Reason for having an interior

[Aecetym]

So far it is always a disadvantage. In the future, as the HP system would get overhauled, most likely making hull blocks useful, the impact on the ships stats would be lowered. But still, any not occupied space is a disadvantage.

The only reason it might be a disadvantage is because you have given up a few more shield to give your ship somewhat of a soul. But because so many other aspects are unbalanced or not even in the game yet atm, trying to 'fix' this aspect of the game now without those fixed first would result in breaking more on the long run imo, surely with boosts and all that would take time to implement.

Usually the bigger the ship is, the bigger the interior. Making 2x2x50 corridor with walls from hulls take space for 600 blocks ( (2x2+8)x50). It's not so much, but usually there isn't only one corridor, but multiple of them (and often bigger ones) + bridge + sleeping rooms + medic bay + airlocks + core room + emergency exit + etc. which combined can take much more space.

I know that most of them aren't necessary and are basically for decoration, but once this idea got implemented, they would actually have a purpose to exist.

Like I said building an interiour shouldn't always take space away from the ship, it can also create space. When I finish the main hull of a ship the bridge is always a exterior part of the ship. Like any other decorative thing can create more space for the ship while at the same time making it look better and bigger.

And this suggestion wouldn't have so many players supporting it, if they also weren't thinking that interiors give a disadvantage.

Pretty sure they want the NPC part more over the boosts part. Thats the only thing I like about the idea but I think it's the logical and unavoidable way NPCs should evolve in time. If you would scrap the whole boosts and the whole interiors-are-bad stuff between the lines I would support it fully.

Core drilling wouldn't be a thing in the future (most likely) and this suggestion also gives an ability to target stations of specific systems, which gives way for more tactical approach in battle. I think combat done this way would be much more fun.

Pin-point accuracy of turrets isn't a problem which this system is trying to solve.

Lets hope the combat gets fixed over time but still, how would targetting systems over just the core be logical or efficient. You could just cripple the main thing of the ship and afterwards just take any remaining threats from range or just go for the turrets like the system does now already. The stations wouldn't be taken out or it would be unlogical to take out unless all turrets or the main bit would be connected to 1 station and NEED it to function. What would create massive downsides again for the interiors.

Set predesigns? If someone wants to have fully functional interior, according to this suggestion, he needs:

• beds/cryopads, stations, crew
• corridors which are connected and are leading to the core room
• corridors leading to big turrets for turrets to have un-nerf
• other functional blocks for astronaut mode

I don't think it's much and all of these (at least for me) makes perfect sense that combined make fully functional interior of the ship.
Corridors connected to one big web makes it easier for invaders to capture the ship (which could be nearly impossible without this requirement) and to some degree forbid abusing the system by building multiple, disconnected 2x2x2 rooms with beds and stations.

I've mentioned additional functional blocks in the OP because they are pretty important at making functional interior, although they would most likely get implemented anyway.

Anyway, i think that our disagreement is mostly based on different opinions about impact of the interiors on the ship.
And i can say it with full belief that interiors so far are always useless and even implementing more functional blocks, oxygen system, or changing HP mechanism would make them only slightly less useless, but players want them to have actual purpose in game.

Implementing this system have few benefits and i don't know, about 1 drawback in form of some need to change build of the ship and recruit the crew.

As much as I want functional blocks, I really do, I keep thinking about what if they look ugly for players interior designs and the impact they would have on creativity? All medbays would look basicly the same for example.

And yes the disagreement is us both having different views on interiors.

 

[Vyor]

Care to explain that? The decorative blocks needed for an interior add nothing to the stats, while adding mass. In other words, once you add RP to a ship, it takes away from mass that could be used for systems.

Wow... 200 blocks... what am I ever going to do on my 1,000,000 block titan? Let me put that in perspective for you...

200/1,000,000=0.0002 or 0.002%

That won't do anything towards overall stats... replacing those with shields won't do much. Replacing them with anything won't do anything.

 

[Visitor]

Wow... 200 blocks... what am I ever going to do on my 1,000,000 block titan? Let me put that in perspective for you...

200/1,000,000=0.0002 or 0.002%

That won't do anything towards overall stats... replacing those with shields won't do much. Replacing them with anything won't do anything.

This is a viable point, here. And one which would be a good foundation for underlining importance of an idea regarding size of interior/crew quarters facilities depending on number of necessary crew members who in turn would be dependant on the size of the vessel, thus making requirements scale properly. As per suggestions like such and the discussion following.

