Reason for having an interior

[Syzygy]

There isn't any way to record and share a ship layout, other than screen recording which uses an external program. A game whose success requires external programs is not a good game.

What makes you think that there is only one use for NPCs? Why do they have to be tied to ship systems? There is a lot that could be done, but the suggestion of making interiors required is a step away from sandbox. Requirements don't add possibilities, they remove them. Stop pretending they add thing unless you can actually give something feasible that is added and not already present.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

What makes you think that there is only one use for NPCs? Why do they have to be tied to ship systems? There is a lot that could be done, but the suggestion of making interiors required is a step away from sandbox. Requirements don't add possibilities, they remove them. Stop pretending they add thing unless you can actually give something feasible that is added and not already present.

There is a requirement for energy to use thrusters, requirement for shield blocks to have shield, money to buy things and ores to craft.
We could just have an all-time creative mode with access to any amount of every block and with ability to adjust ship's stats as we like, but would it really be fun?
Requirements does not mean that the game isn't sandbox, it just mean we will get something, once we fulfilled some of them. The key here is to make requirements logical, what usually mean - based on the real world.
Requirement of the crew for our ship to make it more effective is logical.


And NPCs may have more uses - working at stations, defending the ship, healing crew members, repairing the ship and manning the turrets. Just the most important one for the bigger ships (imo) is to work on the systems of the ship, making them more effective.

 

[Syzygy]

There is a requirement for energy to use thrusters, requirement for shield blocks to have shield, money to buy things and ores to craft.
We could just have an all-time creative mode with access to any amount of every block and with ability to adjust ship's stats as we like, but would it really be fun?
Requirements does not mean that the game isn't sandbox, it just mean we will get something, once we fulfilled some of them. The key here is to make requirements logical, what usually mean - based on the real world.
Requirement of the crew for our ship to make it more effective is logical.


And NPCs may have more uses - working at stations, defending the ship, healing crew members, repairing the ship and manning the turrets. Just the most important one for the bigger ships (imo) is to work on the systems of the ship, making them more effective.

None of those are requirements. You can give yourself materials. There are build servers. But you can also choose not to do that. They aren't requirements, but options. But if you make people require making crew quarters, it isn't an option. You wont be able to pvp effectively without building crew quarters. There isn't a point in building ships a certain way anymore.
It isn't a simple server tweak, it is a complete game-changing thing and can't be passed of as a server option. For this to be optional, it should be requested as a mod.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

I've told You already that thresholds for this system could be very easily changed. If anyone wouldn't like to have this system, then he may change them for the levels like 10 billion, so it would be very hard to get to the point that any of these stats would be overcame.

Basically there should be 3 variables:

• basic threshold
• % of the debuff of the stats after the threshold
• how much buffing each station provide

Changing first 2 to either ridiculously high number (1st variable) or to 0% (2nd) would change this system to completely useless on the server.

And i don't know why You keep saying that players would be forced to build interiors. It's all about balancing these variables, if i.e. % of the debuff would be at 10-20% then stats of the ships with and without the interior wouldn't be much different, therefore ships without the interior wouldn't be much crippled.

 

[ltmauve]

None of those are requirements. You can give yourself materials. There are build servers. But you can also choose not to do that. They aren't requirements, but options. But if you make people require making crew quarters, it isn't an option. You wont be able to pvp effectively without building crew quarters. There isn't a point in building ships a certain way anymore.
It isn't a simple server tweak, it is a complete game-changing thing and can't be passed of as a server option. For this to be optional, it should be requested as a mod.

Energy for thrusters isn't a requirement? You can have shields without shield blocks?
Think of it this way: if larger ships didn't have reduced turning rates, turrets wouldn't be necessary. However, turrets are basically a buff to turning rate that allow larger ships to handle smaller ones. You don't NEED to have turrets, but it makes a lot of sense to do that. It is a perfectly logical reason.
Also, your comment about espionage requiring a video capture system doesn't make sense either. There are other methods of recording layouts, like writing it down on paper.

 

[Syzygy]

I've told You already that thresholds for this system could be very easily changed. If anyone wouldn't like to have this system, then he may change them for the levels like 10 billion, so it would be very hard to get to the point that any of these stats would be overcame.

Basically there should be 3 variables:

• basic threshold
• % of the debuff of the stats after the threshold
• how much buffing each station provide

Changing first 2 to either ridiculously high number (1st variable) or to 0% (2nd) would change this system to completely useless on the server.

