Realistic game mode

[Mariux]

Right now the playerbase is split in half. One side is players who wish to sacrifice realism for fun. Another side beleives that the more realistic the game is, the more fun it is. None of them are wrong. What I suggest is add a realistic gamemode. It would feature newtonian physics (no linear dampening aka. space friction) with an option to turn on auto-braking (in case you accidentaly exit the ship). Also, the speed limit would be really, really high, but to reduce lag at high speeds the game would simply stop attempting to load the chunks you are flying past.

Now, you might ask, why don't you just edit the config?
The answer is simple. It's not user-friendly. Sure, I can go ahead and change a few variables, but the thing is, some people would: a) Find it hard/uncomfortable to use; b) Even if they succeed they might feel like they're cheating. Another problem is that there's a couple of missing features that by simply editing the config you won't be able to add, for example, auto-braking. Although, having two configs, one for arcade and one for realistic game modes would be nice.

One more important thing is that there would be no blocks exclusive to one of the game modes. That means, your friend can save and catalog a ship in arcade mode, send it to you, and you would be able to buy it in realistic game mode and it would work just fine.

I really want to hear some feedback about this, so please leave some comments.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

I figure this might be better suited to a mod. A whole new physics system (Including bug tests) might take an awful while to roll out properly. I still like the idea, I actually find Newt's physics easier to work with...I think the 'not loading chunks at high speed' thing should be in the base game, brilliant performance idea there.

Which is that dev/mod that like to make mods for games? Calling him out for this.

 

[Mariux]

I figure this might be better suited to a mod. A whole new physics system (Including bug tests) might take an awful while to roll out properly. I still like the idea, I actually find Newt's physics easier to work with...I think the 'not loading chunks at high speed' thing should be in the base game, brilliant performance idea there.

Which is that dev/mod that like to make mods for games? Calling him out for this.

A little simplified Newtonian physics shouldn't be that hard to implement, just remove the space friction and add a per-ship option to autobrake if the player accidentally leaves the ship to avoid losing it. This also adds a nice bonus: It allows making inertial missiles and cruise control.

 

[NeonSturm]

And enable push you in opposite direction you push the enemy.

I would also like re-enabled space (or better air) friction when you are inside the planet's atmosphere.
But the formula should be:

blockDensity = ship{.x *.y *.z} /ship.blockCount
xyPlane_surface = ship{.x+.y} * blockDensity
force = - (xyPlane_surface * (air resistance force/block at speed 1) * speed^2)

#optional: heat damage = speed^2 - safeSpeed^2​

Planet says> The force will be against you. How do you dare to enter my atmosphere! :D

 

[Mariux]

And enable push you in opposite direction you push the enemy.

I would also like re-enabled space (or better air) friction when you are inside the planet's atmosphere.
But the formula should be:

blockDensity = ship{.x *.y *.z} /ship.blockCount
xyPlane_surface = ship{.x+.y} * blockDensity
force = - (xyPlane_surface * (air resistance force/block at speed 1) * speed^2)

#optional: heat damage = speed^2 - safeSpeed^2​

Planet says> The force will be against you. How do you dare to enter my atmosphere! :D

Air friction would be prety cool, not sure about reentry though.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

And enable push you in opposite direction you push the enemy.

I would also like re-enabled space (or better air) friction when you are inside the planet's atmosphere.
But the formula should be:

blockDensity = ship{.x *.y *.z} /ship.blockCount
xyPlane_surface = ship{.x+.y} * blockDensity
force = - (xyPlane_surface * (air resistance force/block at speed 1) * speed^2)

#optional: heat damage = speed^2 - safeSpeed^2​

Planet says> The force will be against you. How do you dare to enter my atmosphere! :D

You love your maths, don't you?

I like the idea of atmospheric friction, especially heat damage but that would need to be negligible lest it become a chore to keep repairing constantly.

Looking at those formulae (hope I said that right) there isn't something to scale the 'air', I'd like it to be that it scales with planet sizes. Also, some planets might have thicker or thinner atmospheres than others. That would add interesting variation to planets.

 

[NeonSturm]

You love your maths, don't you?

YES !
Math and science
(though not as much those poeple-confusing symbols or inventor-named stuff, where the long name distracts from a short formula's purpose and mind-bloat all interested peoples + discourages childs keeping themselves longing to know.)

Air resistance (for heat-damage) is taken into account with"safeSpeed" = partially friction, partially heat-absorption.

 

[Mariux]

YES !
Math and science
(though not as much those poeple-confusing symbols or inventor-named stuff, where the long name distracts from a short formula's purpose and mind-bloat all interested peoples + discourages childs keeping themselves longing to know.)

Air resistance (for heat-damage) is taken into account with"safeSpeed" = partially friction, partially heat-absorption.

And muffins. Got 8 of those now.

 

[jayman38]

Hull and Hardened Hull should be able to take heat better than most blocks. Especially if there was some kind of distribution mechanic that calculated heat resistance based on the number of surrounding hulls.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

And muffins. Got 8 of those now.

Wait a minute, I thought we were getting the muffins for voting! Lies! Slander!

@jayman38 Yeah, it's just weird that people simply use a core as their go-to lander. Maybe only those blocks aren't affected by the effect?

 

[NeonSturm]

Hull and Hardened Hull should be able to take heat better than most blocks. Especially if there was some kind of distribution mechanic that calculated heat resistance based on the number of surrounding hulls.

Just cap bonus at 4 (middle of a wall) or 5 (middle of a double-wall) 6 would encourage thick hulls usually found on doom-cubes.
Wedges could only give bonus at their primary and secondary face, but be satisfied with 2 neighbours (and maybe 2 1/2 neighbours).

