Pre-Release Stab.Intergrity Update Dev Thread

    Joined
    Feb 27, 2014
    Messages
    1,074
    Reaction score
    502
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Top Forum Contributor
    Hadn't seena dedicated thread on this yet, so seemed worth spreading what we know so far.
    Build is public, however unfinshed. All we know so far is from testing and kind inquiries by Criss .
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    not sure if anyone has talked bout this yet but the latest dev build seems to have a new mechanic with reactors and stabilizers.
    Power regen doesnt change regardless of the stabilizer distance but theres a new stat called "stab. Integrity". Wonder what this could be?
    I assume the stabilizer integrity is just the Structural Integrity value of the stabilizers... i.e. the much-needed anti-spaghetti mechanic applied to stabilizers (as it has been for maybe two builds now). With that strange new visual, though, and stabilization apparently not changing atm, something else may be going on... or, they're just testing shader application for what will later be the final visual effect for build mode.

    I'll check this out.
    the thing that interests me is the fact that the power regen doesnt increase when stabilization goes up. the max stabilization distance is still pretty large but now theres a logic tube thing that appears when a stabilizer is place down. wonder if this is the beginnings of schema's fix for power.
    \\\\\\\\\\\

    There would appear to be a block called the 'Stabilizer Stream Node' now... let's see what it does! :D
    [doublepost=1513656528,1513654261][/doublepost]Ok, it seems that by linking the nodes I can change the path of the stabilization 'energy', but it doesn't seem to be changing stabilization percentage at all. I assume something's not yet implemented, but I may just be doing something wrong. In any case, spooky witchcraft seems to be involved...


    And what our saviour Criss kindly shared with us:
    I will explain it as best I can without knowing the exact specifics of the system. In short, players were concerned about islands of systems/power becoming too powerful. This beam connects reactors to stabilizers and can be redirected more manually with the nodes. This way a new player does not need to worry about it, but an experienced player can redirect it for aesthetic or tactical reasons.

    If the beam gets hit, your power is disabled. Not sure the exact punishment, but power takes a hit of some sort. Regen stops momentarily or something. I could be wrong, I just can't remember what the exact effect was. Hopefully now though, players won't be able to get away with building un-connected islands of systems without the need to fill that space with actual structure.

    Of course, if you see any issues with this, please discuss it here or on any upcoming news posts. I can't say for certain personally that this is a solution, but I'd like to know whether this alleviates any fears you guys have.
    Discuss away! What issues/positives do you see with this system:?
    Any testing done by players is also greatly appreacited.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Top 4ce
    Joined
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages
    1,173
    Reaction score
    494
    • Competition Winner - Small Fleets
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    I might be wrong, but to me this appears to be a really simple solution to most™ of the issues with stabilizers. Can't wait for it to be explained in full.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Dire Venom
    Joined
    Aug 3, 2016
    Messages
    187
    Reaction score
    96
    Schine is being rеtarded again, more news at 11.
    Instead of rewarding building sensible ships they add yet another half-assed punishing mechanic to force player's hand when designing stuff. This is what happens when developers don't play their own game and don't listen to people that do.
    Hopefully, we'll be able to scavenge this new mess into something interesting, or at least minimize the damage.

    Anyway, I'm curios about both this thing, whatever that is, and the exact reasoning behind it's current implementation. I mean, it looks unusual due to being only partially block-based. Guess I'll just watch it unfold.
     

    AtraUnam

    Maiden of crashes
    Joined
    Oct 15, 2013
    Messages
    1,120
    Reaction score
    866
    • Railman Gold
    • Competition Winner - Small Fleets
    • Wired for Logic Gold
    Wait so distance no longer matters and instead these beams matter... so if my distance is 0 nothing bad happens because distance doesn't matter and there will be essentially no beam... I think?
     
    Joined
    Aug 3, 2016
    Messages
    187
    Reaction score
    96
    Didn't your mother ever tell you to never put all your energy reactors and the only thing that prevents them from going supernova in one basket?
     
    Joined
    Feb 27, 2014
    Messages
    1,074
    Reaction score
    502
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Top Forum Contributor
    Didn't your mother ever tell you to never put all your energy reactors and the only thing that prevents them from going supernova in one basket?
    If the baskets in the sector over from me I'm cool with it :
    It seems like it still will be possible to have system "islands" to a degree, depending on how the beams operate and what the Stab.Integrity does.
     

