FTL is here! It's a StarGate!

[takethispie]

Last thing (hopefully): Does anyone else disagree about the .1 ratio required?

I totally disagree with 0.1 ratio except for small fighters/corvette

I had to add about 1 millions blocks on my Maelstrom, I mean really, carrier and capital ships already have so much stuff to fit inside, I'm a roleplay player so my ship isn't filled with weapon and thruster everywhere , it has room hangar bays and a lot of stuff (1/3 of my ship are room and hangar bays) .
people are already complaining about titans being too OP (wich is really pissing me off but that's not the subject) but if we need more space
to add new system , most people won't take the time to build interiors anymore and will add weapon/effect module/jumpdrive modules instead...

anyway remember it's a devbuild , not an update, anything can still change ^^

 

[Criss]

I totally disagree with 0.1 ratio except for small fighters/corvette

I had to add about 1 millions blocks on my Maelstrom, I mean really, carrier and capital ships already have so much stuff to fit inside, I'm a roleplay player so my ship isn't filled with weapon and thruster everywhere , it has room hangar bays and a lot of stuff (1/3 of my ship are room and hangar bays) .
people are already complaining about titans being too OP (wich is really pissing me off but that's not the subject) but if we need more space
to add new system , most people won't take the time to build interiors anymore and will add weapon/effect module/jumpdrive modules instead...

anyway remember it's a devbuild , not an update, anything can still change ^^

With the coming changes to thrust mechanics, we will need less thrusters and more power gen. Also, who is to say that this isn't where the developer wanted the game and so far had not put all the pieces together. We can't sit here and say the new way is bad when it was just implemented. It might be working exactly as the dev intended. Who knows? We shouldn't rely on how things used to work just because a game changing part was tossed in.

 

[Daveorock]

With the coming changes to thrust mechanics, we will need less thrusters and more power gen. Also, who is to say that this isn't where the developer wanted the game and so far had not put all the pieces together. We can't sit here and say the new way is bad when it was just implemented. It might be working exactly as the dev intended. Who knows? We shouldn't rely on how things used to work just because a game changing part was tossed in.

Since I started this conversation, I'd just like to say that I know it's a dev build, but without any sort of discussion over the numbers until release, it may be thought by Schema and his pals that we're all content with how it is, which is not the case. The main problem comes in with ships that are larger in size but not capitals, and especially those big on RP. If cruisers, dreadnoughts, and the like can't have warp without making huge sacrifices (and they can't ride on carriers b/c of size), then they'd be hugely disadvantaged against defending fleets who don't need to use it. As for RP, I'm making the Starship Titanic from DW, and since its main purpose is RP, literally 1/2 of the >600m ship is interior. I'm not looking forward to adding ftl if it means I have to tear out 1/2 of the already relatively small area allocated to ship systems.

 

[Criss]

Since I started this conversation, I'd just like to say that I know it's a dev build, but without any sort of discussion over the numbers until release, it may be thought by Schema and his pals that we're all content with how it is, which is not the case. The main problem comes in with ships that are larger in size but not capitals, and especially those big on RP. If cruisers, dreadnoughts, and the like can't have warp without making huge sacrifices (and they can't ride on carriers b/c of size), then they'd be hugely disadvantaged against defending fleets who don't need to use it. As for RP, I'm making the Starship Titanic from DW, and since its main purpose is RP, literally 1/2 of the >600m ship is interior. I'm not looking forward to adding ftl if it means I have to tear out 1/2 of the already relatively small area allocated to ship systems.

I am working on EVE ships. Do you know how small the guns on the battleships are compared to the actual size of the ship. They are tiny! (http://prntscr.com/4h2l7t) In the end I will have a big ship that actually takes a while to kill another big ship. There is lots of interior space I plan on building, with many more rooms than most people consider putting in their ships. I will have what most players consider a weak ship in the end, but that's okay because I will be balancing it with the size of the guns. Its a decision. The only reason you think ten percent is high is because you have to rip out systems, and you think thats bad because literally every other person fills their ship up to the brim with every imaginable module. You're actually trying to make something functional and aesthetically pleasing which is more than some people are willing to do. 10% is high, but that doesn't mean schema should make this game easy. People will learn there is no skill in making ships that way. That number will change but it shouldn't stop you from figuring it out.

 

[takethispie]

the fact is that big ship wich are more likely to have jumpdrive can't because it's taking as much space as ALL the weapon and efect modules at the same time while fighter are able to use jumpdrive as much as they want, it's just not good

I also think 10% is high and I don't need to rip of systems
it's not about making the game easier, I can put the 1.5 millions jumpdrive I need for my 1km long spaceship if I want there is no difficulty here , it's just bad and skill has nothing to do with it

I still think jumpdrive and warpgate are really awesome but jumpdrives need some balance that's all I'm saying

 

[Criss]

the fact is that big ship wich are more likely to have jumpdrive can't because it's taking as much space as ALL the weapon and efect modules at the same time while fighter are able to use jumpdrive as much as they want, it's just not good

I also think 10% is high and I don't need to rip of systems
it's not about making the game easier, I can put the 1.5 millions jumpdrive I need for my 1km long spaceship if I want there is no difficulty here , it's just bad and skill has nothing to do with it

I still think jumpdrive and warpgate are really awesome but jumpdrives need some balance that's all I'm saying

A capital ship really doesn't need to use a jumpdrive as often as a smaller ship does. Capital ships are for support and are only necessary in escalated conflicts or logistics. To be honest I bet we all will have a harder time fitting the module on smaller ships instead of larger ships because there is more open space inside. It's also more likely you would be using a hyperspace module instead. There will probably be a way to make it easier to use that instead since it will have a trade off and a high power requirement. At that point the jump drive would be useless on a capital ship.

