Power System Overhaul Proposal

    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Joined
    Jul 12, 2013
    Messages
    295
    Reaction score
    112
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 10
    Someone explain to me why a chandelier with reactors on spokes and the body filled with systems, is better than that same configuration of systems inside a conventional hull with no spokes? Mass is the only advantage I see and that would be negligible just as it is now with pvp vs rp ships. The thing that separates pvp from rp is the difference in how they handle offense and defense, and that wont change no matter how the game changes.

    Please don't misconstrue what I said to mean I want this proposal to go through as is because I don't, just looking for some insight.
     

    Gasboy

    BLRP
    Joined
    Aug 11, 2013
    Messages
    1,311
    Reaction score
    360
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Legacy Citizen 6
    • Purchased!
    Someone explain to me why a chandelier with reactors on spokes and the body filled with systems, is better than that same configuration of systems inside a conventional hull with no spokes? Mass is the only advantage I see and that would be negligible just as it is now with pvp vs rp ships. The thing that separates pvp from rp is the difference in how they handle offense and defense, and that wont change no matter how the game changes.

    Please don't misconstrue what I said to mean I want this proposal to go through as is because I don't
    This is the thing that I do not get either. If mass is the only advantage, then I could say that the chandelier ship would be slightly faster and more maneuverable. However, depending on the spacing between the "bits" of the chandelier, the chandelier might end up heavier.

    Also, the "normal" hull might have an advantage in having less textures being drawn, so chandelier ships may be more laggy than their normal hull counterparts.

    I just don't see it.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages
    16
    Reaction score
    8
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    • Legacy Citizen 6
    Someone explain to me why a chandelier with reactors on spokes and the body filled with systems, is better than that same configuration of systems inside a conventional hull with no spokes? Mass is the only advantage I see and that would be negligible just as it is now with pvp vs rp ships. The thing that separates pvp from rp is the difference in how they handle offense and defense, and that wont change no matter how the game changes.

    Please don't misconstrue what I said to mean I want this proposal to go through as is because I don't, just looking for some insight.
    also looking for this answer. Were it me I'd have a light outer hull to stop missiles exploding close to my systems
     
    Joined
    Jul 12, 2013
    Messages
    295
    Reaction score
    112
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 10
    This is the thing that I do not get either. If mass the only advantage, then I could say that the chandelier ship would be slightly faster and more maneuverable. However, depending on the spacing between the "bits" of the chandelier, the chandelier might end up heavier.
    Were it me I'd have a light outer hull to stop missiles exploding close to my systems
    Another advantage would be the systems are hidden.

    We must be missing something obvious because to me it looks like it would be detrimental to have a chandelier in some situations.
     
    Joined
    Nov 1, 2014
    Messages
    317
    Reaction score
    98
    • Legacy Citizen
    • Purchased!
    So on further thought, I like the heatbox idea but I'm not a fan of calling it "heat." Instead, I think it should have to do with crew access for maintenance, repairs, and some kind of terminal access for regular operation. Add in some kind of required crew terminals that have to fit in the "heatbox" in order to provide low-latency access to the reactor's systems and I think it'll make more sense.

    Of course, that's hard to do without crew already in place...
     
    Joined
    Jul 4, 2013
    Messages
    2
    Reaction score
    1
    For the reactor system I propose a fuel management which will be created like this The fuels will be manufactured via a block of factory like for example a bio refinery with unnecessary blocks such as block of earth, rock, grass etc .... which will give a bio fuel. Then fuel will be transferred to the ship via the cargo transfer between entity on a Storage connected to the reactor which will supply the ship with thruster, weapon etc ... .. This will make it possible to use the unnecessary planet blocks that serve nothing while putting a RP / practical dimension to the ship's energy management system
     
    Joined
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages
    1
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen
    This sounds like a great plan. I'm looking forward to making functional reactor core rooms in the future! The heat value sounds like an good idea. My only question is this: will this also mean that the other systems are going to be buffed, in order to maintain the current balance, or is every system getting an rebalance?
     
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2014
    Messages
    56
    Reaction score
    18
    Have you played "Pulsar: Lost Colony"? They use a heat system similar to this proposal and it works pretty well, but Pulsar also have active coolant and the ability to limit the power that the different systems can use, without that you don't have a lot of control of the ship.

    Anyway, I just suggest one thing: don't attempt to make the game simple for new players. If its a good game they will learn to play. Remember the X3 games and what happened when they tried to make it more accesible for new players? X Rebirth happened.
     
    Joined
    Jun 24, 2015
    Messages
    148
    Reaction score
    33
    Even with all the points people are still trying to make I still think the original post is great. I would only suggest the following:
    • Get rid of is the total heat box.
    • Not make the heat boxes shift if on the edge of the ship. Being on the exterior or near it is a weakness in itself.
    • Possibly introduce another cooling system using like water or something.
     

