In Developement Cockpits: Simple solution (remote core access)

[godmars]

Na. Cores should be removed and not optional.

Na. There isn't any reason this needs to be forced on smaller ships where the core could logically be in or directly behind where it's cockpit is. So long as the avatar isn't sucked into the core when it's entered, the same effect would be achieved regardless. Starmade is all about leaving space for creativity, and what you are saying would go directly against that.

 

[Valiant70]

Na. There isn't any reason this needs to be forced on smaller ships where the core could logically be in or directly behind where it's cockpit is. So long as the avatar isn't sucked into the core when it's entered, the same effect would be achieved regardless. Starmade is all about leaving space for creativity, and what you are saying would go directly against that.

In my experience cores have done nothing but get in my way when I'm trying to be creative. With the center-of-mass update on the way, at least we can put the thing wherever we want on the ship.

 

[Circuitbomb]

Snk and Valiant70

Getting rid of the cores entirely would require the dev team to create a whole new block just to handle creating entities used as ship or station modules that don't require piloting. An automated turret doesn't require a cockpit, nor does a hangar bay door, or an elevator, or anything else that uses the rail system that isn't a ship. Making the cores easier to work around with the center of mass update is a big step in making cores not so central in the build process and adding a ship command/bridge type block that just connects to the core in a similar way that we connect other systems would probably be better and somewhat consistent.

 

[Snk]

Snk and Valiant70

Getting rid of the cores entirely would require the dev team to create a whole new block just to handle creating entities used as ship or station modules that don't require piloting. An automated turret doesn't require a cockpit, nor does a hangar bay door, or an elevator, or anything else that uses the rail system that isn't a ship. Making the cores easier to work around with the center of mass update is a big step in making cores not so central in the build process and adding a ship command/bridge type block that just connects to the core in a similar way that we connect other systems would probably be better and somewhat consistent.

...not at all. Ship and station modules and whatnot are already controlled by logic, and auto turrets are controlled by Bobby AI modules.

 

[Valiant70]

Snk and Valiant70

Getting rid of the cores entirely would require the dev team to create a whole new block just to handle creating entities used as ship or station modules that don't require piloting.

Just use a build block and remove it when you're done building the part you're working on. Bingo. Your mini-turret is now one block smaller.

Cores could stay as a multipurpose starting point for ships that acts as a helm, build block, and basic systems in one, but one should not be required for a ship entity to exist. Requiring one like that does not benefit gameplay in any way. For example, my hangar doors both have cores in them, but they don't need them now that I'm finished building and mounting them. I'd like to remove them now as they are unnecessary, but the game won't let me.

adding a ship command/bridge type block that just connects to the core in a similar way that we connect other systems would probably be better and somewhat consistent.

That's pretty much what I suggested in the OP, minus having to link to the core. There's no reason to bother linking since it can only connect to one thing (the ship it's on).

 

[Fum]

Cores (...) should not be required for a ship entity to exist. Requiring one like that does not benefit gameplay in any way.

It's not about gameplay. It's about programming and game logic. Entities are defined as consisting of an entity-enabling part, such as the core. That's an easy way to make stations, asteroids and ships buildable anywhere, but still allow ships to move.

 

[Ithirahad]

It's not about gameplay. It's about programming and game logic. Entities are defined as consisting of an entity-enabling part, such as the core. That's an easy way to make stations, asteroids and ships buildable anywhere, but still allow ships to move.

But the only thing that made the core meaningful is that it was a center of mass and death point and entry point for the ship. Entities can move just fine without having a fancy block at 0,0,0 - just look at asteroids! If their diamond isn't over a block, it means there's nothing where the ship core would be. I don't see the universe breaking every time they generate... As far as I know, for all it matters, ships can now start with nothing but a control chair, or a piece of grey hull, or a Yhole, at this point.

 

[Valiant70]

As far as I know, for all it matters, ships can now start with nothing but a control chair, or a piece of grey hull, or a Yhole, at this point.

And that's the way it should be. Cores are a vestige of early alpha and really shouldn't be needed any longer.

