building is all cookiecutter and becomes boring

[wanzer]

The game no longer appeals to me.

Something in the formula changed in such a way that it gave me the feeling of being boring and redundant.
If id make a guess that causes this, it would be the new power system and the so called talent tree.
I tried it and did my best to like it.

But I can not last on such a basic and overly simplified system.
I need a challenge when building a bigger ship and not just a bigger simple blob reactor.

I had a discussion with (i think it was) criss about docked reactors some time ago and i still disagree about having them removed instead of managing them, after all, plenty use full suggestions where offered to tackle detaching modules.

But no, boring was the way to advance in this games future.
And with the last power update this boredom reached its limit.
Where i used to be exited to start up the game to build a ship with MY internal and external design, it got gradually replaced with a feeling of... oh yea that's also not allowed anymore... what's the point ... I look at the interface for a minute, close down.

I simply cant bring up the will power to play this game as it is now.

I wrote this cause I truly liked this game
And have my fingers crossed that starmade will do something to entertain the more advanced builders and not only the new ones

best regards,
wanzer.

 

[Harbinger_OF_Cthulhu]

I totally agree, except for the bit about the system catering to new players (in fact I feel it alienates new players even more).

I left SM for a while and have come back. The new power system has absolutely destroyed the game. Building is not fun anymore. I have over 2.5k hours played on starmade. I do not see myself playing another 2.5k hours. Good bye starmade, You were nice while it lasted.

 

[Skwidz]

If you have an issue about the current game mechanics stop complaining even more about it and just go do something else. The issue has already been brought up and discussed and there's no need to hammer a nail that's already deep in the wood.

 

[Edymnion]

Eh, thats okay. Best of luck finding something else to play.

 

[JumpSuit]

The game no longer appeals to me.

Something in the formula changed in such a way that it gave me the feeling of being boring and redundant.
If id make a guess that causes this, it would be the new power system and the so called talent tree.
I tried it and did my best to like it.

But I can not last on such a basic and overly simplified system.
I need a challenge when building a bigger ship and not just a bigger simple blob reactor.

I had a discussion with (i think it was) criss about docked reactors some time ago and i still disagree about having them removed instead of managing them, after all, plenty use full suggestions where offered to tackle detaching modules.

But no, boring was the way to advance in this games future.
And with the last power update this boredom reached its limit.
Where i used to be exited to start up the game to build a ship with MY internal and external design, it got gradually replaced with a feeling of... oh yea that's also not allowed anymore... what's the point ... I look at the interface for a minute, close down.

I simply cant bring up the will power to play this game as it is now.

I wrote this cause I truly liked this game
And have my fingers crossed that starmade will do something to entertain the more advanced builders and not only the new ones

best regards,
wanzer.

Ok, lemme grasp this, you now think StarMade is stale due to the recent Power 2.0? Mkay, what else is new? If ya don't like it-oh well-it is here to stay. Besides this is much more better (in my opinion, I am biased what of it?) as it expands upon Reactor Capabilities and the importance of a reactor. Docked power was NEVER a good solution as that caused TREMENDOUS amounts of lag during combat situations. If I need to edit this post for further details I will do so. This suffices for now I believe.

 

[Aesthetics]

Ok, lemme grasp this, you now think StarMade is stale due to the recent Power 2.0? Mkay, what else is new? If ya don't like it-oh well-it is here to stay. Besides this is much more better (in my opinion, I am biased what of it?)

The attitude you present here is most problematic. What is essentially "If you don't like what I like, too bad" does not sit right with me. I will pretend to ignore your biases for the sake of civil discussion.

Eh, thats okay. Best of luck finding something else to play.

He should not have to.

Something in the formula changed in such a way that it gave me the feeling of being boring and redundant.
If id make a guess that causes this, it would be the new power system and the so called talent tree.
I tried it and did my best to like it.

But I can not last on such a basic and overly simplified system. I need a challenge when building a bigger ship and not just a bigger simple blob reactor.