 

[takethispie]

smaller ship (if you are talking about fighters and corvettes) should not use jumpdrive at all as the carrier are here to transport them, and capital ship are carriers most of the time, so yes they need jumpdrives ^_^

I know that's why I think I'll change my mind when hyperdrive will be there ^^

 

[Criss]

smaller ship (if you are talking about fighters and corvettes) should not use jumpdrive at all as the carrier are here to transport them, and capital ship are carriers most of the time, so yes they need jumpdrives ^_^

I know that's why I think I'll change my mind when hyperdrive will be there ^^

That's your idea of what should be done with the system, but its restricting to other players that want to use it differently. We shouldn't let that happen.

 

[Lecic]

I think somewhere between 1% and 5% would be best for jump drives. One out of every 10 blocks is pretty ridiculous.

 

[takethispie]

yeah , wait and see ^^

 

[NeonSturm]

Maybe it should require 5+ hulls for each jump module instead of supporting just 10 or less.

This would force hulls (rarely some doom cube has) and increase weight, but not for RP ships. Weight increase = thruster decrease.

 

[Mered4]

Updates for Stargates and Jumpdrives:

Incoming changes: http://puu.sh/bb2Xo/5ed7419e92.png
The Stargates are temp. More to come. Straight from Cal himself :D

 

[NeonSturm]

Currently it needs to charge:

• 50 seconds (0 blocks)
• 10 seconds @ 1 mass (10 jump blocks)
  
• 4 seconds @ 5 mass (50 jump blocks)
  
• 2 seconds (infinite blocks)

and has a distance of 8 sectors and 10 seconds between jumps.

With changes from that pic, it needs to charge:

• 30 seconds (0 blocks)
• 105 seconds @ 20000 mass (1000 jump blocks)
  
• 180 seconds (infinite blocks)

and has a distance of 8 sectors and 120 seconds = 2 minutes between jumps!!!

Is it worth it?

BTW: Does it drain power equal to charge?

 

[takethispie]

hell yeah tha's great ! using time and energy mechanics instead of blockc count/mass is great :D
and it will limit chain jumping for every spaceship

 

[NeonSturm]

hell yeah tha's great ! using time and energy mechanics instead of blockc count/mass is great :D
and it will limit chain jumping for every spaceship

True, but is it really FTL with 2 min reload and 1/2 to 3 minutes charge time?

With 10km sectors and 333m/s speed limit (with overdrive) you can cross 5..10 sectors (dependent on charge time) in that time and may need less blocks (especially if you are a fighter with already very much thrust or a capital with high charge time)


At this speed I prefer to 2/3 the cool-down and max charge time -> 1.5 minutes cool-down and 0.5 to 2 minutes charge time.

But maybe most servers would reduce max thrust speed to 50 and 100 with overdrive or buff the default settings anyway.

 

[takethispie]

I've never seen a server with 333m/s speed limit , and in singleplayer I usually set it to 150 ^^
don't forget that you can move will it's charging so charge time isn't a problem


maybe reduce cooldown and charge time a little and add more time to the warping animation (wich is really too fast IMO )
having maximum 2 min charge / 40 seconds warp / 2 min cooldown or something like that

but at least a longer warping animation (around 10-20 seconds minimum)
like: "you waited 2minutes to jump ? now as reward RRRRAAAIINNNBBBOOWWW!! " or sort of xD

 

[NeonSturm]

333 was only used to give better numbers than with 300.
150 with over-drive = 300

But I agree on your warp time argument

 

[FunnyBunny14]

Ehhhh, aren't you forgetting about the bigger sector sizes? Once there is an option to have more asteroids per sector and to fill the area around planets a lot of people will be using bigger sectors, and then 7 sectors is a lot (70 000 on the 10 000 sector size, which I'm totally going to use.

Besides, it really gets useful for faster transportation of big ships in the thrust update and escaping battles quickly.

 

[NeonSturm]

@FunnyBunny14
10km sectors are only 30 seconds with 333 speed or 1 minute with 160
5 minutes charge and cool-down time = you only get 3 sectors more with jump, but 5 sectors more with overdrive.

Dunno how much speed you can get with the new thrust mechanics and how much space overdrive + sufficient thrust will take...
Diminishing returns should affect only acceleration, not max speed AFAIK

Have the feeling you only read the last 1-2 posts in each thread once a day :p

 

[takethispie]

escaping battles quickly.

nope, that is the worst way to escape a battle quickly as you need time and A LOT of energy and I hope Schema will make it almost impossible to escape battle quickly using jumpdrive without implying big risks, except for little spaceship (like raptors in battlestar galactica)

I don't want to be able to jump whenever I want with my big ship during a battle because that's not fair and will ruin the gameplay :/