Chairs n' Viewscreens... And stuff?

[testkil]

Perhaps not like THAT. I was more picturing something much simpler... 3 boxes.One for the stand, one for the seat, one for the backrest. If captain's chairs get a separate block, then it could have simple armrests as well, but that's not necessary.

yea that would be cool

 

[ltmauve]

I'm thinking more that the seat should be a simple block, that gets activated to enter and shows where the player is while "sitting"

 

[Ithirahad]

I'm thinking more that the seat should be a simple block, that gets activated to enter and shows where the player is while "sitting"

Actually, a simple block that the player sits on would work as well; once we have half-block (vertical) panels those can be used to approximate the type of seat I'm envisioning anyway.

 

[Ithirahad]

Hey, another simplification:

Instead of having a complicated linking system with computers and chairs and stuff, what if:

• A player sitting in a chair (and only sitting in a chair) could activate a computer within their reach. They would still see from their from-chair (from-player-head) view unless they switched to a camera (cockpit) view.
• A "Master Computer" to control all systems (like the ship core now) would be available, but would drain a certain amount of extra power when systems are used, scaling up with system size (Zero extra up to 100 blocks or so, then increasing linearly, slowly).
• Controlling ship navigation without this power drain would require someone manning a Helm Computer. The helm computer could also control the docking beam.
  
• All weapons CPUs (and docking modules, and activator blocks, etc.) could be linked to one central block, the Weapons System Terminal, at no cost to power... Possibly another one could be required for powerdrain, powersupply, tractor beams, and other "ship tools".
• Activation blocks could be linked to, and accessed from, any computer terminal.

 

[ltmauve]

First part: nope. You want people exploring the galaxy from the bridge? Don't force them to armor their bridge out of prudence.

Weapons system block? If we could have multiple, with different group for each, that would work.

 

[Ithirahad]

First part: nope. You want people exploring the galaxy from the bridge? Don't force them to armor their bridge out of prudence.

The bridge should always be armored. That's the one thing I always hated about Star Trek. The bridges were always sitting right on gravity-top of the ship (or in front, in the case of the Klingons). If you want a Star Trek-style bridge for a command room, you're gonna have to face the consequences, or make the walls double- or triple-thick, or use T3 hull for it, or balance shields to cover the bridge a bit more, or... whatever. (Personally, I'll just streamline my bridges so there's nothing bumping out of the hull profile, and hope for the best... Or I'll just stick my command rooms in the middle of my ships like a reasonable person.)

Weapons system block? If we could have multiple, with different group for each, that would work.

That's the idea. You can have as many as you want.

 

[ltmauve]

Yeah, but suppose you want to fly the ship from the viewing deck, but can't because of the computer limitation. Yes it looks cool, but there's a risk. However, that viewing deck could be anywhere.

It's not a huge deal, and if someone wants an undefended control area so be it. Not a huge problem.

 

[ltmauve]

Also, you know how the area activation blocks are supposed to be invisible outside of build mode? Do that with the "seats", so people can design their own.

 

[Ithirahad]

Yeah, but suppose you want to fly the ship from the viewing deck, but can't because of the computer limitation. Yes it looks cool, but there's a risk. However, that viewing deck could be anywhere.

It's not a huge deal, and if someone wants an undefended control area so be it. Not a huge problem.

Have a second helm computer if you want a second control point... Personally, I'd put a secondary command setup in my core room; just the basics, helm and weapons.

Also, you know how the area activation blocks are supposed to be invisible outside of build mode? Do that with the "seats", so people can design their own.

...And have the player sit on the bottom face of the block, so they're inside it? That would work.

 

[NeonSturm]

Also, you know how the area activation blocks are supposed to be invisible outside of build mode? Do that with the "seats", so people can design their own.

Half-blocks would help here. 1 metre details are not very appealing.

 

[Ithirahad]

Half-blocks would help here. 1 metre details are not very appealing.

They would, but for now the 3-wedge-seats we build now will serve just fine as crew seats, and you can add an extra block for the backrest on the captain's chair. Should make for a nice, universally-recognizable standard.

