Death cubes: Server side counter

[Neon_42]

After a very nice conversation with the guys on hyper-core server this evening. The details of which were not related to this topic, but it did give me an Idea.

Many servers limit the size of the ships that can be built. For example your ship must fit within a 400x400x400 cube. This really only ever encourages death cubes. Cubes that fill the entire allowed volume with maximumly allowed energy regen and ridiculous weapons. What if on top of these maximum dimensions there was a maximum volume? Say something like only 2/3 or 3/5 of this volume could be filled with blocks. I think this would take away the advantage of filling the entire allowed volume with a cube. Of course Death cubes would still exist but they would be limited to the same amount of energy production as non death cubes. This is assuming that energy production is still based off the sum of all dimensions. a 5x5x5 length generator will generate the same power as a 4x4x7 generator. Thus this takes away the power advantage of boring death cubes. The cube still has the advantage of having maneuverability, but other shapes would have more surface area to mount turrets.

 

[jath]

I made a similar suggestion in a fighter design contest thread. In other words, AGREE!

 

[Thalanor]

As I have seen some servers combine dimension restraints with maximum block counts so that the latter does not permit filling up the dimension cube.
E.g. a ship is limited to 350x350x350, but can at maximum have 1 million blocks. A filled cube of 350x350x350 dimensions would have 42+ million blocks.

 

[SkylordLuke]

we have 800x800x800 max allowed,and we have a solution for "noob cubes" on mushroomfleet :P
we warn.. then ban the builder of that cube
play fair guys

 

[NeonSturm]

As I have seen some servers combine dimension restraints with maximum block counts so that the latter does not permit filling up the dimension cube.
E.g. a ship is limited to 350x350x350, but can at maximum have 1 million blocks. A filled cube of 350x350x350 dimensions would have 42+ million blocks.

Some servers restrict uploads to a certain amount of blocks (I guess a third-party tool scanning file size or contents).
But they allow bigger ships.

AFAIK Sun-World allows 1 huge ship per faction, 3 big ships per player, and large ships else with legth={huge <= 800, big <= 500, large <= 350} or similar


I think the server should define zones and for each zone a restriction.
/sector_chzone ZoneA
/zone_limit ZoneA +a intAxisL +b intAxisM +c intAxisS +m intMass
/zone_permit ZoneA +a int +b int +c int +m int +c int +s "faction", "faction", "faction"
/zone_penalties ZoneA ++noenter ++noexit ++report ...

_chzone sets a zone (multiple sectors can share the same zone
_limit (above) for all factions but permitted
_permit (up to) for some factions
_penalties if a ship exceeds allowed mass

noexit is useful for black holes
noenter + noexit should be default

Use it as good Linux programs do it, but with + to add a restriction, - to remove it. use parameters inbetween those starting with +|- for values

+abc int == equal +a int +b int +c int
++abc int == just ++abc int​

 

[Qweesdy]

Some people care about efficient design more than aesthetics; and other people care about aesthetics more than efficient design.

I am one of the former - my current ship is a black "cube like"thing. If you are one of the latter, then you can download a picture of Justin Beiber to look at while my efficient ship trashes your inefficient ship.

If you decide to have silly rules, then I will bend those rules and find more ways to be more efficient than you. This will only increase the amount of time you spend looking at Justin Beiber while your inefficient ship is being trashed.

 

[Unnamed25]

Some people care about efficient design more than aesthetics; and other people care about aesthetics more than efficient design.

I am one of the former - my current ship is a black "cube like"thing. If you are one of the latter, then you can download a picture of Justin Beiber to look at while my efficient ship trashes your inefficient ship.

If you decide to have silly rules, then I will bend those rules and find more ways to be more efficient than you. This will only increase the amount of time you spend looking at Justin Beiber while your inefficient ship is being trashed.