    Keptick

    Building masochist
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2013
    Messages
    4,062
    Reaction score
    1,841
    • Councillor 2 Gold
    • Railman Gold
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    A bit late to the party, but here's my opinion:
    Looks pretty cool tbh. There are some clear upsides to having less blocks, like actual system design, moar interior, vastly better synergy with crew (once they're added), and especially

    LESS F******G LAG OH GOD YES PLEASE
    .

    But I can see why some people are concerned. First, refitting ships is a pain I agree (but I think it's worth it tbh, considering the advantages like LESS LAG). Second, the whole "heat" thing sounds a bit confusing, I mean that in the sense that reactors would absorb heat from other systems? Don't they usually produce heat? What about power? Guess we'll have to see.

    Finally I feel like the cubic "heat" bounding boxes limit design a bit. Perhaps if players could customize the dimensions of the box to a certain extent (while keeping ths same volume) it'd be better. So for example I could have a rectangular reactor room instead of a forced cube.

    In the end I definitsly think that it'd be worth it. From a personal standpoint it'd definitely fix the biggest issues I've experienced in the game, like crippling combat lag in titan combat (because so many blocks on massive ships get destroyed that it kills servers, having less blocks would help a lot).

    Ps: Please make conduits lossless, I can think of a lot of reasons why I'd place chambers further away (for aestethic reasons) to make cool reactor rooms, and being penalized for that would suck. I also don't really see a downside, if it's longer there's more chances of a cannon round or missile slicing the conduit.
     
    Last edited:

    Ithirahad

    Arana'Aethi
    Joined
    Nov 14, 2013
    Messages
    4,150
    Reaction score
    1,330
    • Purchased!
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 8
    Second, the whole "heat" thing sounds a bit confusing, I mean that in the sense that reactors would absorb heat from other systems? Don't they usually produce heat? What about power? Guess we'll have to see.
    It seems that a larger reactor would be able to output more power without creating tons of heat. But yeah, the system confuses me a bit, too.
     
    Joined
    May 25, 2015
    Messages
    3
    Reaction score
    2
    I mostly agree that this is a great start to this solution, it minimizes block usage, promotes interior building, and adds potential complexity. The use of cooling chambers is a great idea , but seems a bit overly complex at the moment.

    However, I have to agree with these two quotes (copied below) as power regeneration and capacity should work along side with heat generation as a by-product.
    The ideas you propose would be like the Covenant weapons from Halo, which is clear and concise, but just not enough information that you would need in designing/managing a ship with many different systems.

    Here's my solution:
    The reactor itself would generate heat once the ship's power capacity is below 100%, but in addition, any activation of weapons, shield regeneration, scanner, cloaker, or jammer, would all cause the heat level to jump up or even spike. The size of the reactor(s) would determine power regeneration rate, and the size of the chamber(s) would determine the cool down rate.

    I hope this helps!

    Cheers,
    Soundnsilence

    I would think heat should be a separate meter from power, as power is a very reasonable means to convey the capabilities of a vessel, where as heat seems to be more of a... Waste product.
    I have rethought some things here, having only heat is probably not a good idea, but it could be a good idea to ADD heat to the existing systems as ANOTHER limiter.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Swiftstone
    Joined
    Feb 15, 2017
    Messages
    22
    Reaction score
    41
    Ok. First let me say that as someone with a penchant for building rather large motherships from which to operate independently in deep space, I wholeheartedly approve of a systems overhaul along these conceptual lines. It is in fact a more realistic portrayal of what real spacecraft actually have to deal with as an operational and design issue.


    However, I think that if you're going to go with heat generation management as the primary governance principle for design, you should not make such an intuitively understood concept so counter-intuitive for people. In other words, this is a case where realism can actually save everyone involved a lot of grief while still opening up vast potential for complexity of design and actually scaling in a much smoother way.

    In reality, even if a reactor on a ship has coolants circulating around it etc. to keep it from melting down, ultimately, that heat must be radiated away from the ship faster than it is created.

    Which means surface area. Which is very relevant to the discussion at hand. A quick thought experiment is in order:

    Suppose you were to give us options on how to ditch all that heat?
    You could still make it so that conduits carry heat away from the core, but give us choices on where they lead. For instance, if you make it so that when conduits are connected directly to the outer hull/armor of your ship, the amount of heat dissipation is based on total surface area of the ship. This makes it so that heat generation/dissipation scales directly with each ship, rather than having to worry about us hitting the boundary of a 'threshold bracket'.