Basic and overly simplified is only part of the problem. The system itself is flawed; rendering shield regeneration redundant, limiting design choices to, as you say, a bigger simple blob reactor, and so forth. I recognise your distaste for this system and offer my condolences that you feel this way about the game.

I would offer platitudes, saying that it is only an alpha game and it may improve, but in Starmade's case the developers have proven rather ignorant of player input that does not align with a mostly-classified game design plan. I hope for your sake the issues you present to us do not contradict Schema's designs, and that we both may enjoy a game that does not suffer the same simplicity and restriction as an interrogation room.

 

[JumpSuit]

[doublepost=1521582753,1521582659][/doublepost]

The attitude you present here is most problematic. What is essentially "If you don't like what I like, too bad" does not sit right with me. I will pretend to ignore your biases for the sake of civil discussion.


He should not have to.


I need a challenge when building a bigger ship and not just a bigger simple blob reactor.
Basic and overly simplified is only part of the problem. The system itself is flawed; rendering shield regeneration redundant, limiting design choices to, as you say, a bigger simple blob reactor, and so forth. I recognise your distaste for this system and offer my condolences that you feel this way about the game.

I would offer platitudes, saying that it is only an alpha game and it may improve, but in Starmade's case the developers have proven rather ignorant of player input that does not align with a mostly-classified game design plan. I hope for your sake the issues you present to us do not contradict Schema's designs, and that we both may enjoy a game that does not suffer the same simplicity and restriction as an interrogation room.

I do apologize if I sounded rash about this, but homie, Power 2.0 is here to stay...

 

[Aesthetics]

I do apologize if I sounded rash about this, but homie, Power 2.0 is here to stay...

It would seem so, but that does not make it exempt from, what is presented here as, well-founded criticism from a concerned player of the game. Schine must carefully consider how they approach the concerns of their playerbase - ignoring them outright, and maintaining course on Power 2.0 without any appropriate fixes or solutions to, for example, OP's problems will not serve them in the future.

 

[JumpSuit]

It would seem so, but that does not make it exempt from, what is presented here as, well-founded criticism from a concerned player of the game. Schine must carefully consider how they approach the concerns of their playerbase - ignoring them outright, and maintaining course on Power 2.0 without any appropriate fixes or solutions to, for example, OP's problems will not serve them in the future.

While this is true, they(Schine) have done at least a patch on the power 2.0 update titled: "Reactor System Enhancement and Fixes" [Check StarMade Launcher for my Evidence.] But, if your meaning listening to the community's criticism? Well, Schine has their reasons to out right ignore the community apparently in the Developers P.O.V.. Keeping this in mind, let me put this on the table: The main conflicting thing I can see is: Schine vs The Community Standoff. This has turned from a Nominal Dev Team listening to Their Playerbase's input for new features and changes. To what is now the Dev Team seeing their own Playerbase as nothing but a community blurting out hateful things and bashful flame-wars on the forums; thus causing the Developers to loss faith with their Playerbase and rely on input from their lower ranks. (Possible Citations needed.)

 

[wanzer]

Ok, lemme grasp this, you now think StarMade is stale due to the recent Power 2.0? Mkay, what else is new? If ya don't like it-oh well-it is here to stay. Besides this is much more better (in my opinion, I am biased what of it?) as it expands upon Reactor Capabilities and the importance of a reactor. Docked power was NEVER a good solution as that caused TREMENDOUS amounts of lag during combat situations. If I need to edit this post for further details I will do so. This suffices for now I believe.

yes but here you assume the new power system would be the only solution possible to the lag problems.
I'm not against salving lag problems.
I just disagree with how the lag problem was salved and why I disagree.
On top of that I did note that ideas were given to tackle the detachment of those devices.
And we might not have docked reactors anymore but we still have turrets that are encased.