Cubes are only more efficient because they have more space and can carry more mass with their dimensions, so a similar massed but larger on dimensions ship with better looks will be able to take one down depending on it's design.(unless it's simply a looks ship which lots of people seem to build)


Infact when i made a ship with weaponry similar to the one that my Carrier-S had(cube thing) i was able to make it faster, take more hits, and better looking while compensating the lack on anti-shield lasers with it being faster and better shielded.

And they both have around the same mass, so i could have it almost the same ship stat-wise. but with less turets because i was to lazy to add more to it

 

[Qweesdy]

Cubes are only more efficient because they have more space and can carry more mass with their dimensions, so a similar massed but larger on dimensions ship with better looks will be able to take one down depending on it's design.(unless it's simply a looks ship which lots of people seem to build)

No, and no, and also no.

For smaller ships; the way power generators works means that long and skinny is more efficient than cube.

For medium/larger ships; once you go beyond 1 million e/sec the power generator bonus becomes unimportant and a cube is more efficient. This is because it has the least surface area for its internal volume (similar to spheres in the real world). A different shape with the same mass would be worse (more surface area for its internal volume), not better.

Infact when i made a ship with weaponry similar to the one that my Carrier-S had(cube thing) i was able to make it faster, take more hits, and better looking while compensating the lack on anti-shield lasers with it being faster and better shielded.

And they both have around the same mass, so i could have it almost the same ship stat-wise. but with less turets because i was to lazy to add more to it

If you're trying to say that your old cube ship was not efficient (and was so bad that you did better with a different shape); then I don't know if you're right or not; but I do agree that "cube" doesn't magically make it efficient (e.g. a huge cube of dirt isn't going to be good at anything just because it's a cube).

 

[SilentRider_14]

Actually cube ships weren't efficient they were just much easier and quicker to make. A cylinder that can sit inside the same dimensions of a cube would be more efficient and the most efficient shape was the sphere.

 

[Qweesdy]

Actually cube ships weren't efficient they were just much easier and quicker to make. A cylinder that can sit inside the same dimensions of a cube would be more efficient and the most efficient shape was the sphere.

Perhaps (although spheres can be worse than cubes for both turning speed and docking space required).

..but even then you're still looking at efficiency rather than aesthetics; and that was the main point of my original post.

People can make all the silly rules they like (e.g. "every ship must have a minimum of 4 disco balls and a pink fluffy strap-on"); but they will never make "pretty" more efficient than "efficient" (and ugly); so regardless of how many silly rules are proposed people will always be complaining about death cubes, or death spheres, or death triangles, or whatever else becomes the most efficient design for their silly rule of the week.

 

[Unnamed25]

No, and no, and also no.



For medium/larger ships; once you go beyond 1 million e/sec the power generator bonus becomes unimportant and a cube is more efficient. This is because it has the least surface area for its internal volume (similar to spheres in the real world). A different shape with the same mass would be worse (more surface area for its internal volume), not better.

Are you saying that non-cube ships can't use 10x10x10?
Or that non-cube ships only use those shaped generators?

Let's say someone build a 100k mass cube, and someone else builds a ship with a "better" shape and ends up at 100k mass and he built it with the same "pattern" so they both have 100k power regen blocks, 500k shield blocks, etc.

They would both have the same stats, except for turning which is a very slight advantage, and the hull which is a tiny to huge(if it's medium-huge then the other ship is a look ship, and not meant to fight) advantage depending on how much hull it uses(i personally don't use lots of hull)

I'm not trying to say cubes don't have an advantage, but that they don't have a huge one enough for the cube on my example to "trash" the other ship easily(unless it's a look ship like i said before)

Also, cube doesn't mean detail-less and just plain ugly, like some of @Vakna 's ships

 

[Keptick]

@Qweesdy People (me included) DESPISE doomcubes because of the laziness they radiate. Having more surface area on an other ship just means more turret space. The only advantage that cubes have is their size/mass ratio and their turning speed.

