Prerelease v0.200.250

[LoSboccacc]

having an independent connection for each <reactor, chamber> (or <chamber, chamber>) pair is plain annoying

If I wanted the complexity of space engineer, I'd just go and play space engineer.


also, let people configure their ship while docked, since docked ship take part of parent reactor you get no way except undocking to set up your actions.

 

[Spartan-228]

Happy New Year every one.

 

[LoSboccacc]

I tried, I really tried, to play, not even to enjoy it, but the chamber system is just extremely aggravating

want to add a weapon? enlarge the reactor! oh now all your chamber are broken and you need to rework conduits all over your ship

stabilization is not even the main issue there, you can just throw more blocks at a less efficiency for that, the issue is that you have to work your ship all the way from the ground up every time you get some loot and can afford some upgrades because all chambers get disabled and that's that.

this only ever works on creative server or wherever you spawn a blueprint and go. survival/pve is fubar because everything is a chore now, including building ships

 

[Lecic]

I tried, I really tried, to play, not even to enjoy it, but the chamber system is just extremely aggravating

want to add a weapon? enlarge the reactor! oh now all your chamber are broken and you need to rework conduits all over your ship

stabilization is not even the main issue there, you can just throw more blocks at a less efficiency for that, the issue is that you have to work your ship all the way from the ground up every time you get some loot and can afford some upgrades because all chambers get disabled and that's that.

this only ever works on creative server or wherever you spawn a blueprint and go. survival/pve is fubar because everything is a chore now, including building ships

I agree. The size of the chamber should be based on the size of the systems it's modifying, not the size of the reactor. This way, scavenger players would only need to increase the size of one chamber when they added new parts to their ship, rather than all of their chambers.

 

[Spartan-228]

I tried, I really tried, to play, not even to enjoy it, but the chamber system is just extremely aggravating

want to add a weapon? enlarge the reactor! oh now all your chamber are broken and you need to rework conduits all over your ship

stabilization is not even the main issue there, you can just throw more blocks at a less efficiency for that, the issue is that you have to work your ship all the way from the ground up every time you get some loot and can afford some upgrades because all chambers get disabled and that's that.

this only ever works on creative server or wherever you spawn a blueprint and go. survival/pve is fubar because everything is a chore now, including building ships

An interesting problem, I haven't built a ship like that in years.

I agree. The size of the chamber should be based on the size of the systems it's modifying, not the size of the reactor. This way, scavenger players would only need to increase the size of one chamber when they added new parts to their ship, rather than all of their chambers.

That's all well and good, but chambers have replaced systems. No more scaners, jump drives, power capacitors, cloaking computers, jamming computers, and so on. Sure things like shields and thrusters that could work, but not for every thing.

Personally I would just take into account where I am placing my chambers in relation to the reactor, if I knew I would be expanding my reactor size.

Another thing that should be taken into account with chamber it that they should be biger than they need to be so that they can take some block loss befor shuting down.

 

[Lecic]

No more scaners, jump drives, power capacitors, cloaking computers, jamming computers, and so on

The new power system doesn't really have "capacity" anymore anyway, so that doesn't really apply. All the power based chambers would obviously still be tied to reactor size, but that makes sense.

The rest of these getting turned into chambers was a gigantic mistake on Schine's part. They seem to have forgotten the purpose of chambers is to MODIFY systems, not be the systems.

 

[Matt_Bradock]

The new power system doesn't really have "capacity" anymore anyway, so that doesn't really apply. All the power based chambers would obviously still be tied to reactor size, but that makes sense.

The rest of these getting turned into chambers was a gigantic mistake on Schine's part. They seem to have forgotten the purpose of chambers is to MODIFY systems, not be the systems.

I kinda do understand some of it, cloaking and ESPECIALLY jamming was too easy, but countering it was harder. A single block and 50 energy/mass/sec for negating player missile locks, making visual tracking harder, and making most unguided AI weapons miss by far, sounds a bit unfair, especially that docked hull protected from unjamming by motion effect weapons too, so that left your scanner, which later required thousands of blocks to unjam a relatively larger ship (1 for every 10 mass) for only a short time.
Now, the new chamber system needs more sacrifices for a half-decent stealth ship, and full permanent cloak/jam takes up all 100% of reactor capacity AND a sizeable chunk of your power gen, AND forces you to leave your scan, jump drive and other systems on default. This sounds a bit more fair, especially that making a tier 4 scanner (which hard counters it) is still hard, but not as hard, on your chamber capacity, and certainly does NOT scale on enemy ship mass.

Ships now can't be jack of all trades, because of the limited chamber cap. You have to choose. You want a scout, you can have full stealth but crap jump and scan capability. You can have a scout that has good jump distance (or charge speed) and scanning but no stealth drive. You have to choose between combat stats or utility stats, you can't have a permajammer with 60% Ion, and a 30-block chaindrive that gets you to the next galaxy within 10 minutes, and even a jump inhibitor, in one ship. And despite being the guy who has every single design of his larger than a fighter with those specs, I welcome this change. Forces you to pick your ship's purpose and trade-offs. Makes fleet composition actually important now, and support vessels actually have a purpose now, which is electronic warfare (scanning and jump inhibition)

Now, before you spitroast me for saying this, on the oither hand I do agree, it's really tedious for classic survival scavenger playstyle to re-fit the entire power and chamber system every time something new has to be added. Same problem as ship design in general, you have to mind your system placement before anything else, and actually have to leave room for expansion if you ever want to upgrade without spending hours to re-arrange everything.

