Read by Council Get Rid of Reactor Lines

[alterintel]

Everybody knows what I'm talking about.

The current algorithm for power reactors is to favor long lines of interconnecting "+" shaped reactors.
Once you get used to it and learn how to make some decently effective reactor runs, it's not so bad. Some even appreciate the current reactor system because it favors a complicated design that can give you an edge in battle and vulnerabilities in battle if you target the "+" junctions.

But it's hard to implement, harder to learn, and it sounds really stupid when you try to explain to new players how it works. I have personally seen people who I show the game to at work say they haven't played it because reactors are too complicated. We need a better mechanic

I have an idea for a possible solution, but I'll post it on a reply to this thread so it doesn't reduce this thread's like count (hopefully this thread gets likes?)

Please post any ideas you guys/gals/things may have for a better reactor mechanic

Thanks

 

[Reilly Reese]

Everybody knows what I'm talking about.

The current algorithm for power reactors is to favor long lines of interconnecting "+" shaped reactors.
Once you get used to it and learn how to make some decently effective reactor runs, it's not so bad. Some even appreciate the current reactor system because it favors a complicated design that can give you an edge in battle and vulnerabilities in battle if you target the "+" junctions.

But it's hard to implement, harder to learn, and it sounds really stupid when you try to explain to new players how it works. I have personally seen people who I show the game to at work say they haven't played it because reactors are too complicated. We need a better mechanic

I have an idea for a possible solution, but I'll post it on a reply to this thread so it doesn't reduce this thread's like count (hopefully this thread gets likes?)

Please post any ideas you guys/gals/things may have for a better reactor mechanic

Thanks

No one uses InterWeb anymore?

 

[alterintel]

In an effort to get rid of reactor lines while maintaining intelligent design, and combat vulnerabilities

Here's an idea:
Give reactors a similar mechanic to power capacitors, but make it so if one reactor in a group gets destroyed, the whole group of reactors gets severely nerfed or flat out disabled.

The bigger your reactor, the more efficient it is but it's also more vulnerable to attack. Also the more smaller redundant power reactors you have the less efficient your overall power will be.

No one uses InterWeb anymore?

you're referring to the "+" junctions? In some instances it still make sense. Especially on Frigates and Cruisers. But you're right long lines 9 times out of ten will outperform "InterWeb"

 

[Reilly Reese]

In an effort to get rid of reactor lines while maintaining intelligent design, and combat vulnerabilities

Here's an idea:
Give reactors a similar mechanic to power capacitors, but make it so if one reactor in a group gets destroyed, the whole group of reactors gets severely nerfed or flat out disabled.

The bigger your reactor, the more efficient it is but it's also more vulnerable to attack. Also the more smaller redundant power reactors you have the less efficient your overall power will be.


you're referring to the "+" junctions? In some instances it still make sense. Especially on Frigates and Cruisers. But you're right long lines 9 times out of ten will outperform "InterWeb"

InterWeb is long lines actually. The complicated version is called "L-Type"

 

[alterintel]

if nobody uses long lines, then what do they do?
I'm somebody, and I use "InterWeb" apparently

 

[Reilly Reese]

if nobody uses long lines, then what do they do?
I'm somebody, and I use "InterWeb" apparently

I was joking about your Co-Workers xD

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

Give reactors a similar mechanic to power capacitors, but make it so if one reactor in a group gets destroyed, the whole group of reactors gets severely nerfed or flat out disabled.

The bigger your reactor, the more efficient it is but it's also more vulnerable to attack. Also the more smaller redundant power reactors you have the less efficient your overall power will be.

An interesting take on it, though it edges a wee bit closer to how they used to be than the Devs likely want. (they used to work just like Power Capacitor)
The current system was what they did to move away from simple block-based design. (that it helped stymie Titans for a bit was an added bonus in their eyes)
That said, I have constantly thought they went a bit too far into the weird-lands.

Oh, and try explaining to your co-workers that the reactor works best as 3 connected edges of a box.
Pick 1 corner of it, and run along the 3 edges branching from that corner.

Or, that the "best" reactors don't loop back around on themselves, each reactor module increases the box-dim of that reactor cluster.

Bam, there's your reactor.

That's the "simplest" of the complex, literally everything else is blending Lines, Angles, and Edges so as to shrink the over-all space consumed by the reactor.
(and even nesting Edge-clusters so that they don't touch face-to-face)


...

Ah! I knew this had to be on the NEW, GOOD, OFFICIAL Wiki.
Power Systems - StarMade Wiki
This is basically both of the lower articles combined together and updated for more recent rules.
Show that one to your co-workers, but go ahead and peruse the last two just incase something slipped through the cracks.

The Power Management Tutorial article on the OLD wiki:
Tutorials/Power Management - StarMade Wiki
The Power Reactor article:
Power Reactor Module - StarMade Wiki

 

[Blaza612]

I quite like the current reactor algorithms, it may be complicated/confusing at first, but that's just part of the learning curve, and experimentation. I also find it hard to believe that the complexity reactors made people not want to play, it's not as if you NEED the magical meta reactors, thus I'm giving you a C in believability. :p

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

I find it hard to believe that the complexity of reactors made people not want to play.

