Compilation of Ideas (MrNo)

[MrNo]

Okay, I think I get what you mean about the thrusters. It makes sense, I see no immediate problem with it, and I\'ll probably end up switching my current section on the subject with that, when I get the time to do it.



If I understand you correctly on the FTL section, you\'re suggesting that instead of requiring a beacon to enter/use FTL, you merely need one at the arrival point. I like this idea, especially because it gets rid of the extreme limitations to usage. I had wanted some limitation of use, but for whatever reason such a simple fix never entered my mind. I also agree with the chargeup time. A way to insert the chargeup time, as well as prevent usage of it as an annoying escape mechanism, would be to have it activatable from the hotbar, and over time charge up energy until it hits maximum. During this time, it\'s completely sucking power from your systems, meaning that everything goes down (including, possibly, shields) so you can\'t continually fight and just jump out without warning. I like the idea a great deal. You pretty much said this in the post, but I\'m just bringing it all together in a sentence or two.

Now, on the idea of having more hyperdrive coils reduce energy cost the more there are: I\'m sort of opposed to making this too powerful, as a large ship is easily going to have the space to put tons of these, and then just leave at a moments notice. Instead of making them decrease energy cost, you could have them related to range, or have a coil/mass ratio calculation that determines the time it takes to jump (instead of just jumping at max energy charge).

I\'d be absolutely fine with that reactor/conduit system, if it doesn\'t get too complicated.

 

[ltmauve]

On the topic of energy comsumption for hyperdrive jumps, what I meant was that the energy needed to jump would be something like mass/number of coils, so your 20,000 mass ubership with ten coils will require about 300,000 energy to jump, where the one with 200 coils will only take 15,000 energy to jump. Of course, if some of those coils are destroyed, the energy usage goes up. I was thinking it would be independent of range. The jump startup time could be a consequence of having too few coils.

As for using it, I had decided the navcomputer would be a hotbar block, and you would activate it to bring up a list of beacons you could jump to. (you would have had to visit these beacons beforehand) You would select a beacon, and then you would have to wait for you to build up enough energy. You then have zero energy as the coils take all your power for the jump. Then there would be three seconds of activating the coils. While you are doing this, a purple nimbus surronds your ship, to alert your enemies that you are trying to retreat and have no power. Then, boom, you wind up within 1km of the beacon.

 

[MrNo]

Sorry for the long delay before response. I kinda forgot about this thread.

Thank you for clarifying on the energy consumption, I had at first read that as a flat decrease, with possible fall-off with more blocks. Not sure why, that wouldn\'t make any sense at all. That seems like a perfectly reasonable system, would you mind if I changed the OP suggestion to that?



A nav computer block onboard the ship would be interesting, it would give you yet another way to prevent enemy jump from occuring, and could simply function the same way a weapon computer does. I don\'t quite like the idea of a jump dropping you within a certain range of a beacon, as it has the potential to leave you in awkward places inside highly inhabited sectors (for example, inside another ship). I see how that could be worked around, but have no idea what consequences the solution would bring. However, if it works like that, you could have additional nav computer blocks decrease the distance you would arrive from the beacon. Just a little side effect.



One last question that just came up for me: Were you thinking of this as requiring a coil to jump in the first place, or allowing every ship the ability to do so by default, with coils/nav comp being optional? (if the latter, I would say not to add a nav-comp block, for convenience)

 

[EpicFailLord123]

hfmkg

 

[MrNo]

... Indeed. Based on your rather excited response, I\'ll assume that you also agree unconditionally with every other suggestion from the thread