Prerelease v0.200.250

[Dire Venom]

Edit: Nvm I misunderstood

 

[Valiant70]

Personaly it's that it is limited by ONE dimension, requiring you to build long in just one direction to get max effciencey.
The best suggestion i've seen so far is Additive Stabilizer Distance - The Simple Solution
This is a bad illustration, but I think that given an equal number stabilizors this:

Should be just as effcient as this:

With each stabilizor group generating low effcincey zones around it. E.g:
Thus making these two designs equally viable:

Bubbles not drawn to scale, representing low effceiny zones where additional stabilizor groups will contribute nothing to the ship.
(Yeah I know horrible representation)

That's not exactly a correct representation of the conclusion we finally came up with on that thread. I'll come back and explain it better if I get around to it. In the mean time, feel free to look over my posts on that thread.

 

[LoSboccacc]

We just don't want any one aesthetic choice to be more optimal than any other. People can't be forced to make good looking ships and they shouldn't be, but the game shouldn't be actively encouraging the construction of ugly ships.

The old system, ironically, does a much better job of this than the new system, discounting spagetti type builds of course.

yeah we waited months for a weird mess that adds nothing of value and doesn't solve the thing it was set out to solve

what we needed:
- non linear scaling of efficiency with component volume to avoid gigantism
- proper damage to blocks forming subsystem instead of effect being applied at random health values

what we got:
- doomcylinders instead of doomcubes
- a system that requires lot and lot of reworks to build an efficient ship
- a system that severely punishes 'inspired by' builds
- a system that lengthens ship build time by hours so people venturing in combat now are even rarer


...and no content to use the ship for.

 

[Non]

Math:
10,000 block aux units have an efficiency of about 193 e/s per block, regen costs 1 e/s per regen, so an efficiency of 193 shield regen/aux block.

Each aux block weighs .1 mass, so its 1930 regen/mass unit.

In new power, each reactor block generates 100 e/s, and shield regen still costs 1e/s per regen, so its 100 shield regen/reactor block. 50 if we include the needed stabilizers (assuming the minimum ratio of 1 stabilizer for every reactor).

Each reactor block weighs .4 mass, so its 250 shield regen/mass unit. If we include stabilizers, another .2 mass per block, totalling .6 mass, we get 166.67 regen/mass unit.

Conclusion:
Shield regen in dev build should be changed to only use somewhere between 1/5 and 1/10 of an e/s to get the same mass efficiency as old power.

(If I made a math mistake pls correct me.)

 

[ResonKinetic]

"Gee, I wonder what's going on in starbound- I mean starmade lately."

 

[viper1975]

Just warhead the stabilizer and you get a free ship very little damage at all. I'm done updating the game. power could have been fixed faster and without making all builds useless. And why not just leave all those systems off the ship so people building the ship can add them if they want them instead of forcing the player to power those systems.

 

[Matt_Bradock]

Math:
10,000 block aux units have an efficiency of about 193 e/s per block, regen costs 1 e/s per regen, so an efficiency of 193 shield regen/aux block.

Each aux block weighs .1 mass, so its 1930 regen/mass unit.

In new power, each reactor block generates 100 e/s, and shield regen still costs 1e/s per regen, so its 100 shield regen/reactor block. 50 if we include the needed stabilizers (assuming the minimum ratio of 1 stabilizer for every reactor).

Each reactor block weighs .4 mass, so its 250 shield regen/mass unit. If we include stabilizers, another .2 mass per block, totalling .6 mass, we get 166.67 regen/mass unit.

Conclusion:
Shield regen in dev build should be changed to only use somewhere between 1/5 and 1/10 of an e/s to get the same mass efficiency as old power.

(If I made a math mistake pls correct me.)

Math is correct. And what's even sadder, you take into account the lowest efficiency power source formerly available in the game and still come up with far better values as the new, supposedly better system.

That just speaks volumes.

 

[Nosajimiki]

So if you don't like your ships strength limitted by it's dimension, what would be a good attribute to equalise out ships? Would you rather have your ship equalised out to others by its mass like in the old power? Or would you rather like to have more dimensions instead of just one? Or do you have another attribute to suggest that you want instead?

I'm just currious.