The attitude you present here is most problematic. What is essentially "If you don't like what I like, too bad" does not sit right with me. I will pretend to ignore your biases for the sake of civil discussion.

He should not have to.

I need a challenge when building a bigger ship and not just a bigger simple blob reactor.
Basic and overly simplified is only part of the problem. The system itself is flawed; rendering shield regeneration redundant, limiting design choices to, as you say, a bigger simple blob reactor, and so forth. I recognise your distaste for this system and offer my condolences that you feel this way about the game.

I would offer platitudes, saying that it is only an alpha game and it may improve, but in Starmade's case the developers have proven rather ignorant of player input that does not align with a mostly-classified game design plan. I hope for your sake the issues you present to us do not contradict Schema's designs, and that we both may enjoy a game that does not suffer the same simplicity and restriction as an interrogation room.

I might log in once a while and see where it goes.
[doublepost=1521600412,1521599110][/doublepost]

While this is true, they(Schine) have done at least a patch on the power 2.0 update titled: "Reactor System Enhancement and Fixes" [Check StarMade Launcher for my Evidence.] But, if your meaning listening to the community's criticism? Well, Schine has their reasons to out right ignore the community apparently in the Developers P.O.V.. Keeping this in mind, let me put this on the table: The main conflicting thing I can see is: Schine vs The Community Standoff. This has turned from a Nominal Dev Team listening to Their Playerbase's input for new features and changes. To what is now the Dev Team seeing their own Playerbase as nothing but a community blurting out hateful things and bashful flame-wars on the forums; thus causing the Developers to loss faith with their Playerbase and rely on input from their lower ranks. (Possible Citations needed.)

If the developers choose to ignore the community, that be up to them.
Atleast I have tried to address my concerns.

 

[JinM]

*tries not to join a discussion that has been made 100 times before in the past 12 months*

 

[Aesthetics]

*tries not to join a discussion that has been made 100 times before in the past 12 months*

The fact this has been going on for over a year, that the same problems persist without appropriate solutions, is reason enough to express concern over Schine's lack of progress.

 

[JinM]

The fact this has been going on for over a year, that the same problems persist without appropriate solutions, is reason enough to express concern over Schine's lack of progress.

Imagine you have a father and you as his son decide to become a mechanican. But your father tells as soon as you plan to become one thats a shitty idea you should become a policeman just like he was. After you are allready 2 years in your vocational training he still tells you every time you eat dinner with your parents that your decission sucks.

 

[Aesthetics]

Imagine you have a father and you as his son decide to become a mechanican. But your father tells as soon as you plan to become one thats a shitty idea you should become a policeman just like he was. After you are allready 2 years in your vocational training he still tells you every time you eat dinner with your parents that your decission sucks.

Whatever you hoped to accomplish from this "analogy" on how you see Schine's circumstances, you have achieved nothing.

 

[JinM]

Whatever you hoped to accomplish from this "analogy" on how you see Schine's circumstances, you have achieved nothing.

I am sorry but what did I do to upset you so much, that you block a discussion like this?

 

[OfficialCoding]

While this is true, they(Schine) have done at least a patch on the power 2.0 update titled: "Reactor System Enhancement and Fixes" [Check StarMade Launcher for my Evidence.] But, if your meaning listening to the community's criticism? Well, Schine has their reasons to out right ignore the community apparently in the Developers P.O.V.. Keeping this in mind, let me put this on the table: The main conflicting thing I can see is: Schine vs The Community Standoff. This has turned from a Nominal Dev Team listening to Their Playerbase's input for new features and changes. To what is now the Dev Team seeing their own Playerbase as nothing but a community blurting out hateful things and bashful flame-wars on the forums; thus causing the Developers to loss faith with their Playerbase and rely on input from their lower ranks. (Possible Citations needed.)

I am not entirely against power 2.0, but the problem with that patch is that in it's quest to discourage death cubes, it now makes crosses the best shape. Stabilizers inherently favor one shape over all other shapes, and that's a problem.

