Devblog 2017 - 10 - 13

    Discussion in 'Game News' started by schema, Oct 13, 2017.

    1. Jojomo

      Joined:
      Aug 23, 2016
      Messages:
      758
      Even if you remind yourself that by placing then at closer distances you'll be maximising total ship efficien y?

      I don't think reducing stabiliser efficiency is breaking the system. It's a feature not a bug.
       
    2. GnomeKing

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2015
      Messages:
      224
      (that all said i still think 'hammer-head dumb-bells will be the obvious core choice for power focused new builds :/ )
       
      • Like Like x 1
    3. Dire Venom

      Joined:
      Feb 27, 2014
      Messages:
      1,068
      Or... you know ships with their various parts dispersed over a large area :P Have the reactor 1km behind and bellow all other parts, weapons mounted in space, stabilizors spread out a few hundred meters above everything else etc. Resonable sized shield bits for all :P
      You could make it look nice as well if you make each part look like a seperate ship :D!
       
    4. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,177
      Okay we definitely need a breakaway system.
       
    5. GnomeKing

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2015
      Messages:
      224
      Further Re-fitting:

      another ship: this one smaller in all dimensions and less mass than previous but with same power regen from moderately efficient & compact XYZ lines - the XYZ threading took time to make relatively compact - this ship has a much higher proportion of armor than previous and is slower, with less interior (but not a systems brick).

      in power 2.0 i can not match the same output (to ship above) without substantial changes to dimensions and hull - specifically length.
      At this point the restriction to single dimension with stabilizers begins to bite- all i can do is make the whole thing longer and spam stabilizers in the front end :/ - the compact/powerful shape in power 1.0 was achieved by working in 3 dimensions - in power 2.0 this carefully built ship must be restricted to relativity half the power of slightly larger ship that previously it matched ... :/ - this feels restrictive :(

      Not being able to work in 3 dimensions for stabilizers quickly feels restrictive, despite the apparent early feeling of freedom :(

      (edit: as in having option to meaningfully build parts of power systems in places/directions all along ship, rather than basically just spam-boxes at each ends of a stick...)
       
      #85 GnomeKing, Nov 10, 2017
      Last edited: Nov 17, 2017
    6. Jojomo

      Joined:
      Aug 23, 2016
      Messages:
      758
      Or conduits between reactor and stabilisers.
      --- Updated post (merge), Nov 10, 2017, Original Post Date: Nov 10, 2017 ---
      I don't think replicating power 1.0 ships was a goal for power 2.0.

      I'm not sure if I should be able to see an image of a ship above, so I may be misunderstanding, but you aren't restricted to one dimension, you can place as many groups of stabilisers as you like, in any direction from the reactor.
      To take that to the extreme, you could build a spherical shell of stabilisers around a central reactor, for example.
       
      #86 Jojomo, Nov 10, 2017
      Last edited: Nov 11, 2017
      • Agree Agree x 1
    7. Neon_42

      Joined:
      Sep 11, 2013
      Messages:
      334
      So, it has now been over a month since the original post. Can we get a status update?
       
      • Agree Agree x 2
    8. AWildSylveon

      Joined:
      Dec 26, 2016
      Messages:
      17
      Only downside i find with the latest dev builds is the factions, any time you create a faction, it crashes the game and results in the probability of it making the faction or wiping the sector your in.
       
    9. Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW

      Joined:
      Jul 4, 2013
      Messages:
      415
      Tested out the new dev build with some 1:1 scale ships. Shields weren't working in the last build, but are now working. I made a Danube-class runabout and an Xwing.

      Danube had way too little shielding and I had to cram in a ton more capacitors. At that point, my regen went negative, so I needed more rechargers...but placing them just about 4 blocks apart made the smaller group non-functional and the ship was too small to have separate groups. This was very troublesome to do without having exposed systems and having an interior.
      It seems like small ship design will start with reactor surrounded by a shell of rechargers, then stabilizers in the nose, then weapons. You really can't have rechargers in separate groups in something runabout-sized (23x13x5).
      The good news is that the Danube was still fine on power.

      I'd like to also mention that the new shield system's shield numbers are over double those of the old system. That Xwing's 4 capacitors put it at 1.8k in the new system and 649 in the old system (tooltip still available), which is still measly, but if the numbers translate into damage the same, it seems like shields got a significant buff.
       
      • Useful Useful x 1
    10. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,177
      I think something like this should provide a bonus, reducing the minimum distance from the reactor by a certain factor.
       
      • Creative Creative x 1
    11. Antikristianos

      Joined:
      Dec 9, 2015
      Messages:
      149
      something like this?:
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    12. UrstMcRedHead

      Joined:
      Mar 27, 2014
      Messages:
      23
      I just came back after a couple of weeks to see what kind of cannon systems I can support on a 180m long ship with Power2.0.
      TL:DR the answer is none. I could only cram 700 blocks into this space with a max output of 70k power.
      If I wanted to get the 600,000 power that I would need to run this cannon, and the thrusters I would have to put 1mil reactor/stab blocks at 0% efficiency.