And i don't know why You keep saying that players would be forced to build interiors. It's all about balancing these variables, if i.e. % of the debuff would be at 10-20% then stats of the ships with and without the interior wouldn't be much different, therefore ships without the interior wouldn't be much crippled.

This isn't something that is easy to balance. You will get to a point where people will say it isn't turned up enough, and people that says it is turned up too much. It's just a source of complaint. If you turn it up enough to not have people say it is overpowered, it is useless. If you wanted to buy a game for $60 and had $10, getting $10 more doesn't let you have partial fun with the game. You still get nothing. If they aren't powerful enough, decent interiors are still only going to be made by people who made them in the first place. If you turn it up enough that you don't get hardly any people saying it isn't strong enough, people who normally wouldn't want one for combat efficiency are essentially forced to build dumb looking interiors. You might say you balanced it just right, I would disagree. I might have to leave my favorite server so I can build the way I want, and not be able to find one I think is balanced, and that actually has other people on it since they will think it isn't. You can't make it so that it is objectively balanced.

 

[Lecic]

This isn't something that is easy to balance. You will get to a point where people will say it isn't turned up enough, and people that says it is turned up too much. It's just a source of complaint. If you turn it up enough to not have people say it is overpowered, it is useless. If you wanted to buy a game for $60 and had $10, getting $10 more doesn't let you have partial fun with the game. You still get nothing. If they aren't powerful enough, decent interiors are still only going to be made by people who made them in the first place. If you turn it up enough that you don't get hardly any people saying it isn't strong enough, people who normally wouldn't want one for combat efficiency are essentially forced to build dumb looking interiors. You might say you balanced it just right, I would disagree. I might have to leave my favorite server so I can build the way I want, and not be able to find one I think is balanced, and that actually has other people on it since they will think it isn't. You can't make it so that it is objectively balanced.

If you favorite server decides to set the settings to something you don't like, it's time to find a new server, or get used to it. If everyone else likes something, they shouldn't have to bend away from that for one person. And anyway, the final decision on those kinds of things goes down to the owner.

Letting players choose the numbers on a per server / singleplayer game basis when the community as a whole can't agree on it is the best balancing I can think of.

 

[Vyor]

If you favorite server decides to set the settings to something you don't like, it's time to find a new server, or get used to it. If everyone else likes something, they shouldn't have to bend away from that for one person. And anyway, the final decision on those kinds of things goes down to the owner.

Letting players choose the numbers on a per server / singleplayer game basis when the community as a whole can't agree on it is the best balancing I can think of.

I don't think you know the first thing about balance... Cost is the simplest way to balance something, a diamond sword is the most expensive thing in minecraft, but it is also the most powerful, the M290-Cain is the most powerful gun in a shooter ever but you can only fire 1 to 2 times, and a tiger tank is one of the most heavily armored tanks ever deployed but they are prohibitively expensive, these are all costs. Next you have counter strategies, how do you counter this new way to optimize? And don't say getting on a ship and spying... a turret near the only entrance kills that plan and you. Now you have the most important part, can this be exploited? Yes it can be... and very much so... A few thousand blocks isn't going to make much of a difference(IE stuffed ships), maybe a few hundred extra damage to guns, a bit more turn speed, or a few thousand shields... until you buff it with a 10-20% boost... this puts it even further ahead than it would have been, even for those that utilize this mechanic(basic math FTW). This doesn't fix anything.

Oh, and what would you suggest? The completely organic boost of stuffing your hull with stat blocks for giving you more numbers? News flash, there will ALWAYS be an optimal way to build.

on organic stats:
It is organic because you need to get the money to get those stat blocks. You earn this money and can spend it on those stat blocks. That is organic... Having an npc magically giving you a buff is not organic, it is arbitrary, and makes no sense(how would you figure this out while playing? Stat blocks are obvious, this would require a tutorial.


on optimal builds:
Tell that to starcraft. There is no optimal build because everything can be countered. Zerg rush? Marines in bunker. Battleships or carriers? There is a zerg unit nicknamed the carrier killer, there is a reason for that. Bunch of marines and flame guys(brain fart :P)? Ultralisks. Counter play is your friend when it comes to balance.

What about logic blocks? With those I can fire weapons while they fire weapons? Are you actually serious? You can already do that with this magical thing called being the pilot, and it just so happens to be a lot better in every single way.