 

[StormWing0]

I'd say the specialization is a tad too restrictive. Currently we're stuck in a Old system not restrictive enough and the New system being too restrictive so lets try somewhere in-between. Currently you can only max out one chamber tree per reactor so lets make it something like 1.5 to 2.5 chamber tree paths? Somewhere in that area might help balance things out a bit.

 

[Dire Venom]

Simply put- The new power is less fun, less engaging and will piss you off if you need to change anything.

A nightmare of a system to work with :/

Each new addition is another stake through my shriveled heart when it comes to even attempting to build a new ship -_-

 

[Lecic]

I kinda do understand some of it, cloaking and ESPECIALLY jamming was too easy, but countering it was harder. A single block and 50 energy/mass/sec for negating player missile locks, making visual tracking harder, and making most unguided AI weapons miss by far, sounds a bit unfair, especially that docked hull protected from unjamming by motion effect weapons too, so that left your scanner, which later required thousands of blocks to unjam a relatively larger ship (1 for every 10 mass) for only a short time.
Now, the new chamber system needs more sacrifices for a half-decent stealth ship, and full permanent cloak/jam takes up all 100% of reactor capacity AND a sizeable chunk of your power gen, AND forces you to leave your scan, jump drive and other systems on default. This sounds a bit more fair, especially that making a tier 4 scanner (which hard counters it) is still hard, but not as hard, on your chamber capacity, and certainly does NOT scale on enemy ship mass.

Well sure, if you're going with the shitty scanner system we ended up with, I would agree. But for months we had the system where your cloaking and jamming ability was based on the number of cloaking and jamming comps you had on your ship, and you needed more scanners than that to beat it. That was a much better system than both the chamber way of doing it and the late 1.0 mass-based way of doing it, which was just terrible.

 

[Inspired2150]

I wish the time that went into making this power system instead went into making Starmade into a game.

Four years later, and it still isn't one.

 

[MacThule]

I wish the time that went into making this power system instead went into making Starmade into a game.

Four years later, and it still isn't one.

и кто знает что они теперь делают! We can only hope that the code changes to the core system will result in a better pace for implementing improvements from now on.

 

[LoSboccacc]

That's all well and good, but chambers have replaced systems. No more scaners, jump drives, power capacitors, cloaking computers, jamming computers, and so on.

it basically went from a system that was configurable in a continuum to a system where everything is a toggle.

the adding jump chambers does more or less the same as what adding jump blocks did, except now it has to be a fixed ratio on the reactor size, has to be multiple chambers all distinct and all connected and has to be reworked at every ship update insterad of just becoming slightly less efficient as you add power and shift power usage

 

[MacThule]

it basically went from a system that was configurable in a continuum to a system where everything is a toggle.

the adding jump chambers does more or less the same as what adding jump blocks did, except now it has to be a fixed ratio on the reactor size, has to be multiple chambers all distinct and all connected and has to be reworked at every ship update insterad of just becoming slightly less efficient as you add power and shift power usage

And in more than one way, the toggle system is more hostile:

The old system was only placing blocks; now it's placing blocks and working the toggles.

The old system was more forgiving and if your ratios were slightly over or under you only slightly lost efficiency; now if you're 0.5% over or under you can lose an entire 10% block of efficiency.

It's fine, I guess, but we have gone from a uniquely, beautifully nuanced and tunable sandbox effect system, to something like a first-run Diablo 2 clone with a really short skill tree. I hadn't understood that to be the goal at all, but here we are. I don't believe it improves accessibility either, just destroys one of the brighter jewels of SM - the unbelievable degree of flexibility and nuance.

I'm now guessing that with the weapon overhaul, Ion, AP, Explosive, etc will also be melted down and locked into oversimplified toggles that actually require additional interface steps to use?

If so, it will be complete tragedy - the delicately nuanced weapon and effect gradations here were one of my favorite elements of any game. Ever made.

 

[SkyHawk024]

schema when should we expect the full release? I'm actually looking forward to this update!

 

[Spartan-228]

I'm now guessing that with the weapon overhaul, Ion, AP, Explosive, etc will also be melted down and locked into oversimplified toggles that actually require additional interface steps to use?

If so, it will be complete tragedy - the delicately nuanced weapon and effect gradations here were one of my favorite elements of any game. Ever made.

If that happens, designing turrets is going to be a pain in the ass. The last thing I want to see is the weapons effects turned into chambers or something like them. Chambers might work for ship mounted weapons, but turrets would be effected negatively. It is already hard to make reasonably powerful turrets that are not over sized and look good. I cant see how another system other than the one we have would be better, at lest if they stick with an assemblance of the system they have now.
I don't really see the need for the weapons system to be drastically overhauled. Maybe changing some of the weapons visual effects, tweaking their stats, maybe adding sound (Though there is no sound in space), and possibly adding some new weapons and effects.