Logarithmic falloff per subsystem set, never mass or size. Basically each system whether it is weapons, power, shields, etc should have a non-linear falloff in efficiency which the current system does very well with in many respects. The problem is that the game does not calculate all docked entities together. If weapon power efficiency for example was a based on the sum off ALL weapon outputs on a ship and its docked stuff, and not just a single computer, then 100 output turrets would disappear overnight. Reactors should also share soft caps between docked stuff as well so that you can have a power system that is either localized into a core or distributed about, but does not allow for self powered turrets. Passive effects (or chambers) would apply based on the system they affect so an overdrive should need to be a % size of all of your thruster groups, Ion would be proportional to your shields. (Basing chambers on reactor size is dumb if they are not related to your power system) Shields would be shared 100% by all docked things negating the principle effect of docked armor (Bubbles are also dumb). Also, non-linear return on thrusters would inherently mean big ships wont have the extra power to invest into fast turning if turning just followed the same requirements of normal thrust. Most of these mechanics already exist in the game, they just need to be unified and rebalanced which would have been a LOT less work than the new power update.

This achieves several things:
1- It does not define the shape of a ship making spheres, cubes, long-boys, tall-boys, crescents, wedges, chandeliers, dumbbells, and all your star trek fan builds, etc all equally viable choices.
2- It does not say WHERE your systems need to be on a ship so that you can't just look at it and predict where you need to shoot to hit the reactor.
3- Naturally limits min-max builds.

Basicly, this plusthe structural integrity would have fixed pretty much every major combat exploit in the game that I've seen in the past 3 years.

 

[ResonKinetic]

Just warhead the stabilizer and you get a free ship very little damage at all. I'm done updating the game. power could have been fixed faster and without making all builds useless. And why not just leave all those systems off the ship so people building the ship can add them if they want them instead of forcing the player to power those systems.

my mans made an account just to shit on the update lmao

 

[Nosajimiki]

my mans made an account just to shit on the update lmao

The update is upsetting enough to get people who don't like Out-of-Game stuff into the forums.

 

[viper1975]

The update is upsetting enough to get people who don't like Out-of-Game stuff into the forums.

Thank you.
And that kind of a reply is why i don't post most of the time.

 

[ResonKinetic]

Thank you.
And that kind of a reply is why i don't post most of the time.

don't worry i was agreeing with you anyway lol.

 

[LoSboccacc]

so, leveled up perma stealth uses flat 40% of reactor power, whatever power a reactor outputs?

are all other chambers doing shit like that?

also, now I need a chamber for every stealth effect? and their effect cost a fixed percentage of reactor power whatever power output the reactor has?


how was this ever a good idea?

 

[plusnine]

starmade is a game with years of major revisions to components and systems, but this is definitely the first time that so many things have been fundamentally altered in a single release, so after an enjoyably long hiatus, I thought I might try things out. the forums, as ever, seem to be populated primarily with people negotiating their dreams with each other, and that appears to be going predictably.

perhaps, though, it might be helpful if the development team would like to elaborate upon and formalize the intent of the design through providing a few fresh example ships that fill a functional in-game role? the experience might yield helpful articulations or documentation in terms of building design and syntax to communicate to a player base.

 

[Crashmaster]

They should fite too.

 

[Top 4ce]

starmade is a game with years of major revisions to components and systems, but this is definitely the first time that both so many things have been fundamentally altered in a single release, so after an enjoyably long hiatus, I thought I might try things out. the forums, as ever, seem to be populated primarily with people negotiating their dreams with each other, and that appears to be going predictably.

perhaps, though, it might be helpful if the development team would like to elaborate upon and formalize the intent of the design through providing a few fresh example ships that fill a functional in-game role? the experience might yield helpful articulations or documentation in terms of building design and syntax to communicate to a player base.

Welcome back!

 

[ResonKinetic]

perhaps, though, it might be helpful if the development team would like to elaborate upon and formalize the intent of the design through providing a few fresh example ships that fill a functional in-game role? the experience might yield helpful articulations or documentation in terms of building design and syntax to communicate to a player base.

lol yeah i'd like to see them build functional ships without mom's spaghetti

 

[JinM]

What's new in the v.251 prerelease?

 

[NuclearHolocaust]

What exactly am i supposed to fit in my turret base now? shields do not work, power also not, whats left? nothing useful.
so having somewhat larger turret bases is now close to useless. just build a big gun on a tiny base, limits design quite massively if you want to keep some touch with efficiency or realism.

Do i undestand that right?

Also how big is the shield radius? does it ruin turrets with longer barrels when they move out of their original position?

 

[Lecic]

What exactly am i supposed to fit in my turret base now? shields do not work, power also not, whats left? nothing useful.
so having somewhat larger turret bases is now close to useless. just build a big gun on a tiny base, limits design quite massively if you want to keep some touch with efficiency or realism.

Do i undestand that right?

Also how big is the shield radius? does it ruin turrets with longer barrels when they move out of their original position?

You could put mass enhancers for the barrels to move, and thrusters for your mothership to use and to help you dock the turrets.

Ideally they would implement a system that lets us link weapons in the base to the barrels.