WOW! How do you fire missiles while using AMCs(at the same time, no hotkeys, no pause)??? Please tell me your magic!

Energy for thrusters isn't a requirement? You can have shields without shield blocks?
Think of it this way: if larger ships didn't have reduced turning rates, turrets wouldn't be necessary. However, turrets are basically a buff to turning rate that allow larger ships to handle smaller ones. You don't NEED to have turrets, but it makes a lot of sense to do that. It is a perfectly logical reason.
Also, your comment about espionage requiring a video capture system doesn't make sense either. There are other methods of recording layouts, like writing it down on paper.

This is blatantly not true... Shield blocks are a cost, not a requirement. Even if big ships didn't have reduced turn speed they would still need turrets. Why? How do you shoot someone at 90 or 180 degree angles? You don't. How do you get on the ship when I have a turret in front of the door?

Requirements does not mean that the game isn't sandbox, it just mean we will get something, once we fulfilled some of them. The key here is to make requirements logical, what usually mean - based on the real world.
Requirement of the crew for our ship to make it more effective is logical.

This trope should fill you in on why that is wrong:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic

 

[Aecetym]

This discussion is getting a bit out of hand it seems. To much hostility from both sides, or that is what it looks like.

Anyway the thread started a bit on the wrong with it's basis. The idea that an interior is, no matter how big the interior is, a downside to have against ships that don't have one. And by that logic to 'balance' this you need to 'persuade' people into building them by giving them boosts.

Now obviously by the first 5 ish pages not everybody thinks of it that way. So people build interiors because they like them, not because they want any reward or boosts for them, except maybe a complement from a fellow builder but everybody likes that once a while. The people that don't just don't build them because they don't see the point of them (just a valid of a point as the other side).

Now obviously later on in the thread people started pointing out how this might be abused and how some will abuse it. Now the space an interiors takes on a ship has to be balance with the ship it's size, as do most posters agree with I think. Now coming more to the last posts, it's obvious the suggestion is fundamental broken.

It has gotten to the point that now because people can't agree on something the only option seems to just force it into the game. This by making it a server option and so causing even more potential problems with no fixes possible for them.

Instead of boosts and all that stuff, forcing people into building what they don't want, etc the thread should have tried to expand the idea of organizing things rather then 'balancing' things. I like the whole NPC's working and living on my ship aspect. I would love them controling my turrets if that would mean I could set them to do sertain things, killing 1 type of target rather then an other. For example letting the bigger turrets focus on bigger ships in range while the smaller once on closer fighter like threats, and if that isn't an option then focus on what is felt to shoot at. No need to put boosts if you could build a more orginized ship for spending a bit of space on you're crew.

On a side note:
The fact that this thread's poll has so many yes votes has to be taken with a grain of salt, a big grain. Most of the yes votes got achieved shortly after the OP was posted. Most players that did so never posted on the thread itself, most likely didn't think about the downsides of it all. After the first few counter posts the yes votes pretty much stopped, while the no votes only went up.

 

[Lecic]

I don't think you know the first thing about balance... Cost is the simplest way to balance something, a diamond sword is the most expensive thing in minecraft, but it is also the most powerful, the M290-Cain is the most powerful gun in a shooter ever but you can only fire 1 to 2 times, and a tiger tank is one of the most heavily armored tanks ever deployed but they are prohibitively expensive, these are all costs. Next you have counter strategies, how do you counter this new way to optimize? And don't say getting on a ship and spying... a turret near the only entrance kills that plan and you. Now you have the most important part, can this be exploited? Yes it can be... and very much so... A few thousand blocks isn't going to make much of a difference(IE stuffed ships), maybe a few hundred extra damage to guns, a bit more turn speed, or a few thousand shields... until you buff it with a 10-20% boost... this puts it even further ahead than it would have been, even for those that utilize this mechanic(basic math FTW). This doesn't fix anything.

Cost is not a balancing feature when the "expensive items" used to obtain them are actual very easy to obtain. Take diamonds for example, since you love bringing them up. You first diamond tools can be gotten in under 10 minutes, and your full diamond armor can be gotten within a few hours. Cost is not the only balancing feature that should be looked at. It is one of many things you use to make sure something is balanced.

