did that for SM - tried the free copy from Steam for a few days, then paid for it) but I have to be honest, I'd be a bit hesitant parting with money ahead of time for essentially...

Ta ;) I'll quote it/myself here, seeing as it's now hidden on the previous page: Yes, I think it's probably not uncommon for people to not realise/notice that a completely different definition of "wide/large/spacious" applies when you go from talking about terrestrial stuff to onboard ships...

I think your impression of that photo is a bit inaccurate. Also don't forget the distortion you get at the edges of the photo: things become stretched there. We can do a couple of rough checks: I drew a red box from the guy's head to his heel, and laid a copy sideways across the bottom. If we...

I suppose in practical terms that although larger sectors require more server memory and take longer to load, they don't have to load as often.