 

[Mariux]

Just cap bonus at 4 (middle of a wall) or 5 (middle of a double-wall) 6 would encourage thick hulls usually found on doom-cubes.
Wedges could only give bonus at their primary and secondary face, but be satisfied with 2 neighbours (and maybe 2 1/2 neighbours).

Those aerodynamic calculations might cause some lag, but if Schema can pull it off, I'm fine.

 

[jayman38]

Just cap bonus at 4 (middle of a wall) or 5 (middle of a double-wall) 6 would encourage thick hulls usually found on doom-cubes.
Wedges could only give bonus at their primary and secondary face, but be satisfied with 2 neighbours (and maybe 2 1/2 neighbours).

For wedges and other angles, people would like to see the angled blocks receive different mass values, so maybe adjust the bonus by mass of attached hull, instead of just the number of attached hull blocks. Therefore, a wedge would provide only half the bonus of a full hull block.

If you make sure that it only calculates based on attached hull blocks, then the third or more layer of hull won't matter until a hull block on the first layer is destroyed, effectively making the second-layer hull underneath the destroyed hull become the new first layer, now that it is directly exposed to the atmosphere. Unfortunately, this per-block calculation does not scale well with larger ships, so maybe such an idea should be a mod, not in the default game.

 

[Mariux]

I think we should also talk about how thrust would work in realistic game mode. I'd say that it would be linear increase in thrust and power consumption, but with some sort of other drawbacks for making F1 titan ships.

 

[jayman38]

I think we should also talk about how thrust would work in realistic game mode. I'd say that it would be linear increase in thrust and power consumption, but with some sort of other drawbacks for making F1 titan ships.

I think if you want to talk about realistic thrust in larger vessels, you need to talk about thruster group distribution. In short, the farther a block is away from any thruster, the more likely it will be damaged or destroyed during acceleration.

If a large ship has a massive singular cluster of thrusters in one location, there should be a chance for damage to other blocks farther away from the thrust group, to simulate acceleration stresses. "She'll fly apart [if we try to accelerate]!" "Fly her apart, then!" On the other hand, if you have multiple thruster clusters throughout the ship, this would close gaps in the stress diagram and prevent damage, by simulating a more evenly-distributed thrust across more of a cross-section of the ship, reducing stress at remote members.

My theory is that multiple distributed thruster clusters would be less energy-efficient than one massive, central thruster group, forcing that cost of extra energy needed for the same amount of thrust. As a player, you still have the option of better efficiency in a single massive thruster group, but you run the constant risk of system damage as you use it. The random damage calculation should only run when the ship is actively accelerating, not cruising, sitting still, or slowing down by space friction. However, this raises the specter of lag as the game tries to calculate block distances from thruster blocks, to find out which blocks are eligible for acceleration damage. Maybe those calculations could be done at the time of building or buying or block destruction, and then be stored for later use when randomly picking which block(s) get the bad news.

Example calculations:
Any block within 50 m of a thruster are ineligible for damage.
For every 1 m of distance beyond 50m, a block is 1% more likely to receive 50% damage.
For every 20 m of distance beyond 100m, a block is 5% more likely to be destroyed completely, skipping the damage risk calculations.

Unfortunately, there is nothing here that discourages doom cubes.

 

[Mariux]

I think if you want to talk about realistic thrust in larger vessels, you need to talk about thruster group distribution. In short, the farther a block is away from any thruster, the more likely it will be damaged or destroyed during acceleration.

If a large ship has a massive singular cluster of thrusters in one location, there should be a chance for damage to other blocks farther away from the thrust group, to simulate acceleration stresses. "She'll fly apart [if we try to accelerate]!" "Fly her apart, then!" On the other hand, if you have multiple thruster clusters throughout the ship, this would close gaps in the stress diagram and prevent damage, by simulating a more evenly-distributed thrust across more of a cross-section of the ship, reducing stress at remote members.

My theory is that multiple distributed thruster clusters would be less energy-efficient than one massive, central thruster group, forcing that cost of extra energy needed for the same amount of thrust. As a player, you still have the option of better efficiency in a single massive thruster group, but you run the constant risk of system damage as you use it. The random damage calculation should only run when the ship is actively accelerating, not cruising, sitting still, or slowing down by space friction. However, this raises the specter of lag as the game tries to calculate block distances from thruster blocks, to find out which blocks are eligible for acceleration damage. Maybe those calculations could be done at the time of building or buying or block destruction, and then be stored for later use when randomly picking which block(s) get the bad news.

Example calculations:
Any block within 50 m of a thruster are ineligible for damage.
For every 1 m of distance beyond 50m, a block is 1% more likely to receive 50% damage.
For every 20 m of distance beyond 100m, a block is 5% more likely to be destroyed completely, skipping the damage risk calculations.

Unfortunately, there is nothing here that discourages doom cubes.

That's one way of doing it. It could be possible to reinforce the ship by adding more hull blocks. That would also encourage larger ships to also rely on armor other then just shielding.

 

[Gamel]

here you go

 

[NeonSturm]

That's one way of doing it. It could be possible to reinforce the ship by adding more hull blocks. That would also encourage larger ships to also rely on armor other then just shielding.

More armour = more mass = less speed gain, like+1

@Gamel you can resize your picture by putting it within a quote. (or using imgur.com)
Don'T distract from topic! :p

 

[Thomas Jetson]

I even like the names for the modes. Can you guess which one I prefer?

 

[jayman38]

I even like the names for the modes. Can you guess which one I prefer?

Muffin mode. Everyone loves Muffin mode.