Then, you talk about how it can be exploited. So? Every other thing can be exploited too. Cramped quarters aren't an exploit, they're a realistic thing to be expected on a space ship. Just take a quick look at any spaceship we've ever launched. If someone has the space left on a big ship to make the rooms a little nicer, then they can do what they want. Plenty of people put little fins and stuff on their ships that technically give them a slight disadvantage.

Anyway, a 10% or 20% boost is ridiculous. I'm shooting for a 1% to 5% boost, depending on the NPCs morale, species (if intelligent aliens you can hire ever become a thing), and number of people manning a station. IE, having two sad NPCs with both 1% boosts man the shields increases it by 2%.

on organic stats:
It is organic because you need to get the money to get those stat blocks. You earn this money and can spend it on those stat blocks. That is organic... Having an npc magically giving you a buff is not organic, it is arbitrary, and makes no sense(how would you figure this out while playing? Stat blocks are obvious, this would require a tutorial.

Having an NPC man a station to give it a boost makes perfect sense, and is completely organic. A person adding input and making sure the computer doesn't glitch out would improve its reliability, which would translate as a stat boost for our purposes. Unless you want there to be random computer glitches which cause systems to go down, needing NPCs to assist the computer, this is really the best way for NPCs to give boosts to a ship.

on optimal builds:
Tell that to starcraft. There is no optimal build because everything can be countered. Zerg rush? Marines in bunker. Battleships or carriers? There is a zerg unit nicknamed the carrier killer, there is a reason for that. Bunch of marines and flame guys(brain fart :p)? Ultralisks. Counter play is your friend when it comes to balance.

True, but the zerg rush is famous because it is so often optimal (and that people think it's kind of cheaty, but whatever).

Also, RTS's are the most heavily balanced games in existance. A better example would be a shooter, which you already touched on earlier. Shooters often have optimal loadouts, simply because certain designs are better than others. I don't see anyone complaining that the pistols in Call of Duty are weaker than the assault rifles.

WOW! How do you fire missiles while using AMCs(at the same time, no hotkeys, no pause)??? Please tell me your magic!

I'd take this seriously, but logic blocks can't really fire fast enough for the time switch between the two to matter, as well at the fact that logic blocks can only fire straight out of the barrel, with no aiming. So, unless those missiles are heat seekers and you've got a big Z-E-R-O docked ships on you, there isn't much point to this, especially since using missiles is all about timing.

This is blatantly not true... Shield blocks are a cost, not a requirement. Even if big ships didn't have reduced turn speed they would still need turrets. Why? How do you shoot someone at 90 or 180 degree angles? You don't. How do you get on the ship when I have a turret in front of the door?

Shields are what I'll call a forced option. You technically don't need to put them on your ship, but you'd be such a pile of junk that they really are. Shields are, in essence, a requirement for your ship, unless you happen to be building a little zoomer ship for fast but dangerous transport.

 

[Lecic]

This discussion is getting a bit out of hand it seems. To much hostility from both sides, or that is what it looks like.

Anyway the thread started a bit on the wrong with it's basis. The idea that an interior is, no matter how big the interior is, a downside to have against ships that don't hove one. And by that logic to 'balance' this you need to 'persuade' people into building them by giving them boosts.

Now obviously by the first 5 ish pages not everybody thinks of it that way. So people build interiors because they like them, not because they want any reward or boosts for them, except maybe a complement from a fellow builder but everybody likes that once a while. The people that don't just don't build them because they don't see the point of them (just a valid of a point as the other side).

Now obviously later on in the thread people started pointing out how this might be abused and how some will abuse it. Now the space an interiors takes on a ship has to be balance with the ship it's size, as do most posters agree with I think. Now coming more to the last posts, it's obvious the suggestion is fundamental broken.

It has gotten to the point that now because people can't agree on something the only option seems to just force it into the game. This by making it a server option and so causing even more potential problems with no fixes possible for them.

Instead of boosts and all that stuff, forcing people into building what they don't want, etc the thread should have tried to expand the idea of organizing things rather then 'balancing' things. I like the whole NPC's working and living on my ship aspect. I would love them controling my turrets if that would mean I could set them to do sertain things, killing 1 type of target rather then an other. For example letting the bigger turrets focus on bigger ships in range while the smaller once on closer fighter like threats, and if that isn't an option then focus on what is felt to shoot at. No need to put boosts if you could build a more orginized ship for spending a bit of space on you're crew.