That's the Easiest part for me to believe. Office Complex workers are sometimes called "drones" for a very good reason.
(that reason being that they're genuinely dumber at work than they are at home)

it's not as if you NEED the magical meta reactors

And that's an out-and-out lie. EVERYTHING AND THEIR LITTLE DOG TOO!! needs the Magical Efficient reactor.

Short 'n simple: I'd rather have an efficient reactor, than the ships own weight in extra reactor blocks.
(only a slight exaggeration, it really does get nearly that bad when retrofitting the REALLY old stuff.)

The Smiley Is cause I realized it sounded a bit like an attack, it was not meant as one.

 

[alterintel]

thus I'm giving you a C in believability. :p

Hey, I'll settle for a C in believably, at least something about me is only average :P

 

[Blaza612]

That's the Easiest part for me to believe. Office Complex workers are sometimes called "drones" for a very good reason.
(that reason being that they're genuinely dumber at work than they are at home)

But we're not talking about drones, we're talking about people playing video games. They're not going to be drones, there here to have fun, and if a complex reactor system put them off from having fun, then that's their own problem entirely. While min-maxing may not exactly be fun, there is no reason why they have to be min-maxing, especially if they're new players. They'll learn naturally as they continue to play the game and try to make better and better ships. I think if anything, the OP is at fault for trying to shove it down their throats.

You know what, I can believe it, but on the fault of the OP. If you're shoving a complex system down someone's throat when they're new players, then you fucked up, and I'm not going to hire you for PR. :p

And that's an out-and-out lie. EVERYTHING AND THEIR LITTLE DOG TOO!! needs the Magical Efficient reactor.

Oh hell no, this ain't no lie, I swear on me mothers asshole, this ain't a lying.

I'd rather have an efficient reactor, than the ships own weight in extra reactor blocks.

I'm pretty sure this is all people, however, these are noobs, they're not going to be able to or want to min-max straight off the bat.

Hey, I'll settle for a C in believably, at least something about me is only average :p

Awww, I feel bad now. <3

STAHP DOING THIS TO ME! :p

 

[Kingofanime]

But we're not talking about drones, we're talking about people playing video games. They're not going to be drones, there here to have fun, and if a complex reactor system put them off from having fun, then that's their own problem entirely. While min-maxing may not exactly be fun, there is no reason why they have to be min-maxing, especially if they're new players. They'll learn naturally as they continue to play the game and try to make better and better ships. I think if anything, the OP is at fault for trying to shove it down their throats.

You know what, I can believe it, but on the fault of the OP. If you're shoving a complex system down someone's throat when they're new players, then you fucked up, and I'm not going to hire you for PR. :p

I was just about to post something like this. I've introduced many nieces and nephews to new games and played many lan sessions with them. When playing something such as titan quest it's a mistake for me to ever explain the stat system to them unless they ask for it. Its far better for them to make extremely crappy characters that can't equip gear. That way they will have fun and won't feel overwhelmed. Let them seek knowledge at their own pace.

 

[MacThule]

Everybody knows what I'm talking about.

The current algorithm for power reactors is to favor long lines of interconnecting "+" shaped reactors.
Once you get used to it and learn how to make some decently effective reactor runs, it's not so bad. Some even appreciate the current reactor system because it favors a complicated design that can give you an edge in battle and vulnerabilities in battle if you target the "+" junctions.

But it's hard to implement, harder to learn, and it sounds really stupid when you try to explain to new players how it works. I have personally seen people who I show the game to at work say they haven't played it because reactors are too complicated. We need a better mechanic

I have an idea for a possible solution, but I'll post it on a reply to this thread so it doesn't reduce this thread's like count (hopefully this thread gets likes?)

Please post any ideas you guys/gals/things may have for a better reactor mechanic

Thanks

-1

Complex power dynamics mean that ships built by players who learn the system will perform better. New players can buy or download excellent blueprints from experienced engineers.

The alternative is make every novice (in this game arguably about ship design) able to engineer ships as powerful as an experienced player with no effort, which leaves zero room for growth or progress unless an arbitrary, fake "experience points" system is implemented to give players who grind better ships based on their arbitrary experience "points" earned by repeatedly pushing a series of buttons for countless hours.

I vastly prefer the current system which rewards 1) intelligence, 2) problem solving, 3) research, and 4) creativity over a system which rewards only time spent repeatedly pushing a button and leads to domination by dependent minors and the unemployed because of their vast time resource.

I'd actually support a more complex reactor system and a variety of other complex systems for thrust and shields, because the comprehension and mastery of these systems IS the difference between novices and masters in this game, and not accidentally so.

 

[alterintel]

-1

Complex power dynamics mean that ships built by players who learn the system will perform better. New players can buy or download excellent blueprints from experienced engineers.