    Further, you could make different types of hull and armor radiate that heat away with graded efficiencies.
    Basic hull radiates heat most efficiently, while standard armor, being a cera-metal composite, would radiate heat less efficiently, and so on, making 'shield boat/armor boat' differentiation and variation strategies still viable in designing our ships/stations. This principle could also operate both ways if you decide to implement star heat effects, so that heavier armor would protect you more from the effects of a star's heat on the facing side, even though it presents heat dissipation problems for overall operation.

    This mechanic would be sufficient for most standard types of ship, and indeed would encourage some very interesting design variations to maximize radiating surface area while minimizing mass for small to medium combat or utility craft. Cooling vane arrays, more organic, spherical or finned design choices and the like. It also obviously encourages people to create interior living spaces for themselves, as they need to create the volume in order to radiate enough heat away to make the ship functional anyway, but this overall mechanic would allow for greater choice in placement and distribution of those interior spaces.

    You could also make the rate from this mechanic slower in dissipating heat when used alone, so that with constant firing of a weapon or constant charging of a jump-drive, etc., slow heat buildup can become an issue over time if systems are improperly balanced against surface area. Interestingly, this would also offer us choices and compromises to make for small high-powered, short-engagement craft like fighters, frigates, corvettes and the like. Much as has often been done with the existent power systems, you can run a ship 'hot'.

    Meaning that like now, it would still be possible to mount weapons systems that far exceed the rated cooling capacity of a ship of a given size, allowing for differentiation of design of craft meant for short, intense engagements and those built for long engagements or operation, such as a mining vessel or battleship, which must continually fire it's modules over a long period of time.

    For compact, high-power, heavily armored or heavily shielded ships however, (think military-grade vessels built to have minimized target profiles in order to make them harder to hit, or deploy-able fleet miners) this purely passive radiating strategy alone would be insufficient, and would be where your suggested cooling strategy would come into play as a significant augmentation to cooling rate, rather than being the sole means of dissipating heat. This would still encourage the creation of at least minimal interior spaces on such vessels as per your system.

    It offers simple to understand complexity in design options for beginners and veteran builders alike.

    It would allow us a finer control and greater variation over the potential roles for a craft we design, from highly specialized to highly generalized capabilities. Each would require concessions to be made in design, while doing very little to limit variations in our solutions to such design challenges.

    Want to have big sails or very textured and/or expansive and spidery, intricate overall design for your ship that just looks cool? That's actually a good thing with heat dissipation being tied to surface area, but you'll be bigger, easier to hit, easier to critically damage by the removal of outer hull or armor thereby removing heat-sink ability, and it makes you slower to maneuver.

    Unless we install your suggested specialized coolant chambers, which force compromises of their own as far as interior space/surface area ratios.

    More importantly, this still allows you to balance things quite easily by changing heat generation/dissipation values for individual systems and types of outer hull block, offering you finer control over how to do that balancing, while allowing you yet more simple realism for immersion purposes.

    For instance, you could make it so that the primary limiter on missile systems or cannons are based on load time as they are to a certain degree now anyway while generating very little heat, whereas beams or rapid-fire cannons and missiles could be fired continuously, but generate a lot of heat because the magazine of the weapon is working harder, or the beams generate a lot of heat with continued operation. This would allow all the variation in weapons combinations and actual practical functionality of them left largely intact while offering that finer control in balancing both for the devs and the players. It also offers you solid grounding for the conceptual framing of explanations concerning how things are balanced for new players to easily grasp the principles of.

    It is very easy for a person to understand that in order to ditch more heat, their ship needs to either be more 'puffy', or more spindly and elaborate in design to radiate it away, as well as it being easy to grasp that such would make the ship potentially more vulnerable to harm once the shields go down as a result.

    I hope that what I propose has been laid out here in a comprehensible manner.

    I believe it would maximize design variation and game balancing options rather simply and intuitively, while simultaneously placing real and finely scaling, knowable limits on what is possible to do with each vessel or station based on size and/or firepower.
    Not to mention easier conversion of existing game assets and ship designs. Power Drain modules and drones used in existing combat designs simply become Heat Beams instead, which offer extra cooling for your ship while pointing that heat at the enemy in an effort to overload their cooling capacity. That sort of thing.

    In addition to this, if you decide to leave power generation/capacity as a factor to balance against heat generation/dissipation, then all you have to do is make your 'Chambers' into 'Turbines', and you provide us with the option to simultaneously generate extra power for high-end weaponry etc., (negating the need for Auxiliary Power blocks) while rapidly dissipating the heat the modules being powered generate. You could even make them operate on a toggling basis, just like the current Auxiliaries do for emergency combat-rated use of the ship's full capabilities.

    Sorry for the long reply, but you did ask for suggestions on refinements for the idea...
     