On a side note:
The fact that this thread's poll has so many yes votes has to be taken with a grain of salt, a big grain. Most of the yes votes got achieved shortly after the OP was posted. Most players that did so never posted on the thread itself, most likely didn't think about the downsides of it all. After the first few counter posts the yes votes pretty much stopped, while the no votes only went up.

I want to build a ship without shields or engines, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them.

This is what the argument against needing interiors for your NPCs amounts to.

Designs for ships will need to change over time. This is how an alpha game works. Things change. Look at the weapons update. People are going to need to redesign their ships, because the old designs won't work as well anymore.

 

[Aecetym]

I want to build a ship without shields or engines, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them.

This is what the argument against needing interiors for your NPCs amounts to.

Designs for ships will need to change over time. This is how an alpha game works. Things change. Look at the weapons update. People are going to need to redesign their ships, because the old designs won't work as well anymore.

So basicly you want to just totally remove powerblocks, shield and etc and replace the with ...

Ships will be empty, surely the bigger ones very empty. Even for a guy like me that likes interiors with a passion still that is a lot of empty space and rooms.

Obvious questions here; How will things (still) work?

 

[Lecic]

So basicly you want to just totally remove powerblocks, shield and etc and replace the with ...

Ships will be empty, surely the bigger ones very empty. Even for a guy like me that likes interiors with a passion still that is a lot of empty space and rooms.

Obvious questions here; How will things (still) work?

Maybe you misread my statement. I was saying that "I want to build a ship without shields or engines, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them." is the equivalent of saying "I want to build a ship without interiors or crew, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them."

Obviously, a ship without vital components wouldn't work as well, which is what I'm saying here with NPCs, as they should be vital components on any larger ship.

 

[Aecetym]

Maybe you misread my statement. I was saying that "I want to build a ship without shields or engines, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them." is the equivalent of saying "I want to build a ship without interiors or crew, but I still want it to be equal to ships with them."

Obviously, a ship without vital components wouldn't work as well, which is what I'm saying here with NPCs, as they should be vital components on any larger ship.

Reread, did read a bit to quick. Tough day at work, somewhat tired.

Anyway I fully agree on the furter development of the NPC and it's roles on ships, just as I said in my post

Instead of boosts and all that stuff, forcing people into building what they don't want, etc the thread should have tried to expand the idea of organizing things rather then 'balancing' things. I like the whole NPC's working and living on my ship aspect. I would love them controling my turrets if that would mean I could set them to do sertain things, killing 1 type of target rather then an other. For example letting the bigger turrets focus on bigger ships in range while the smaller once on closer fighter like threats, and if that isn't an option then focus on what is felt to shoot at. No need to put boosts if you could build a more orginized ship for spending a bit of space on you're crew.

I would take a more organized ship while supporting an idea of interior over a ship with a forced interior for it to function.

I often notice that turrets that weren't able to shoot a target often would try to turn all directions in the hope of being able to shoot at it, just looks stupid. Or all turrets firing at a single small fighter that would never from any real threat to the ship rather then the much bigger ship flying behind it. If NPCs would allow more costumization of a ship and making it function in combat possibly better you would please both sides.

The interior guys would have a new shiny toy to play with and those against interior might change their minds and start doing it aswell, or not. This would leave only a win/win situation imo.

 

[Vyor]

Red bold text mine.

Cost is not a balancing feature when the "expensive items" used to obtain them are actual very easy to obtain. Take diamonds for example, since you love bringing them up. You first diamond tools can be gotten in under 10 minutes, and your full diamond armor can be gotten within a few hours. Cost is not the only balancing feature that should be looked at. It is one of many things you use to make sure something is balanced.

I have never gotten a diamond in ten minutes... So, ok, lets bring up something else. Time is a cost, is it not? So, how long does it take to get the M290-Cain in mass effect? A quarter of the way into the game right? How many times can you fire it? Once every couple of missions, if you get a decent amount of ammo. Both a way of balance through cost. Ammo is cost.



Then, you talk about how it can be exploited. So? Every other thing can be exploited too. Cramped quarters aren't an exploit, they're a realistic thing to be expected on a space ship. Just take a quick look at any spaceship we've ever launched. If someone has the space left on a big ship to make the rooms a little nicer, then they can do what they want. Plenty of people put little fins and stuff on their ships that technically give them a slight disadvantage.

So what you are saying is that people will build interiors anyway??? You know... our main objection to this???