The alternative is make every novice (in this game arguably about ship design) able to engineer ships as powerful as an experienced player with no effort, which leaves zero room for growth or progress unless an arbitrary, fake "experience points" system is implemented to give players who grind better ships based on their arbitrary experience "points" earned by repeatedly pushing a series of buttons for countless hours.

I vastly prefer the current system which rewards 1) intelligence, 2) problem solving, 3) research, and 4) creativity over a system which rewards only time spent repeatedly pushing a button and leads to domination by dependent minors and the unemployed because of their vast time resource.

I'd actually support a more complex reactor system and a variety of other complex systems for thrust and shields, because the comprehension and mastery of these systems IS the difference between novices and masters in this game, and not accidentally so.

An argument well done. Thanks

However,
I think I've gotten pretty good at power reactor lines. All of my ships have custom setups with what I believe to be above average energy per second for their size, and all of them are on the dock. Here's my problem. These things are a bitch to work around while building... Its very common to put in your power reactors before the rest of your systems. So in my case that ship gets filled with all kind of wacky squiggly reactor lines that I have to work around for the next couple of days or weeks on my system fills. It's not fun. Now if it was a job, fun wouldn't be an issue. But this is a game that I'm supposed to enjoy playing. Now try refitting it after an update?

I'm not arguing your point at all which I agree with totally. I even addressed it in my OP. But I think the cost of intelligent design may be a little too high when considering how much fun it costs to implement.

 

[ChoMar]

I agree with the current design being too complex. And, even wors, its not very Intuitive.
I have thought about it, and what about adding some kind of Cooling system? A reactor only delivers full output when connected on two sides to an active cooling system for 100% efficiency. That and some easy grouping rules would make for a logical, understandable power system. Not difficult enough? Cooling system need symmetrical amount of Reactor Heat Exchanger and Heat sinks. Or something like that. Im sure a little brainstorming could work out the details.

 

[MacThule]

An argument well done. Thanks

However,
I think I've gotten pretty good at power reactor lines. All of my ships have custom setups with what I believe to be above average energy per second for their size, and all of them are on the dock. Here's my problem. These things are a bitch to work around while building... Its very common to put in your power reactors before the rest of your systems. So in my case that ship gets filled with all kind of wacky squiggly reactor lines that I have to work around for the next couple of days or weeks on my system fills. It's not fun. Now if it was a job, fun wouldn't be an issue. But this is a game that I'm supposed to enjoy playing. Now try refitting it after an update?

I'm not arguing your point at all which I agree with totally. I even addressed it in my OP. But I think the cost of intelligent design may be a little too high when considering how much fun it costs to implement.

This is fair. They are a pain in the ass to build around and complete nightmares to retrofit. I think that yes, complex reactor dynamics that aren't so intrusive could probably be developed and would improve gameplay. I'd support alternative reactor dynamics that allow better space management while still demanding research and problem solving.

 

[alterintel]

This is fair. They are a pain in the ass to build around and complete nightmares to retrofit. I think that yes, complex reactor dynamics that aren't so intrusive could probably be developed and would improve gameplay. I'd support alternative reactor dynamics that allow better space management while still demanding research and problem solving.

Wow, I think this is the first time in my life that I've come to an actual 100% agreement with somebody while having a good argument.
Thanks

 

[Pacific_Jim]

I quite like the reactor system we have at the moment. It doesn't take too long to learn, the game just doesn't really convey it well. It scales very well with ship sizes too, and the 2 mil soft cap is a pretty reasonable number. I also like having a system that involves a bit more thought than placing a bigger lump.

I do agree about fitting around reactors though. Filling in systems in general is kinda tedious, I'd put working around reactors towards the low end of that. A decent fill area option should fix that though.

 

[MacThule]

I agree with the current design being too complex. And, even wors, its not very Intuitive.
I have thought about it, and what about adding some kind of Cooling system? A reactor only delivers full output when connected on two sides to an active cooling system for 100% efficiency. That and some easy grouping rules would make for a logical, understandable power system. Not difficult enough? Cooling system need symmetrical amount of Reactor Heat Exchanger and Heat sinks. Or something like that. Im sure a little brainstorming could work out the details.

Cooling systems, fuel systems, force conduits between reactors and systems they power - any of these would be interesting ways to improve complexity if the current reactor system were simplified.

 

[Reilly Reese]

An argument well done. Thanks

However,
I think I've gotten pretty good at power reactor lines. All of my ships have custom setups with what I believe to be above average energy per second for their size, and all of them are on the dock. Here's my problem. These things are a bitch to work around while building... Its very common to put in your power reactors before the rest of your systems. So in my case that ship gets filled with all kind of wacky squiggly reactor lines that I have to work around for the next couple of days or weeks on my system fills. It's not fun. Now if it was a job, fun wouldn't be an issue. But this is a game that I'm supposed to enjoy playing. Now try refitting it after an update?

I'm not arguing your point at all which I agree with totally. I even addressed it in my OP. But I think the cost of intelligent design may be a little too high when considering how much fun it costs to implement.

Try to plan it all before going at it. You only need enough power to keep your ship stable whilst moving or jamming (Slightly overdraining cannons are not bad things.)