 

[Nosajimiki]

I'm trying to branch out into memes, hows this?

I see your meme and raise you an allegory!

*Ahem*...

In the beginning God made man and woman, and said that this is good. In fact, he liked people so much that he gave them the ability to reproduce.

But Eve soon found an exploit so that she could have all the pleasure of reproduction without having all the work of raising kids. Upon seeing this, God exclaimed, “OH NO! This is not good”; so, God removed all carrots, cucumbers, and all other similar vegetables. Then Adam found an even easier exploit; so, God removed thumbs. Then Adam and Eve discussed how God had patched away the exploits, and working together found many new ways to exploit the system. So, God removed mouths and many other body parts that can not be named on Starmade Dock, but no matter how hard God tried Adam and Eve would always find new ways to exploit the system.

Getting tired of writing patches, God decided to redesign the whole reproductive system so that it would no longer be pleasurable. Surely enough, Adam and Eve stopped exploiting… but they also did not reproduce either. After a while, Adam and Eve decided that life was no longer fun so they both threw themselves from a cliff, and the world became a very quiet and lonely place for God to visit.

After a while, God decided to pull a backup of his original design and said, “this was not good… but it was a good start”. So, he let Adam and Eve continue to use their exploits, but patched the reproductive system to feel better when used as intended so that the human race would still have a reason to go forth and multiply. Adam and Eve loved how this new system worked so they told God, “Thank you, now THIS is good.”

 

[Ratchet Hundreda]

I wish the time that went into making this power system instead went into making Starmade into a game.

Four years later, and it still isn't one.

I think StarMade kind of became this sort of side project a little team works on when they get bored, tweaking it and adding things to it every now and then. I know programming but don't know Java so can't tell how complicated it can get but from my perspective the whole thing seems like as i just described it. There is no other plausible explanation for such long development time i can think of other than that and don't come to me with the "it was a mass back then, they didn't have a team just one guy worked on it" crap because the pace of development is just as slow as it was back then if not slower.

I understand developing the current system is a bit more complicated and it requires a complete rewrite of the previous but there was a code which was already working in a way and if you know how it worked and build on it the revamp of it should absolutely not take that long even if we take into account the constant tweaking on the numbers to get the most desirable results after the base code is done.

I don't want to hurt the feelings of others but i'm just going to with the following:
This is an amateur dev team working in an amateur way on an amateur game. Might as well loop the 'amateur' for each statement which can be made on this game.

Other than that the potential is very much there hence the reason i keep coming back every now and then checking on how things are going around here. Get a bit disappointed each time on how long things take to progress but always leave with a bit of hope left in me.

 

[Jeffenuva]

To expand on an earlier idea:

Compliment the new power and stabilizer system (and simplify the stabilizer math) by creating 3 types of reactor blocks, like the 3 types of armor. This will effectively result in 3 classes of starship, and eliminate the need to rescale your design every time you add reactor blocks.

Basic reactor blocks will have the highest output per block (2x) and the lowest power cap - hard cap at maybe 10K. They will be made in basic factories and cost the least. The stabilizer distance for basic reactors will be a constant "25m". If you stabilize at this distance you are 100% stable - under this distance 25% stable.

Standard reactor blocks will have lower output per block (1x) and a higher power generation cap - maybe 100K. These blocks will cost more than basic blocks and be manufactured in the standard factory. The 100% stabilizer distance for standard reactors will be a constant "75m".

Advanced reactor blocks will have lower power output per block (x0.5) than standard blocks and cost more per block, but have a higher power cap - maybe 1mil. The 100% stabilizer distance for advanced reactors will be a constant "150m".

Stabilizer math will be friendlier. 3 different hard power caps will allow different sizes of starship, while limiting the incentive to endlessly fill with more power and systems.

Potentially the 3 different scales could even receive different chamber options.

 

[Spartan-228]

To expand on an earlier idea:

Compliment the new power and stabilizer system (and simplify the stabilizer math) by creating 3 types of reactor blocks, like the 3 types of armor. This will effectively result in 3 classes of starship, and eliminate the need to rescale your design every time you add reactor blocks.

Basic reactor blocks will have the highest output per block (2x) and the lowest power cap - hard cap at maybe 10K. They will be made in basic factories and cost the least. The stabilizer distance for basic reactors will be a constant "25m". If you stabilize at this distance you are 100% stable - under this distance 25% stable.

Standard reactor blocks will have lower output per block (1x) and a higher power generation cap - maybe 100K. These blocks will cost more than basic blocks and be manufactured in the standard factory. The 100% stabilizer distance for standard reactors will be a constant "75m".

Advanced reactor blocks will have lower power output per block (x0.5) than standard blocks and cost more per block, but have a higher power cap - maybe 1mil. The 100% stabilizer distance for advanced reactors will be a constant "150m".

Stabilizer math will be friendlier. 3 different hard power caps will allow different sizes of starship, while limiting the incentive to endlessly fill with more power and systems.

Potentially the 3 different scales could even receive different chamber options.

Creative idea, but I don't think it addresses the primary complaint about stabilizers.