      Here's the link:

       

      Attached Files:

      • Useful Useful x 1
    13. Zekester81

      Joined:
      Oct 22, 2014
      Messages:
      323
      Alright. I can now say I just hate the whole power 2.o. I'd rather keep what we already had. We're still just filling space with system blocks, just different ones. Some of the earlier dev builds were ok, not great, just ok. The latest ones I just don't like at all. There are some interesting things going on besides power but the power it's self sucks. And the shields, hate them.
       
      • Like Like x 1
      • Useful Useful x 1
    14. Jojomo

      Joined:
      Aug 23, 2016
      Messages:
      758
      You've made the same assumption many people are making with power 2.0, but actually you shouldn't place your stabilisers at 100% efficiency separation distance.

      The way to build is place your reactor, then place your stabilisers in the place you want them to be (within reason), then add more stabilisers until you get 100% reactor output.

      Here's a 180m ship with 600,000 e/s, in 200.171
      (my power system is an ugly shape here, but you don't have to do the same, I'm just lazy)

      starmade-screenshot-0056.png
       
      #94 Jojomo, Nov 17, 2017
      Last edited: Nov 17, 2017
      • Useful Useful x 1
    15. GnomeKing

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2015
      Messages:
      224
      maybe it wont be exactly the same as Jojomo's image, but very very nearly the same ....

      There is no point placing stabilizer in 50% or less ranges > unless you especially enjoy a ship full of stabilizer spam-cubes

      So there is just the basic 'I-shaped' / balls-on-stick approach...very dull.

      Previously i could carefully place and expand/improve power lines by using various aspects of a ships length/width/height...now i can just stick balls out the back and slap a hammer-head on the front...yippee

      With power 1.0, having regen and capacity are overlapping systems with different rules and could be built around each other > now there is just one option ...fill apposite ends with reactors and spam(sry, stabilizers) as much as feasible without being a forward facing Plate-of-spam (sry, stabilizer). 1.0, with complementary aspects to generation and capacity had way more potential for variation and interest in the long-term.

      The more I mess with power 2.0, the less interesting it becomes > there is no real 'challenge', just a question of whether i can be bothered to add fish-tails and pig-snouts to existing hulls or not.

      Was power 1.0 was 'too complicated' to get people playing? probably not (imo), but I don't think 1-dimensional systems like power 2.0 (in terms of the building-game) will sustain peoples interest either.

      There is no possibility to 'do better power' > just block spam of stabilizers, which is fucking-dull-as-shit (IMHO)

      I repeat; Ships with well-made/compact XYZ reactors suffer badly in 2.0; 'oversized' and/or long-stick ships that previously had sub-optimal performance due to poor XYZ implementation are now much better than their more carefully built 1.0 peers.

      Was that the intention of 2.0 ?
      (a 'level playing field' (whatever that might be) is one thing...But this is currently a Power Pancake :/)
       
      #95 GnomeKing, Nov 17, 2017
      Last edited: Nov 17, 2017
      • Like Like x 1
    16. Jojomo

      Joined:
      Aug 23, 2016
      Messages:
      758
      I think it was this thread that I said already: you can make your power system any shape you like, even a spherical shell of stabilisers around a central reactor.
      The power system only becomes "linear" in shape if the designer thinks about ship hulls as a primarily "linear" shape...and in that case they've only got themselves to blame.

      Does power 2.0 create ships "full of stabilisers" or "two balls on a stick"? Can't be both...
      The power system above had stabiliser efficiency around 35%. Depending on what percentage mass you're happy using for power, you can aim WAY below 50% stabiliser efficiency.

      "carefully place and expand/improve power lines by using various aspects of a ships length/width/height" ===> "make three intersecting sticks at the widest, longest, and deepest parts of the hull."

      Dressing power 1.0 up in "better" language doesn't make it any more interesting than it was.
       
    17. Jananton

      Joined:
      Jul 12, 2014
      Messages:
      510
      Silly question maybe, but in the latest build v0.200.171, how do I fire the build in jump drive? After loading, left mouse button, the right mouse button does nothing, what am I missing or is this a bug?

      Greets,

      Jan
       
    18. Antikristianos

      Joined:
      Dec 9, 2015
      Messages:
      149
      its a bug.
       
      • Informative Informative x 1
    19. Chckn Wildstyle

      Chckn Wildstyle Design Head of Cabal Weapons/Technologies (CWT)

      Joined:
      Feb 8, 2014
      Messages:
      127
      I wonder, oh I wonder, when the next dev blog will be.
      Maybe when they said 2 weeks, it was 2 to the power of three?
      An update on what is happening for us players is not clear to see.
      I've been checking the news each day in hope, is this... just me?
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    20. 0ldSkull

      Joined:
      Mar 18, 2014
      Messages:
      291
      I thought that some of the metaphysical imagery was really particularly effective.
       
    Loading...