 

[Visitor]

I have to agree that core shouldn't be necessary. Mechanics-wise, they can be easily substituted aside from actual ship command as they already play lesser role in defining qualities of the ship than they did some time ago.

Aside from that, going a bit off-tangent and for the record I'd like to voice opinion for something more than merely a cockpit being simple, mostly visual alternative to a core block - I'd like it to matter. For example, the fact that there is actual guy standing in front of some console/sitting in a pilot seat would help with things like implementation of bio/chemical warfare, destroying life support systems or hull breach as the character would be affected by the state of the ship outside of the single block he'd 'live' in. I also would like to divide controls into single, simple seat-with-controls object for smaller ships and several separate command consoles for a bigger ones (where there still would be one helm console for all basic functions, but also a need for multitasking or several crewmembers for managing all subsystems, internal ship facilities and so on).

 

[Snk]

I have to agree that core shouldn't be necessary. Mechanics-wise, they can be easily substituted aside from actual ship command as they already play lesser role in defining qualities of the ship than they did some time ago.

Aside from that, going a bit off-tangent and for the record I'd like to voice opinion for something more than merely a cockpit being simple, mostly visual alternative to a core block - I'd like it to matter. For example, the fact that there is actual guy standing in front of some console/sitting in a pilot seat would help with things like implementation of bio/chemical warfare, destroying life support systems or hull breach as the character would be affected by the state of the ship outside of the single block he'd 'live' in. I also would like to divide controls into single, simple seat-with-controls object for smaller ships and several separate command consoles for a bigger ones (where there still would be one helm console for all basic functions, but also a need for multitasking or several crewmembers for managing all subsystems, internal ship facilities and so on).

Along with that, an advantage to command consoles could be that you could customize them..

 

[Woodz Gaming]

Perhaps the proposed helm module shouldn't have access to build mode. This would cause players to build their starter ships by hand, and it would give build blocks more uses. Thus, modifying ships would require the pilot to leave the helm module and travel through their ship to begin building.

 

[Ithirahad]

Perhaps the proposed helm module shouldn't have access to build mode. This would cause players to build their starter ships by hand, and it would give build blocks more uses. Thus, modifying ships would require the pilot to leave the helm module and travel through their ship to begin building.

...Yes, and modifying ships in flight couldn't be done by the pilot, either, which makes certain exploits a lot harder. (e.g. spamming large blocks of blocks while being shot at)

 

[Visitor]

Perhaps the proposed helm module shouldn't have access to build mode. This would cause players to build their starter ships by hand, and it would give build blocks more uses. Thus, modifying ships would require the pilot to leave the helm module and travel through their ship to begin building.

...Yes, and modifying ships in flight couldn't be done by the pilot, either, which makes certain exploits a lot harder. (e.g. spamming large blocks of blocks while being shot at)

Plus it would be a solid base for the whole shipyard idea relatively often requested by community for creation of bigger ships.

 

[Valiant70]

Along with that, an advantage to command consoles could be that you could customize them..

Ah yes. Each control station could have permissions like being able to modify which weapons a control station has access to, whether it can control the rotation and thrusters, etc. Sharing the set waypoint across all consoles on the same ship would also be interesting, and allowing only certain stations to set the waypoint (or multiple waypoints) would be better yet. Then you could have the CIC telling everyone what to do and where to go, the bridge flying the ship, and fire control managing weapons, all from different parts of the ship if desired.

 

[Snk]

Ah yes. Each control station could have permissions like being able to modify which weapons a control station has access to, whether it can control the rotation and thrusters, etc. Sharing the set waypoint across all consoles on the same ship would also be interesting, and allowing only certain stations to set the waypoint (or multiple waypoints) would be better yet. Then you could have the CIC telling everyone what to do and where to go, the bridge flying the ship, and fire control managing weapons, all from different parts of the ship if desired.

This is a little off topic, but it brings up the idea of crewability. I wrote a thread about it: http://starmadedock.net/threads/a-manifesto-on-crewability.4329/

 

[TheOmega]

WHAT IF....