Anyway, a 10% or 20% boost is ridiculous. I'm shooting for a 1% to 5% boost, depending on the NPCs morale, species (if intelligent aliens you can hire ever become a thing), and number of people manning a station. IE, having two sad NPCs with both 1% boosts man the shields increases it by 2%.


If you remember, my calculations showed that it would make ships that didn't use this at a severe disadvantage(you have barely a 1% difference in stats[based on mass]) .



Having an NPC man a station to give it a boost makes perfect sense, and is completely organic. A person adding input and making sure the computer doesn't glitch out would improve its reliability, which would translate as a stat boost for our purposes. Unless you want there to be random computer glitches which cause systems to go down, needing NPCs to assist the computer, this is really the best way for NPCs to give boosts to a ship.


No.... magic stat boosts are not organic. It would require a tutorial to explain, that is the opposite of organic.


True, but the zerg rush is famous because it is so often optimal (and that people think it's kind of cheaty, but whatever).


Except that it almost never works in high level play, that is because they can easily counter it.


Also, RTS's are the most heavily balanced games in existance. A better example would be a shooter, which you already touched on earlier. Shooters often have optimal loadouts, simply because certain designs are better than others. I don't see anyone complaining that the pistols in Call of Duty are weaker than the assault rifles.


One is a side arm, one is primary. You are only supposed to use the pistol in certain circumstances... besides the point, this just proves that you don't know what you are talking about... the pistols often do more DPS than assault rifles in CoD...


I'd take this seriously, but logic blocks can't really fire fast enough for the time switch between the two to matter, as well at the fact that logic blocks can only fire straight out of the barrel, with no aiming. So, unless those missiles are heat seekers and you've got a big Z-E-R-O docked ships on you, there isn't much point to this, especially since using missiles is all about timing.

I tend to remember a video showing a rapid fire missile launcher design using logic blocks... can't find the vid though :P



Shields are what I'll call a forced option. You technically don't need to put them on your ship, but you'd be such a pile of junk that they really are. Shields are, in essence, a requirement for your ship, unless you happen to be building a little zoomer ship for fast but dangerous transport.

No, again, they are a cost. You need something to do x. That is a cost.

 

[Vyor]

Reread, did read a bit to quick. Tough day at work, somewhat tired.

Anyway I fully agree on the furter development of the NPC and it's roles on ships, just as I said in my post



I would take a more organized ship while supporting an idea of interior over a ship with a forced interior for it to function.

I often notice that turrets that weren't able to shoot a target often would try to turn all directions in the hope of being able to shoot at it, just looks stupid. Or all turrets firing at a single small fighter that would never from any real threat to the ship rather then the much bigger ship flying behind it. If NPCs would allow more customization of a ship and making it function in combat possibly better you would please both sides.

The interior guys would have a new shiny toy to play with and those against interior might change their minds and start doing it aswell, or not. This would leave only a win/win situation imo.

I agree completely.

 

[Lecic]

Red bold text mine.

First off, please respond normally, so I can actually quote you, unless your intention is to try and "win" the argument by making me not want to bother responding.

I have never gotten a diamond in ten minutes... So, ok, lets bring up something else. Time is a cost, is it not? So, how long does it take to get the M290-Cain in mass effect? A quarter of the way into the game right? How many times can you fire it? Once every couple of missions, if you get a decent amount of ammo. Both a way of balance through cost. Ammo is cost.

While cost is an important balancing feature, you keep forgetting to really mention WHAT the cost you are balancing really is. The cost of the blocks put where an interior would be? The generic cost of any large ship? You haven't said what cost you are balancing actually is in forever, and even then it was kind of weak.

So what you are saying is that people will build interiors anyway??? You know... our main objection to this???

First off, I really hate this objection. You want to know why? It's like saying we won't need the ground vehicle cores, because people already build ground vehicles, or that we don't need the new hazard stripe or ice crystal partial blocks because people already added those themselves.

Next, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that people aren't going to build microsized crew quarters, they'll build nice looking ones, because they like having things look nice. This entire suggestion is so that people who build large, expansive interiors aren't at such a disadvantage as those that aren't. And don't give me that crap about hallways not mattering that much in terms of stats. Sure, on a vessel with short, thin hallways, maybe, but on a ship with a large hanger, nice hallways, and rooms, spaces that could be filling with hundreds or maybe even a few thousand shields or power.