    Last edited:

    Fellow Starmadian

    Oh cool so thats what this is
    Joined
    Jun 7, 2014
    Messages
    227
    Reaction score
    87
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Wired for Logic
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    It is not that simple, even with advanced build mode, redoing my new salvager requires more than just pulling out the old power blocks, because the power system is decentralized between waffled salvage modules, and the ship doesn't have any internal space left. I'd have to partioally rebuild the whole ship to make room for the proposed power systems, because they wouldn't fit in the 50x1x1 spaces between the salvage modules and would incur "heat penalties" due to systems occupying the "heat zones" of the reactors. It would be easier just to build a new ship with room for the new systems, than spend time refitting a ship that wasn't built with the new system in mind.
    In this proposed system, your salvage arrays would be much more powerful, so you'd just need to cut down on their length by a lot to account for this crazy system.

    Matt_Bradock You've said what I've been trying to convey, noice use of words.

    Regarding chandelier ships: Systems would not be uncovered, just spread out until they are outside the heat box. And if you want to add hull around the dead space in the center of your ship then fine, but it would still be the same design, only a little slower due to lots of extra hull. This proposal is still just replacing one "bad" power system with another.
     

    nightrune

    Wizard/Developer/Project Manager
    Joined
    May 11, 2015
    Messages
    1,324
    Reaction score
    577
    • Schine
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Thinking Positive
    econd, the whole "heat" thing sounds a bit confusing, I mean that in the sense that reactors would absorb heat from other systems? Don't they usually produce heat? What about power? Guess we'll have to see.
    Yeah this part is a bit misleading. In life, when you draw from an generator that's not designed to match your load you generate lots of heat due to inefficiencies. The difference with these is that without the heat box there is no downside to having a smaller reactor. There are a ton of variables to play with though. I think many more then what "power" gives us. Heat allows many interoperations with other gameplay dynamics, which irregardless of the op post is the most valuable to me. One underlying mechanic that helps affect the world seems better to me.
     

    Matt_Bradock

    The Shrink
    Joined
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages
    798
    Reaction score
    464
    • Purchased!
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    What I really don't get about the boxes myself, is WHY put in more BOXES if so far the Schine team always tried to rely LESS on boxes. That's why the whole docking system was reworked, that's why every couple patches more calculation optimizations are done to reduce lag from collision boxes... like, seriously... can't this be done a bit more elegantly?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Top 4ce
    Joined
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages
    338
    Reaction score
    148
    • Legacy Citizen 3
    Alright, I have read enough to give me some ideas.

    I think the reactors we have now should be kept, even with a new system. They should be limited to a certain block count per chain, adjustable in the config. This would allow using small chains to power small craft, leaving the choice of free power+capacitors or going with a small reactor. It would also allow people who don't like the new system to bypass it if they wish.

    Since large vessels wouldn't be able to power themselves with the smaller chains, they would need reactors. Capacitors should be kept, the reactor could replace the aux power blocks. I like what Swiftstone said above about heat radiation, piping it with conduits to dissipation sources. A large vessel could even use some small chains of normal reactors as a backup system in-case the reactors get destroyed, building just enough power over time to limp away. I would definitely add heat in alongside power/gen, but not replace it.

    I would make heat gen per entity, to keep turrets from adding to the total of the mothership, and to keep the motherships total from affecting the turrets. This would also prevent fighters and whatnot from causing efficiency loss if they are in a heatbox. If you even choose to utilize a heatbox. I might skip the heatbox and just make certain blocks radiate heat if you put conduit by it that is connected to a reactor. That leaves out the downsides of the heatboxes, and you still have to worry about heat dissipation when you build. That would alleviate the "where can I put all this without affecting my heat gen" and chandelier ship concerns I believe.

    Edit: I think you're going to need to get NPC crew in, and make them necessary, before people will have an incentive to build functional interiors. Giving us the ability to produce more power in a smaller space, or making weapons more powerful in a smaller size, or shield gen with less blocks would give all the room necessary to use them. The problem is, you have to limit the upper end somewhere, or make those crew absolutely necessary, or people will take those extra powerful weapons/shields to the logical next step. Then every ship becomes a super weapon. There MUST be a reason to fill the extra space left over(IE space for NPC crew to live and work), or it will just be filled with more useful systems. If you don't want to cap weapon power or shields, you have to make crew necessary.

    Green is reactor block, I used Ingot to encase, or represent needed encasement block. Conduit/pipe is to transfer heat to dissipation block(s). I suggest using metal mesh/grill, the new grate/railing block, scaffolding, ingots, and basic hull for heat dissipation.

    starmade-screenshot-0010.png starmade-screenshot-0009.png starmade-screenshot-0008.png
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Swiftstone
    Status
    Not open for further replies.