 

[Vyor]

This is a viable point, here. And one which would be a good foundation for underlining importance of an idea regarding size of interior/crew quarters facilities depending on number of necessary crew members who in turn would be dependant on the size of the vessel, thus making requirements scale properly. As per suggestions like such and the discussion following.

You would need 1000x those 200 blocks(20,000 blocks) to make any difference... even then, it's only 2%... any suggestion involving buffs have to consider how much you are actually losing... the answer is, not much. Any suggestion that gives more than that tiny percentage in stats is too much. Even at 10,000x that number of blocks(200,000 blocks) you are only at 20%, no one has that many decoration blocks. If you require that many it stifles creativity. This is the only scale at which any buff would be useful...

 

[Visitor]

It really depends on the values of buff vs how much of whatever blocks would provide and possibly - in relation to the discussion linked - how necessary NPC-derived buffs would be for proper ship functioning (arguably not befitting to be called 'buff' anymore, but let's keep it for simplicity).

If, hypothetically, completely unbuffed ships would operate only at 25% of maximal potential performance, then it would be a big difference no matter if the ship's size in dozens of thousands or millions of blocks. Of course, your point will still be standing, at least to a degree, as effect on ship's stats will still depend on different use of relatively small amount of blocks and will be more of a matter of NPCs than use of space (a thing which belongs to said linked thread rather than here).

However, it's partially the point - I don't really think that designs have to be completely changed and ships have to be completely hollow inside with rooms and corridors. Those rooms and corridors may be necessary for NPCs which, if properly implemented in a way that would make them not the most easily acquirable, would be balancing factor in itself - again, depending how implemented (though I do believe interiors and need for NPC should scale with overall size of the ship), which is a good enough.

If corridors themselves will help with balance in case of some types of ships, that's all the better - what's important is that ships in general will have some internal living space - some more, some less - possibly upping the server-wise level of intelligence of design and aesthetics, creating difference between designs of vessels of different sizes (instead of promoting just slapping more blocks on simple design of an ugly fighter) and - even if lesser than some expect - positive effect on balance, a thing which is always a step in the right direction.

 

[Vyor]

It really depends on the values of buff vs how much of whatever blocks would provide and possibly - in relation to the discussion linked - how necessary NPC-derived buffs would be for proper ship functioning (arguably not befitting to be called 'buff' anymore, but let's keep it for simplicity).

If, hypothetically, completely unbuffed ships would operate only at 25% of maximal potential performance, then it would be a big difference no matter if the ship's size in dozens of thousands or millions of blocks. Of course, your point will still be standing, at least to a degree, as effect on ship's stats will still depend on different use of relatively small amount of blocks and will be more of a matter of NPCs than use of space (a thing which belongs to said linked thread rather than here).

However, it's partially the point - I don't really think that designs have to be completely changed and ships have to be completely hollow inside with rooms and corridors. Those rooms and corridors may be necessary for NPCs which, if properly implemented in a way that would make them not the most easily acquirable, would be balancing factor in itself - again, depending how implemented (though I do believe interiors and need for NPC should scale with overall size of the ship), which is a good enough.

If corridors themselves will help with balance in case of some types of ships, that's all the better - what's important is that ships in general will have some internal living space - some more, some less - possibly upping the server-wise level of intelligence of design and aesthetics, creating difference between designs of vessels of different sizes (instead of promoting just slapping more blocks on simple design of an ugly fighter) and - even if lesser than some expect - positive effect on balance, a thing which is always a step in the right direction.

But this can be exploited! Look at some of war dogs solutions. This doesn't do anything, it just gives percentage boosts(has to or else it would either be broken, or OP), which means that packed ships would be even more powerful than not packed ships. It doesn't help anything.

 

[Visitor]

But this can be exploited! Look at some of war dogs solutions. This doesn't do anything, it just gives percentage boosts(has to or else it would either be broken, or OP), which means that packed ships would be even more powerful than not packed ships. It doesn't help anything.

Actually, I'd have to refer you to that thread mentioned. The idea is that rooms, interior and NPCs living in it providing buff would be a standard thing on a ship and the only way for bigger ships to optimally use all their potential. With maximal value of the buff that can be provided to avoid exploit in 'opposite direction' ships packed with full complement of personnel being more powerful than those simply with blocks would be kind of the point as without those NPCs who have access to both facilities and crew quarters, the ships would suffer.