 

[Skwidz]

I am not entirely against power 2.0, but the problem with that patch is that in it's quest to discourage death cubes, it now makes crosses the best shape. Stabilizers inherently favor one shape over all other shapes, and that's a problem.

Sure it discourages them but they can still exist. Just make a reactor using all six sides and add giant system cubes with each stabilizer "arm" forming the space between each cube kind of like the combined Borg cubes from that Star Trek game I can't remember. It will have some gaps in between some areas but you will have made a cube.

 

[Nosajimiki]

...I had a discussion with (i think it was) criss about docked reactors some time ago and i still disagree about having them removed instead of managing them, after all, plenty use full suggestions where offered to tackle detaching modules...

...Docked power was NEVER a good solution as that caused TREMENDOUS amounts of lag during combat situations. If I need to edit this post for further details I will do so. This suffices for now I believe.

Yes please do expand, because as it stands it sounds like you are arguing that we needed to get rid of docked power because it was not fixed instead of realizing that the OP acknowledged this problem AND the solution. It could have been a very simple fix: don't do collision checks on immobile rails. There was already a trick called zeroing out rails that elementated all of the extra lag of docked power and armor where you could eliminate the unneeded collision detection by just making a rail have zero speed. If the game engine checked 1st if it could move, then second if moving would cause collisions, there would have been no problem. The only remaining lag was from undocking, but Schine fixed that anyway by making docked connections persistent when damaged. The problem could have been 100% solved in an afternoon instead of replacing one problem for another after 10 months of development.

The other common issue people had with docked power was the false belief that it was a universally useful exploit. People who swore that docked power was always the way to go did not understand the finer mechanics of the game. Apart from being necessary for running certain systems like jammers and thrusters, AUX was more versatile. 50m regen/sec in one central place could often do the job of 60-75m regen distributed around because it could allocate better. Docked power also meant you needed docked capacitors which were less efficient than centralized ones, so things like docked long-range turrets often waisted more mass than they saved trying to add enough capacity to be self-powered... and if you messed up the capacity needs, your turret would "tank out" destroying several seconds of power regen and interrupting fire; so, they were less stable too. Docked power weapons could also be jammed more easily by hitting the main body of a ship with EMP. Docked power vs AUX was a choice that had to be carefully considered based on play-style, and your enemies' weapons of choice. It added a lot of depth to people who like to experiment on things or develop "hard-counter ships", but was easy enough for any noob to throw down a cube of power and be done with. Now, there is no easy nooby throw it down however option, nor is there a complex investigative option.

As for chambers, they don't need to be based on a reactor at all. In fact, reactor scaling exploits are much harder to address than mass scaling exploits of the old passives system. For example, I have a ship with a 99,999 block main reactor and it has only chambers I need in combat, then for a jump drive, I can have a minimal reactor with a maxed out jump drive system for less mass than adding a single extra chamber to my main reactor. How do you fix that without just telling people they can't have backup reactors at all? Old system would have been way easier to fix with just a couple lines of code by just using mass based on the entire entity chain (which the game already calculates btw). Don't get me wrong, there are some neat new things in the chamber system's skill tree, but they could have been implemented using the old passives system much better and multi-level effects made way more since as % effects bases on "chamber" size.

 

[kulbolen]

Imagine you have a father and you as his son decide to become a mechanican. But your father tells as soon as you plan to become one thats a shitty idea you should become a policeman just like he was. After you are allready 2 years in your vocational training he still tells you every time you eat dinner with your parents that your decission sucks.

this would make more sense if it were the same person each time.

 

[Star-Boy]

Imagine you have a father and you as his son decide to become a mechanican. But your father tells as soon as you plan to become one thats a shitty idea you should become a policeman just like he was. After you are allready 2 years in your vocational training he still tells you every time you eat dinner with your parents that your decission sucks.

No son of mine is going to choose a fictional career!