    Non

    Joined
    Nov 17, 2013
    Messages
    296
    Reaction score
    157
    Instead of rewarding building sensible ships they add yet another half-assed punishing mechanic to force player's hand when designing stuff. This is what happens when developers don't play their own game and don't listen to people that do.
    Hopefully, we'll be able to scavenge this new mess into something interesting, or at least minimize the damage.

    Anyway, I'm curios about both this thing, whatever that is, and the exact reasoning behind it's current implementation. I mean, it looks unusual due to being only partially block-based. Guess I'll just watch it unfold.
    I'm not so sure this will suck yet, or that it will necessarily be a punishing mechanic. if it works in such a way as to where the beams distance traveled counts as the stabilizer distance it could be mildly interesting
     

    Ithirahad

    Arana'Aethi
    Joined
    Nov 14, 2013
    Messages
    4,150
    Reaction score
    1,329
    • Purchased!
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 8
    I'm not so sure this will suck yet, or that it will necessarily be a punishing mechanic. if it works in such a way as to where the beams distance traveled counts as the stabilizer distance it could be mildly interesting
    It isn't. I'd like to say "it isn't yet," but I've been here too long to hope much for something like that changing after initial implementation :\

    This 'energy stream' mechanic is evidently just their way of dealing with far-away stabilizer 'islands'.
     
    Joined
    Aug 23, 2013
    Messages
    379
    Reaction score
    65
    A short history of Power 2.0.

    a) Developers (possibly encouraged by a few people who want to role play in a unrealistic universe where engineering, physics and economics count for nothing) decide that forcing ship builders to have pointless empty space is the same as encouraging ship builders to provide "crew areas"

    b) Most people complain about how silly the idea is.

    c) Developers ignore everyone, rehash the original proposal (replacing a slightly realistic "heat" reason for it with no realistic reason at all), and implement "reactor to stabiliser distance" mechanic.

    d) Most people complain about how silly the idea is. People start building ships with 2 completely disconnected distant blobs as a work-around for the "reactor to stabiliser distance is incredibly stupid" problem.

    e) Developers realise that 2 completely disconnected distant blobs doesn't achieve the "encouraging ship builders to provide crew areas" goal, and decide to put an umbilical cord between the reactors and stabilisers that has to be protected, hoping that this will suddenly encourage ship builders to provide crew areas.

    f) Ship builders start building ships as 2 distant blobs connected by an armoured/hulled umbilical cord.

    g) Developers realise that 2 distant blobs connected by an armoured/hulled umbilical cord doesn't achieve the "encouraging ship builders to provide crew areas" goal; and dream up some other mechanic that ignores the fact that the only way to encourage ship builders to provide crew areas is to give ship builders a reason to provide crew areas (e.g. bonuses related to AI crew happiness or something).

    h) Ship builders start building ships that are even more hideous to work-around the next failure to encourage crew areas, while continuing to not bother providing crew areas.

    Note: So that I don't need to come back and update this in 2 years time, I've added 3 things on the end that haven't happened yet.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Ithirahad
    Joined
    Aug 3, 2016
    Messages
    187
    Reaction score
    96
    And the worst part is that you may actually be correct in your predictions.
    After all, the one true constant we all can rely upon is Schine's ineptitude when it comes to designing systems.

    Hell, even using total beam length instead of/as stabilizer distance would be an improvement.
    Like some weird kind of heat pipe with stabs being a coolant pump or something.
    I mean, it would actually make sense then. Which is why it'll never be implemented.
     
    Joined
    Aug 14, 2017
    Messages
    353
    Reaction score
    162
    For reactors without stabilizers there seems to be set up a couple of hurdles in config file. It should be noted that I don't know how many of them are implemented (it needs proper testing) but there are following things:

    Reactor explosions upon being hit - reactors with no stabilisation explode upon being hit similar to auxiliary power. (max 20 explosions, max 5 meter radius, max 50k damage)
    Reactor explosions upon overload - if your ship tries to eat more power than reactor produces it explodes same way as above.
    Reactor HP damage - RHP takes up to 100% of damage dealt to other blocks on the ship, depending on how low is your stabilisation, under 10% of stabilisation it takes 100% of damage. (There is also some strange lines that may mean that RHP takes damage even if the shields are still active)

    The power path (glowing new thing) being hit stops your reactor for 5 seconds.
     