 

[Vyor]

Actually, I'd have to refer you to that thread mentioned. The idea is that rooms, interior and NPCs living in it providing buff would be a standard thing on a ship and the only way for bigger ships to optimally use all their potential. With maximal value of the buff that can be provided to avoid exploit in 'opposite direction' ships packed with full complement of personnel being more powerful than those simply with blocks would be kind of the point as without those NPCs who have access to both facilities and crew quarters, the ships would suffer.

Again, exploitable. Look at some of War Dog 's diagrams.

 

[Visitor]

Again, exploitable. Look at some of War Dog 's diagrams.

I've checked all posts the user has associated with his account to date (wasn't that hard, at this moment it means 23 of them). There are no diagrams that would show exacerbated exploitation of the idea (in fact, I saw no real diagrams connected to the issue at all, only screenshots of simple quarter design with bad looking tileset for Dwarf Fortress) that would break the borders of what's assumed to work by this thread and the one created by WarSong.

Please provide a more detailed explanation or link to a diagram that actually shows the idea wouldn't work at all as what War Dog pointed out so far as possible issues is still, while understandable and proving that the implementation wouldn't be a smooth ride, well within considerations of aforementioned ideas.

 

[Vyor]

I've checked all posts the user has associated with his account to date (wasn't that hard, at this moment it means 23 of them). There are no diagrams that would show exacerbated exploitation of the idea (in fact, I saw no real diagrams connected to the issue at all, only screenshots of simple quarter design with bad looking tileset for Dwarf Fortress) that would break the borders of what's assumed to work by this thread and the one created by WarSong.

Please provide a more detailed explanation or link to a diagram that actually shows the idea wouldn't work at all as what War Dog pointed out so far as possible issues is still, while understandable and proving that the implementation wouldn't be a smooth ride, well within considerations of aforementioned ideas.

It is to show how easily it can be broken. That is what those diagrams show.

 

[Aecetym]

Please provide a more detailed explanation or link to a diagram that actually shows the idea wouldn't work at all as what War Dog pointed out so far as possible issues is still, while understandable and proving that the implementation wouldn't be a smooth ride, well within considerations of aforementioned ideas.

Page 5 post 83
The image got replace by a link so it's harder to find
Anyway here are War Dog's diagrams. (Or at least I think this is what was meant)

 

[arrowwolf2]

Yes, you can build them in small grouping. But if your shield go down there will be more dead crewmember, destroyed stations and more debuff. Also the crew needs room to work so if there are too many crew than that members that they will not get full buff that a bug ship would have, because they all cannot work on the same station

 

[Aecetym]

Yes, you can build them in small grouping. But if your shield go down there will be more dead crewmember, destroyed stations and more debuff. Also the crew needs room to work so if there are too many crew than that members that they will not get full buff that a bug ship would have, because they all cannot work on the same station

The thing is, when your shields go down, so do you. Hull won't stop the incoming AMC/missile spam.

Follow the logic of the thread, more interior is only a downside. So by that logic you want everything on a as small as possible space yet getting all the benifits for it. This would end up in as small as possible corridors and all the needed space and items very close together.

 

[Vyor]

Yes, you can build them in small grouping. But if your shield go down there will be more dead crewmember, destroyed stations and more debuff. Also the crew needs room to work so if there are too many crew than that members that they will not get full buff that a bug ship would have, because they all cannot work on the same station

That is why you build them deep in the ship.

Aecetym Exactly the ones I was thinking of.

 

[Visitor]

It is to show how easily it can be broken. That is what those diagrams show.

I saw Dwarf-Fortress-Minimalistic-Rooms-With-Crude-Tileset screens as I've said and I still don't see the problem. Yes, the interior can be minimized, yes, it can be made crappy but effective and thus when it comes to combat - superior in comparison with beautiful hallways and internal squares. Funnily enough, it's still fine.

It still doesn't change the fact that it would be a step over solid ship full of blocks with cramped nook for the pilot, that the feature will encourage creation of interiors, that those who will decide to make some interiors - preferably ones better-looking than ones you refer to (that's a shabby looking and rather unoriginal for DF living complex and I am willing to say so) won't be at disadvantage to rather thoughtless designs of 'let's pile a lot of blocks' (quite the opposite) and that such kind of maximum-efficiency design won't be much of an exploit if there will be maximum value for a buff (that in turn will be dependant on morale which will require more sensible quarters) - and if that buff will be marking big percentage of overall combat effectiveness, bottom line - simplistic quarters designs won't provide overly much of an advantage.

Sure, it won't be too hard to create utilitarian hive interior design to balance possible gains with the space used, here.