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

I had a similar idea, but I don't like still having a core in addition to control chairs. It makes them seem a bit useless and leaves us with the same problems of how cores work, plus it would make cores almost entirely obsolete when the hitpoint system is added. My idea is to instead have control chairs be a replacement of ship cores entirely.

 

[scagjmboy45]

That's actually pretty much the idea. You can then have one person at the helm, one person controlling weapons, turret targeting/control, shield distribution, and some kind of master (captain) seat... ETC.



That's the idea as well. If you defeat someone and capture their ship, that's good... Winning shouldn't always imply completely destroying a ship. Killing the crew, flying aboard in a shuttlecraft or something, and stealing the ship should be a lot easier, and just a better idea in general, unless you want to salvage the entire thing with beams.

This would work perfectly with this thread that I wrote the other night.
This is definitely the feature that I want to see implemented the most, just because I really want this to be a game I can play with my friends as a crew, not just as a group of captains.

 

[Ithirahad]

I had a similar idea, but I don't like still having a core in addition to control chairs. It makes them seem a bit useless and leaves us with the same problems of how cores work, plus it would make cores almost entirely obsolete when the hitpoint system is added. My idea is to instead have control chairs be a replacement of ship cores entirely.

The core still remains as the way of starting construction of a ship, and as a first build block if you don't have space for a separate one. It could also serve as an access point for the Structure Menu (which could also be done using a Structure Control Panel block or a Master Computer if you have a large ship and choose to cover up the core with armor)

 

[RoyalWolfe]

OK, I think we need to really tread carefully here.

there are concerns for both sides of this issue. so lets define them here.

cores become useless. this is not what we're discussing here. we are not saying get rid of them or make them less important. we are however saying they do way too much. you fly the ship, control its systems, manage all components, and control all turrets, from this one part. this thing does it all. that's the issue we aren't saying if you kill it it shouldn't destroy the entity it controls. that's the one part we all agree on, it does that just fine and should not change.

the game would play more like X. this is just silly. you guys are more worried that X game is going to taker over and dictate how we play? really this is your argument? maybe if you thought about it correctly, if it was a bad idea? why then did X game use it? OK lets put the game argument aside, the game becomes X Sci Fi movie or TV program? again why the hell not? if it was a bad idea why did they use it? we aren't saying make it work differently, we are saying make it better by doing both. if you don't want to pilot from a buckskin chair don't! we simply asking for the option.

i think that covers the two major ones.

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

To see why a core would be useless, we must ask the question "For what reasons do cores exist at all?"
The answer is as follows:a core is the entry point to control of the ship, is the thing to take out to kill the ship, defines docking positioning, and identifies the ship in the universe.
A control chair utterly eliminates reason number one. Reason number two becomes silly (if we're not shooting at the pilot controlling the ship, why does hitting this one block kill the ship? Does it have no backup systems at all?).
Reason number three is something that is absolutely a bad reason for cores to exist, as it severely limits docking for ships that aren't built from the start around having the core at the center. Finally, reason number four is just a quirk of the game (Space Engineers does just fine and dandy without any equivalent of a ship core, you can even just split a ship in half and the two halves become separate ships.).

Cores just don't really bring much to the game, and a control chair raises the issue of cores by taking over the piloting ability that is the only real necessity of cores. We could just have cores be changed to be two blocks tall and show a player if one's inside, and have a chair shape. The only differences then with the suggestion would be due to the whole player dying with the core thing (maybe a good reason for seperation, but I do feel it's rather silly, plus you can just exit the core before it gets damaged if badly losing) and the docking effects (a secondary concern that's moot if chairs get placed near the center or you have a bunch of docking enhancers and room anyways).

I suspect we'll be stuck with the magically-inside-blocks thing for years to come and won't even get something as simple as chair cores.

 

[Forge_Meiser]

There was another method that does not change cores much other than their killability. Something that I discussed with someone was the possibility of increasing the hitpoints a core can have via how much hull plating a ship has. This would be a calculation similar to the shield calculation, except that instead of thousands to millions of shields, it would also be thousands to millions of core hitpoints. For example, a pirate station takes several hits to it's faction module before you can board it and grab the loot. Exactly the same concept, except the hull determines how many thousands of hits before the core decides to overheat. This would make cores both more effective at combat and at the same time give hull a purpose.

