Default thruster mechanic (poll)

[Hanspeter Schnitzel]

Ohh, okay.

 

[Rhyssia]

I... vote for...

Spoiler

UnitCalcStyle BOX_DIM_ADD
UnitCalcMult 1.15
(Change to taste)

 

[PizzaPress]

What if it was a flat 2-5 thrust per block(I do feel the linear system needs a bit of a buff)?

 

[TrainDodger]

If I'm not mistaken, under the old system, thrusters used a similar calculation method to power tanks. It wasn't just the number of them, like shield blocks. They actually had to be physically connected to each other. When the switch was made to Box Dimensions, like reactors, I initially hated it, but eventually grew to appreciate the vastly increased potency of thruster blocks and how it freed up space for other components.

This is a difficult choice for me, because while I like the realism of big thruster chunks, I have a tendency to do RP builds with lots of empty space for the interior. Furthermore, the new weapon system essentially demands that we allocate a LOT of space to support and effect modules in order to have anything resembling decent firepower. However, the box dimension thrusters were a little OP. The ideal option would be a happy medium between these extremes.

Box dimensions would work fine if the bonus was nerfed. Likewise, linear would also work if the bonus was buffed.

 

[Rhyssia]

And now, I am going to try testing out a majority of tweaks to thrusters. My main goal is to make it something like a large initial bonus with diminishing returns on larger arrays so that big ships will still need serious engines.

 

[Lecic]

I think it makes the most sense to need giant chunks of engine on larger ships. However. the starting amount is too low, and it makes it difficult to build smaller ships like fighters.

I've also seen a lot of people complaining about weapons taking more space, and here's what I've got to say on the matter. There are 6 systems your larger ships need. Shields, Power, Power Storage, Weapons, Effects, and Thrust. You need to balance out all of these, instead of complaining there is no longer enough space for all of them. If you can't build your engines to work with the new set up, pull out some shields or whatever system you have surplus of out.

 

[Viridis00]

And now, I am going to try testing out a majority of tweaks to thrusters. My main goal is to make it something like a large initial bonus with diminishing returns on larger arrays so that big ships will still need serious engines.

I think anything would be better than the way it is now. Diminishing returns could be a nice solution, but linear growth is really awful.

Then again, when we get a new way thrust is used my opinion might change also. I'd like to see a system where there are benefits and disadvantages to big single thrusters and arrays of smaller thrusters. Like a mobility bonus with arrays (faster stopping and changing directions) and a higher top speed with larger single thrusters.

Something like that would make me stop caring about box dims. I just don't want to see engines as something that you just slap on and call it a day. Something interesting and practical in their placement and construction is needed. Box dims at least rewarded players for thinking around the system, allowing smart players to compact their systems.

 

[Rhyssia]

Alright, I had some favorable results with DIM_BOX_ADD with 1.55

Anyone elses thoughts? (It keeps the additive bonus low enough that large ships would require multiple, multiple arrays to reach a T:M of 2:1 while a 500 block fighter could reach it in as little as 40 blocks in a single array.)

 

[KiloZulu]

I really don't care, as long as they stick with it. I'm currently in a holding pattern with ship building because I don't want to have to strip out one system for another. What I'd like to see is for them to announce a final mechanic - they can play with balancing or whatever, just let me get building again.

 

[Keptick]

I really don't care, as long as they stick with it. I'm currently in a holding pattern with ship building because I don't want to have to strip out one system for another. What I'd like to see is for them to announce a final mechanic - they can play with balancing or whatever, just let me get building again.

You won't be seing any of this until late Beta stage, unfortunately. Trying to fine tune balance when half the features are missing is just a waste of time imho. HOWEVER, I'd like it if they stopped swapping out the default mechanics every two updates. It may have a config but most (read: all) servers will hesitate to change the defaults.

 

[jzimmerman4]

Thrust should scale linearly (how it currently is) up till a certain amount, it should then be most efficient using box dimensions (how it use to be). The reason for this is to allow smaller ships to be able to use their space more efficiently while larger ships need better planning.

The up side: small ships would be more effective (space wise).

The down side: any large super capital would take a long time to lay down thrusters, to fix this thrust could have a soft cap where it again becomes better to just throw them down in large chunks.

 

[Lecic]

Thrust should scale linearly (how it currently is) up till a certain amount, it should then be most efficient using box dimensions (how it use to be). The reason for this is to allow smaller ships to be able to use their space more efficiently while larger ships need better planning.

The up side: small ships would be more effective (space wise).

The down side: any large super capital would take a long time to lay down thrusters, to fix this thrust could have a soft cap where it again becomes better to just throw them down in large chunks.

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

 

[jzimmerman4]

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

I see what you mean.. hmm perhaps for smaller ships it should be able to go either way, as in it gets a bonus for box dimensions but scales linearly if they are just clumped together.

edit: Actually that may be best for all ship sizes

 

[Lecic]

I see what you mean.. hmm perhaps for smaller ships it should be able to go either way, as in it gets a bonus for box dimensions but scales linearly if they are just clumped together.

edit: Actually that may be best for all ship sizes

I like linear or diminishing returns the most. It makes sense for huge ships to need huge amounts of engines, not 300 to move a 100,000 mass ship at max speed.