If you pride yourself on making efficient ships then do it in a nice shell. You're not going to get any respect for a "supr eficient det cube" for the simple fact that it requires ABSOLUTELY no skill to make. I could make a cube with perfectly optimal systems in 10 minutes tops (but I won't because it would be mental torture).

So, you might kill other ships well but that's most likely only because you have a greater mass. You're also just going to pass off as a scrub by doing so.

/rant end

 

[Qweesdy]

@Qweesdy People (me included) DESPISE doomcubes because of the laziness they radiate. Having more surface area on an other ship just means more turret space. The only advantage that cubes have is their size/mass ratio and their turning speed.

If you pride yourself on making efficient ships then do it in a nice shell. You're not going to get any respect for a "supr eficient det cube" for the simple fact that it requires ABSOLUTELY no skill to make. I could make a cube with perfectly optimal systems in 10 minutes tops (but I won't because it would be mental torture).

So, you might kill other ships well but that's most likely only because you have a greater mass. You're also just going to pass off as a scrub by doing so.

If only you had a clue...

My ship is pure black; for the same reason that a soldier in a forest wears a green pattern, and a soldier in the snow wears white. It's not because I think black looks pretty; it makes me harder to notice and harder to target.

Most of my ship is cube shaped; because I've got huge "shield plates" docked on the top, bottom and sides; so that an enemy has to punch through the (easily replaced) "shield plate" shields before they can even think about doing any damage to my mother-ship's own shields (and in battle, I roll to distribute the damage across all the shield plates and make it even harder for enemy fire to get through).

The front of my ship is not flat (it's the only part that's not cube shaped). This makes it impossible for an enemy that's underneath my line of fire to take out the weapons above the nose, and impossible for an enemy above my line of fire to take out the weapons under the nose, because in both cases the nose is in their way. It's not because I think the nose looks pretty; it's so that my ship can take a significant amount of damage (after all shields are down) and still put up a decent offence.

Everything I do I do for a reason; and that reason is never "it looks good" or "I'm lazy" or "I don't have skills".

I don't care if people say my ship is ugly (it is!). I do care if people say I should be forced to build flying turds instead of well designed/efficient ships, because efficiency is the only thing that really matters.

 

[K10wN]

@Qweesdy: What you have forgotten take into consideration is the admin who sees your cube ship on their server, types /destroy_entity_docked, then shoots you while you linger helpless in space... simply because you broke the rules imposed by the people who run the server. The second command they type is a ban! Hands down, you loose, and in more ways than one.

On another note. The 'space' isn't black anymore for people who can run the game at higher settings. I've even been through systems that are a hot pink background.

Go make and play with your doom cubes in the sandbox. Stay off the servers who would rather play with ships.

 

[Qweesdy]

@Qweesdy: What you have forgotten take into consideration is the admin who sees your cube ship on their server, types /destroy_entity_docked, then shoots you while you linger helpless in space... simply because you broke the rules imposed by the people who run the server. The second command they type is a ban! Hands down, you loose, and in more ways than one.

Except that I either wouldn't play on that server; or I'd build an efficient ship that is within the rules (but is still as efficient as possible, which means "not pretty", which means there's still going to be a plaque of morons whining about whatever shape it happens to end up as because they think "pretty flying turds" make sense).

Basically; you've completely missed the point of everything I've said.[DOUBLEPOST=1412444754,1412442537][/DOUBLEPOST]Let's summerize!

If a server also has a maximum volume (in addition to the max. block count or max. box size); then I will build a death rectangle that meets that volume requirement. This achieves nothing at all - people will just complain about death rectangles instead of complaining about death cubes.

If a server has a size requirement, and a volume requirement, and also says "must have more than 90% angles" (specifically intended to prevent cubes and rectangles); then I will build a death sphere. This achieves nothing at all - people will complain about death spheres instead of death cubes or death rectangles.

If a server then says "must not be symmetrical"; then I will build a "half-cube, half sphere" death shape. This achieves nothing at all - people will just complain about "half cube, half sphere death shapes" (instead of death spheres or death cubes or death rectangles).