    Joined
    Feb 27, 2014
    Messages
    1,074
    Reaction score
    502
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Top Forum Contributor
    Thanks for the detailed look! That certaintly sounds quite intersting.
    So far it seems the ideal design will be to have Reactors/Stabs right next to each other (so no long power rope) in their own separated bubble/island.
    Congratulations, you played your self devs :P (Unless I'm missing something)
     
    Joined
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages
    1,696
    Reaction score
    1,199
    • Thinking Positive
    • Likeable
    I thought the point of reactors was to power other systems.

    I could be misreading, but it's looking like Schine literally wants to use reactors to control every aspect of the game meta. I worry that in order to accomplish this, they are going to make power so convoluted and non-intuitive that every benefit gained by re-building power from the ground up in the first place - an effort consuming most of the last year - will be rapidly lost. It could easily become so entangled and contorted that it becomes just as difficult as previous reactor dynamics to adapt to new systems and dynamics and inhibits future development every bit as much or more.

    Very worrisome.
    [doublepost=1513721872,1513720935][/doublepost]If they want people to build interior spaces, why don't they just implement a system rewarding interior space directly? Where clearly defined interior spaces themselves directly benefit the ship's function instead of dancing around the issue at the cost of making a giant mess of what should be straightforward ship components?

    It'd be so much more reasonable. Why else would anyone have a reactor room full of computers and workstations on a ship... if it didn't buff the reactor? Why would I ever build a bridge... if it didn't improve my scanning & information awareness capabilities?

    And from the other side; what would possibly give a real vessel more ability to modify and optimize its systems - on the go, in real time - than making those systems directly accessible to crew and providing workstations that would allow sensor re-calibration, adjustments to injector ratios and the like in real time by (imaginary, FFS) crew?

    Is it even likely that the finally resulting power reactor will be optimal or streamlined when more of its constraints and features are informed by attempting to make it surreptitiously control build meta than providing clean, accessible power to ship systems?
     

    Ithirahad

    Arana'Aethi
    Joined
    Nov 14, 2013
    Messages
    4,150
    Reaction score
    1,329
    • Purchased!
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 8
    Thanks for the detailed look! That certaintly sounds quite intersting.
    So far it seems the ideal design will be to have Reactors/Stabs right next to each other (so no long power rope) in their own separated bubble/island.
    Congratulations, you played your self devs :P (Unless I'm missing something)
    Nope, it's still sticks and dumbbells if it was ever sticks and dumbbells. The flow length doesn't matter; nodes would be more accurately named 'Stabilizer Energy Flow Diverters' as all they are for is allowing you to route the flows so that they don't go in inopportune places, such as through your interior or the outside of the ship. Extending the flow does not increase stabilization; all this system is apparently intended to do is enforce the system as it's built currently and prevent floating stabilizer shenanigans.
     
    Joined
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages
    24
    Reaction score
    10
    • Purchased!
    I thought the point of reactors was to power other systems.

    I could be misreading, but it's looking like Schine literally wants to use reactors to control every aspect of the game meta. I worry that in order to accomplish this, they are going to make power so convoluted and non-intuitive that every benefit gained by re-building power from the ground up in the first place - an effort consuming most of the last year - will be rapidly lost. It could easily become so entangled and contorted that it becomes just as difficult as previous reactor dynamics to adapt to new systems and dynamics and inhibits future development every bit as much or more.
    I think you've nailed it. At some point, probably right near the start of the whole power thing, the goal of the update changed from "Let's make a simple to use, powerful energy system to remove the ambiguity of the old one" to "how can we change power to control how people build their ships?".
    At this point the sheer amount of crammed-in rules and restrictions is making a complete mess of things that should really be very simple. The old system was essentially "Want power? Place a power block. Want a weapon? Add weapon blocks". It's simple. It's intuitive (with the exception of its scaling, but that's more of a bonus for smaller ships than a penalty of any sort), it's fast, it's easy, it doesn't dictate your ship design. All things that a power system should be.
    The new one is hamfisted. You require stabilizers to get power, it's no longer a case of placing down a power block and receiving power. They can't be too close to the reactor or you get no juice, so now they have to be placed away from your reactor, which forces you to construct a lengthy ship along one dimension if you want to run your thrusters at all. Oh but they can't be at an angle that intersects empty space or you'll have a magic vulnerability which requires a third block type to fix. You can't make conduits to block it either because lel integrity - yet another thing to keep in mind.
    Then to top it off the reactors go boom if they get hit, because everyone loved core drilling so much and Schine totally didn't design an entire HP system designed to prevent it.