 

[Ithirahad]

To see why a core would be useless, we must ask the question "For what reasons do cores exist at all?"
The answer is as follows:a core is the entry point to control of the ship, is the thing to take out to kill the ship, defines docking positioning, and identifies the ship in the universe.
A control chair utterly eliminates reason number one.

Yes, mostly because controlling a ship from what is apparently a computer core that doesn't even have a monitor makes no sense.

Reason number two becomes silly (if we're not shooting at the pilot controlling the ship, why does hitting this one block kill the ship? Does it have no backup systems at all?).

Backup systems would actually be a decent idea, but I guess it kills the ship because it's the only computer core. However, shooting a computer core shouldn't blow up a ship, merely disable it and make it salvageable; you should have to hit a ship with tons of explosives to make it just go boom (Or the ship should have to have an explosive reactor for a power system)

Reason number three is something that is absolutely a bad reason for cores to exist, as it severely limits docking for ships that aren't built from the start around having the core at the center.

That's due to terrible docking mechanics. If ships docked via clamps (or, in the case of turrets, hinges) we wouldn't even be thinking about this.

Finally, reason number four is just a quirk of the game (Space Engineers does just fine and dandy without any equivalent of a ship core, you can even just split a ship in half and the two halves become separate ships.).

I dislike this as well.

Cores just don't really bring much to the game, and a control chair raises the issue of cores by taking over the piloting ability that is the only real necessity of cores. We could just have cores be changed to be two blocks tall and show a player if one's inside, and have a chair shape. The only differences then with the suggestion would be due to the whole player dying with the core thing (maybe a good reason for seperation, but I do feel it's rather silly, plus you can just exit the core before it gets damaged if badly losing) and the docking effects (a secondary concern that's moot if chairs get placed near the center or you have a bunch of docking enhancers and room anyways).

I dislike chair cores because that means that you can't have your chair (command access point) and core (Ship build starting point, center of rotation, and main vulnerability) in two different places. If I want to build, say, the USS Enterprise, and put the core in the center of the warp core, but the chair at the top of the saucer in the bridge, I should be able to do that. In addition, even if I get out of the core before my shields go down completely, all (or at least many) of the shots will be headed towards the core, so if I'm stuck near the core when the AMC bullets break through the hull, I'm very likely to get hit, compared to if I'm in the front or on the top of the ship, which I could orient so that it isn't between the enemy ship and the core. Also, it's kind of hard to have escape pods if you need them to be in the one area where they'll probably get obliterated. :\

I suspect we'll be stuck with the magically-inside-blocks thing for years to come and won't even get something as simple as chair cores.

That would suck terribly.

 

[Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW]

Ah, yes, the rotation problem (another reason cores exist). I would really prefer rotation not be centered around the core. There's pretty much no reason to not have the core in the center of the ship. We don't gain anything from rotation being based around.
I suppose that would be a sufficient reason to keep cores alongside different control entry points, assuming it doesn't get changed.

 

[Ithirahad]

Ah, yes, the rotation problem (another reason cores exist). I would really prefer rotation not be centered around the core. There's pretty much no reason to not have the core in the center of the ship. We don't gain anything from rotation being based around.
I suppose that would be a sufficient reason to keep cores alongside different control entry points, assuming it doesn't get changed.

I once got a fairly long explanation of why it's hard to have anything but the core as the center of rotation. Basically, it's because the core is (0,0,0) in the ship's block-grid and it's apparently a lot harder (more resource-intensive) to calculate rotations from other places.

There was another method that does not change cores much other than their killability. Something that I discussed with someone was the possibility of increasing the hitpoints a core can have via how much hull plating a ship has. This would be a calculation similar to the shield calculation, except that instead of thousands to millions of shields, it would also be thousands to millions of core hitpoints. For example, a pirate station takes several hits to it's faction module before you can board it and grab the loot. Exactly the same concept, except the hull determines how many thousands of hits before the core decides to overheat. This would make cores both more effective at combat and at the same time give hull a purpose.

It would make a lot more sense if it was HULL that got this kind of system, not the core. The more blocks of connected hull there are, the stronger each block is. Simple, logical, and effective.