Basically; these silly rules are futile and can never solve the real problem. But, what is the real problem?

The real problem is people don't like certain styles of ships designed for efficiency rather than aesthetics; and want to force their idea of what a ship should look like onto other players. These people can never be happy. Let's solve the real problem by preventing people from trying to force their idea of what a ship should look like onto other players.

 

[Keptick]

efficiency is the only thing that really matters.

I misjudged you then, but I still disagree with that notion. Maybe it's just because making an extremely optimized ship isn't something that is hard for me, so I find it rather boring...

Just don't boast when you destroy something that isn't a super combat machine, because it was never meant to be one. And the thing is, by fighting the way you do, you're forcing everyone else to also make flying death cubes in order to even stand a chance in combat (ironic considering that your point was to "not force stuff onto other people"). THAT'S the problem.

Also, qualifying everything that isn't 100% optimized as a flying turd won't get you any sympathy. Real skill lies in the ability to blend beauty and power, it's an art. In my eyes (and everyone else's) you're actually the one using flying turds. You can do what you want, but don't expect other people to accept it.

 

[Qweesdy]

I misjudged you then, but I still disagree with that notion. Maybe it's just because making an extremely optimized ship isn't something that is hard for me, so I find it rather boring...

Just don't boast when you destroy something that isn't a super combat machine, because it was never meant to be one. And the thing is, by fighting the way you do, you're forcing everyone else to also make flying death cubes in order to even stand a chance in combat. THAT'S the problem.

If that's the problem; then let these people form an "anti-ugly ship faction" and gang up on people with efficient ships. Then it becomes "biggest faction wins" rather than "best ship wins".

Please note that I'm not against pretty ships (there really is some awesome/detailed ships out there); and wouldn't attempt to ban them because they aren't efficient - that would be very silly (as silly as trying to ban death cubes because they aren't pretty).

Also, qualifying everything that isn't 100% optimized as a flying turd won't get you any sympathy. Real skill lies in the ability to blend beauty and power, it's an art. In my eyes (and everyone else's) you're actually the one using flying turds. You can do what you want, but don't expect other people to accept it.

Don't get me wrong - I build interior rooms (but they're rooms with practical value, like a bridge, a storage room, hangers, etc), and passages between them and the entry/exit (because, how else do you get between room); and sometimes I'll even put in things like gardens (mostly because I'm near the $2 billion credit limit and need to fill space cheaply). I "decorate" docking areas with a special pattern (but mostly so it's easy to recognise/find them). I have an internal colour scheme, like "grey floors, white walls, lights down the middle" (but mostly so it's easier to figure out which way is down when you're disoriented). I also recess my turrets so they aren't big ugly blobs hanging on the side (but mostly so that it's harder for enemies to hit them).

I also have my own personal rules that go against efficiency. For example, all my weapons output blocks are exposed to the outside because I think missiles/beams passing through solid blocks is just plain bad (even though it'd be better if the enemy couldn't see/find them); and I have a similar rule for thruster groups (because, physics). I don't let turrets clip through their surroundings because it's tacky (even though it'd be more efficient for turrets to fill their docking area). I put "landing feet" on larger ships because it looks silly when a large ship is docked on a landing pad without them (even though it makes the box size larger and can make turning speed a little worse).

 

[lio_oVo_oil]

@Neon_42, do you realize that you made the mistake of stating that dimensions and volume are different?

 

[Keptick]

@Neon_42, do you realize that you made the mistake of stating that dimensions and volume are different?

Dimensions is the measurement of the x,y,z lenghts seperately. Volume is the amount of space occupied by the ship. So no.... he didn't make a mistake.

 

[NeonSturm]

OMG

10% size increase means 30% more powa
20% size increase means 60% more powa

Blame the cubic law, once you face a slightly bigger ship you are trash. That's why I want RP stuff more.