    It's a mess of a post, but it's a mess of a system. They should not spend any more time and money on it, scrap it, go back to the drawing board. Just because you spent months on something isn't a compelling reason to force it in, it will harm you in the short term and cripple you in the long term. Don't throw good money after bad.


    I realise that turned into a giant rant, but I haven't had a good one in a while. If your sanity is still intact after getting through it then you've got one up on me.
     
    Joined
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages
    138
    Reaction score
    220
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 9
    Hmmmm. I think I may have something to contribute to this thread.

    A few days ago, I posted a thread (now deleted) about joining the reactors to the stabilizers by conduits. If these conduits broke, the stabilizer group the conduit connected to the reactor would stop working. This would have meant that "islands" and "dumb-bells" would not be possible as people needed to protect these conduits connecting the two ends of the ship also.

    I think this "beam" is just that- albeit a virtual version of conduits. That is, it has no purpose nor effect other than simply giving people a reason to protect the parts of their ship in between their reactors and stabilizers.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Dire Venom
    Joined
    Feb 27, 2014
    Messages
    1,074
    Reaction score
    502
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Top Forum Contributor
    Hmmmm. I think I may have something to contribute to this thread.

    A few days ago, I posted a thread (now deleted) about joining the reactors to the stabilizers by conduits. If these conduits broke, the stabilizer group the conduit connected to the reactor would stop working. This would have meant that "islands" and "dumb-bells" would not be possible as people needed to protect these conduits connecting the two ends of the ship also.

    I think this "beam" is just that- albeit a virtual version of conduits. That is, it has no purpose nor effect other than simply giving people a reason to protect the parts of their ship in between their reactors and stabilizers.

    This is why I was really surprised when I stumbled upon this post (I havent played SM for couple of days) because it seemed as if they implemented just that. (This may just be a coincidence that I thought of the same idea before they released this)


    Hope that helped :)
    As far as the mechnic goes (Beam with Nodes'n stuff) It does look kinda cool.
    I feel that it could certiantly be of use somewhere in Starmade.

    As a key power feature? Maybe not. It might just overcomplicate things without really adding anything of value.
    In terms of a Power System for Starmade, I think Simpler really is better!

    I would still like to see this used somewhere else as well though.
     
    Joined
    Aug 23, 2013
    Messages
    379
    Reaction score
    65
    As far as the mechnic goes (Beam with Nodes'n stuff) It does look kinda cool.
    I feel that it could certiantly be of use somewhere in Starmade.
    I actually like the "stabiliser stream" (in theory, as long as it doesn't hurt frame rates - I haven't tested much yet). Of course I still dislike the insanely excessive "reactor to stabiliser" distance, but that's a separate issue.

    For the stabiliser stream, I've been thinking of turning it into "centrepiece decoration" (e.g. surrounding it with glass and deliberately putting a large corridor on either side; having a park/garden with the beam going overhead; etc).

    For ship's with multiple reactors I've already found a way to turn it into a set of "which reactor is active" indicators - basically; "stream nodes" are arranged so that if a reactor is active its stabiliser stream passes through a glass block that has black standard hull behind it, so that the glass block will look black (reactor not active) or the same colour as the stream (reactor active).

    Note: I'm getting green stabiliser streams while other people are showing screenshots of purple stabiliser streams. I'm not sure if the colour was changed or if it depends on ship size or something else.
     
    Joined
    May 25, 2017
    Messages
    9
    Reaction score
    2
    The strange beam thing can be a good idea, but the non physical way is not really good, maybe make physical block like the animated blue conduit decoration can be better, more controlable and less "Oh hey i am the big purple beam, just going on ur corridor dont worry about me!"
     

    AtraUnam

    Maiden of crashes
    Joined
    Oct 15, 2013
    Messages
    1,120
    Reaction score
    866
    • Railman Gold
    • Competition Winner - Small Fleets
    • Wired for Logic Gold
    Anyone remember the original power system? not the one presently in release, the one that had such a level of depth that while a bundle of lines worked just fine, the truly most efficient reactors were so complex that people wrote genetic algorithms to work out the best reactor design for a given volume.

    Can we just have that again?