But that's okay.

Like I wrote before, the idea - from my point of view - is to allow certain alternatives in design, especially to the design depending on creating solid piles of blocks, to 'even out the field', so to speak, not to simply punish those who prefer to make maximum efficiency warships. They should have still have an advantage but with this idea implemented, the advantage will be smaller and different interior designs - viable, allowing more variation than it is now.

Now, possible variety of effective designs and differences between different types of designs may be questioned as it still depends on how balanced the stats themselves would be. For all the other above advantages of the idea, developers would have to mess up somewhat to make them not viable. That taken into consideration, I maintain my earlier stance - I believe that while the idea for the sake of balance alone may not be as revolutionary as some may think, with all other changes incorporated it'd be a good and very enjoyable thing to have and of certain satisfaction to those who don't play the game for the sake of piling blocks to destroy blocks of others - an important thing given that it seems that there's considerable number of such players.

 

[Vyor]

I saw Dwarf-Fortress-Minimalistic-Rooms-With-Crude-Tileset screens as I've said and I still don't see the problem. Yes, the interior can be minimized, yes, it can be made crappy but effective and thus when it comes to combat - superior in comparison with beautiful hallways and internal squares. Funnily enough, it's still fine.

It still doesn't change the fact that it would be a step over solid ship full of blocks with cramped nook for the pilot, that the feature will encourage creation of interiors, that those who will decide to make some interiors - preferably ones better-looking than ones you refer to (that's a shabby looking and rather unoriginal for DF living complex and I am willing to say so) won't be at disadvantage to rather thoughtless designs of 'let's pile a lot of blocks' (quite the opposite) and that such kind of maximum-efficiency design won't be much of an exploit if there will be maximum value for a buff (that in turn will be dependant on morale which will require more sensible quarters) - and if that buff will be marking big percentage of overall combat effectiveness, bottom line - simplistic quarters designs won't provide overly much of an advantage.

Sure, it won't be too hard to create utilitarian hive interior design to balance possible gains with the space used, here.

But that's okay.

Like I wrote before, the idea - from my point of view - is to allow certain alternatives in design, especially to the design depending on creating solid piles of blocks, to 'even out the field', so to speak, not to simply punish those who prefer to make maximum efficiency warships. They should have still have an advantage but with this idea implemented, the advantage will be smaller and different interior designs - viable, allowing more variation than it is now.

Now, possible variety of effective designs and differences between different types of designs may be questioned as it still depends on how balanced the stats themselves would be. For all the other above advantages of the idea, developers would have to mess up somewhat to make them not viable. That taken into consideration, I maintain my earlier stance - I believe that while the idea for the sake of balance alone may not be as revolutionary as some may think, with all other changes incorporated it'd be a good and very enjoyable thing to have and of certain satisfaction to those who don't play the game for the sake of piling blocks to destroy blocks of others - an important thing given that it seems that there's considerable number of such players.

Spoiler: rude macro...you have been warned

 

[Lecic]

Because an image macro is a great way to prove your point and not make you look like a fool.

 

[Syzygy]

I was fine with them adding NPCs, but afraid because it might lead to something like this. This makes ships have to be sized and designed right, and people can be less creative with the sizes of the ships they make. Don't add this.

 

[Lecic]

I was fine with them adding NPCs, but afraid because it might lead to something like this. This makes ships have to be sized and designed right, and people can be less creative with the sizes of the ships they make. Don't add this.

No, it makes the game more creative, because people can design creative interiors and still derive use from them. You don't need to make an interior, you'll just lose out on any buffs manned stations might give you.

By your logic, any rules in this game force people to be less creative with their ships. If I want the best power, I need to build a reactor that doesn't fit into my original design. If I want to hold more power, I need to make a big block of power tanks. If I want the best thrusters I need to specifically design my engines for them the best way possible!

 

[Syzygy]

Yes, it is dumb that you have to make a big cross with engines to be more efficient, instead of designing a good looking engine at the back. People aren't going to build "better looking" quarters for their crew if it is added. They will make minimum required for functionality if that is what they did before. You absolutely cannot make a "more creative" design be better in functionality, and that would hurt the less creative of us if it were possible. You would force people to make ugly crew quarters on ships, when they could have had a simple, better looking interior without them. People who already want to make good designed interiors have to accept efficiency loss either way, so why force people to make garbage, out of place, interiors on their ships? This game requires either efficiency, or looks. Its a compromise. Trying to make it not a compromise just breaks things.