Ship cores were removed and replaced with build blocks. Create a ship, spawns a build block. Create a station, spawns a build block. Nav marker would be on the CoM and to kill the ship you kill the pilot. Have the helm module be nearly invisible (think glass) or have the texture of the block below it. You could delete the build block and a message would come up like when you delete the last block of a ship like on a station.

 

[Snk]

WHAT IF....

Ship cores were removed and replaced with build blocks. Create a ship, spawns a build block. Create a station, spawns a build block. Nav marker would be on the CoM and to kill the ship you kill the pilot. Have the helm module be nearly invisible (think glass) or have the texture of the block below it. You could delete the build block and a message would come up like when you delete the last block of a ship like on a station.

...except that shipyards are going to make build blocks useless.

 

[0Samuel0]

In light of the recent update for boarding, I like think this idea could be expanded upon further. Currently, torching the core ejects the player, thereby disabling the ship. I like the idea that if implemented, this would let you either go for the core, disabling the ship (and turrets) and allowing you to gain control but leaving the player to come after you, or B - attacking the player directly, leaving turrets and ship systems working and forcing you to go back to the core to gain control. So, if implemented and used in a ship, you would need to both disable the core and capture the cockpit to take a ship.

The core should not be removed. But neither should it serve the same purpose it always has had. Sure, asteroids and stations don't have cores. But neither do they fly around. Having cores makes sense on a ship. They shouldn't necessarily be buildblock and entry point, but rather a key vulnerability. Make it so that disabling a core disables all connected systems (and all AI's on docked turrets). So a ship could have it's core taken out, either by boarders or clever shooting, leaving shields, armor, and power intact but forcing players to use computers for weapons. After all, it's the core of the ship.

 

[Valiant70]

Why do we still have ship cores???

They are no longer used to kill the ship. They no longer dictate the center of rotation. All they are used for is flying and building, and the building part is going to be gone/ubernerfed in the next big update. We do not need this immutable block and it's annoying to plan a ship around it. Sure, we've been doing it since the beginning, but that doesn't make it any less irritating.

Please allow us to move/remove the core. If there's no core, you couldn't fly, but a ship entity should be able to exist without one. I hope this gets fixed in the shipyard update at the latest. It's been annoying the living crap out of me for the past hour.

 

[jayman38]

Why do we still have ship cores???

They are no longer used to kill the ship. They no longer dictate the center of rotation. All they are used for is flying and building, and the building part is going to be gone/ubernerfed in the next big update. We do not need this immutable block and it's annoying to plan a ship around it. Sure, we've been doing it since the beginning, but that doesn't make it any less irritating.

Please allow us to move/remove the core. If there's no core, you couldn't fly, but a ship entity should be able to exist without one. I hope this gets fixed in the shipyard update at the latest. It's been annoying the living crap out of me for the past hour.

With these changes, unless something dictates that we require cores, I think cores might be going away soon.

With that said, I think new structures could start with a simple block of armor or something as a start. (When last block is gone, structure is gone.) No difference between starting a station or a ship, except for the station "buy-in".

On the other hand, some people have gone through a lot of trouble to make their core rooms beautiful. (Not me. I focus beauty on other points in the ship, in the vain hope that it'll draw fire from distracted enemies.) So I'd like your thoughts on a suitably impressive block to replace the core. I think the beacon would be too flashy, especially for those who put their cores in their cockpits/bridges. Maybe an unlinked FTL computer on existing ships? It'll need to be something that doesn't add any new functionality (such as a computer without linked system blocks or a system block without a linked computer), but should still look cool as a focal point of the room. A Bobby AI might be a fun replacement, with a fun bit of lore (ships used to use cores, but then those cores developed sentience...), but might fundamentally change the purpose and functionality of the ship. Not that such a change would be a bad thing. Of course, we need a replacement block that serves as a ship control interface, hopefully with the option to place more than one on a ship or other structure (think: being able to control a station's logic from this control system with hotbars), so maybe the core will just morph into that control interface.