If you remember, my calculations showed that it would make ships that didn't use this at a severe disadvantage(you have barely a 1% difference in stats[based on mass]) .

A twenty thousand (20,000) block ship, having just 1% of its space, presumably normally shield banks, taken away by interior instead would have two hundred (200) blocks taken up the interior, counting the space taken up by walls of the hallway. 200 blocks is capable of creating a 2x2 hallway with minimal interior hull plating 25 blocks long, which is an appropriate length hallway for a ship of that size, I would think. However, a basic ship interior is probably going to have at least 1 5x4x5 room (50 blocks) for computers, 1 5x5x5 (75 blocks) core room, and 1 4x5x5 crew quarters (100 blocks) (2 beds, with a personal plex storage next to each one, with no extra space), as well as numerous other rooms (plex storage, hanger, captain's quarters, bridge), which I decided not to mention because I felt I proved my point. Overall, these basic, minimal interiors I listed add up to four hundred twenty-five (425) blocks, which is 2.1% of a ship, far more than the under 1% you claim, even without additional rooms that most interiored ship have. On a ship with one thousand (1000) shield blocks, which is probably a bit of an understatement for a ship like this, that would gain the ship an additional 21 shield blocks. A ship with 1000 shield blocks vs 1021 shield blocks gives us 80,678 vs 81803, which is an additional ~1,100 damage the ship could take. So, ask yourself again, is it really a forced choice to use NPCs if this was added with a 1%-5% boost on a system?

Also, I'd like to bring up a topic that might get me some flak (on top of what I already get from Vyor).
What if you could also hire robotic crew members powered by a BobbyAI or something of the likes? They'd always work at 1.2% efficiency,
as opposed to the fluctuating efficiency of human or alien crew based on their morale, and wouldn't require anything beyond passageways throughout the ship to work. However, they would need power to run, and while they would use a ship's energy while on board, if you took them off for away missions onto planets or other unpowered places, they would slowly drain away from their internal battery, and be forced to use their backup battery, which cuts movement speed to a quarter and prevents them from using weapons or anything. I was thinking a 10,000 capacity battery that drains at 5 e/s, meaning you could use them off ship for 2000s/33 ⅓min.

 

[Jack Caos]

sorry i was to lazy to read all the posts... BUT:

maybe we can have some kind of FTL ( the game) like mechanism (or a advanced version of that)

• if we asign a NPC to a ship he will be part of the crew now
• and with some crew lifesign checkerblock thing we could have the crew lifesigns displayed in the ships HUD
• somekind of functionality to call him to the bridge would be good, so you can
• asign him to a specific station by direct speach
• asignable stations would be what is now weapons computers, so we then need to have shieldcomputers, thrustercomputers, powergeneratorcomputers etc

Extendet features:

• Fact: the ship has a number of crewmen asigned to it, the work at stations
• if we now have a number of beds, equal to the number of crewmen -> moralebonus->more efficency
• if we have some kind of cantina -> moralebonus ->> more efficency
• 2 crewmen asigned to the same station->they have shifts now-> moraleboost for both of them -> more efficency

so it would be what was mentioned before:

• just the ship without crew -> it works somehow
• ship whith crew -> it works better
• ship with crew and stuff for them or more crew -> works like a charm (XD)

what do you think of this?

 

[Vyor]

First off, please respond normally, so I can actually quote you, unless your intention is to try and "win" the argument by making me not want to bother responding.

No, it was just simpler.

While cost is an important balancing feature, you keep forgetting to really mention WHAT the cost you are balancing really is. The cost of the blocks put where an interior would be? The generic cost of any large ship? You haven't said what cost you are balancing actually is in forever, and even then it was kind of weak.

Now you are ignoring entire posts... The blocks would be the cost

First off, I really hate this objection. You want to know why? It's like saying we won't need the ground vehicle cores, because people already build ground vehicles, or that we don't need the new hazard stripe or ice crystal partial blocks because people already added those themselves.

No... it's like saying that we don't need a new type of rock...

Next, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that people aren't going to build microsized crew quarters, they'll build nice looking ones, because they like having things look nice. This entire suggestion is so that people who build large, expansive interiors aren't at such a disadvantage as those that aren't. And don't give me that crap about hallways not mattering that much in terms of stats. Sure, on a vessel with short, thin hallways, maybe, but on a ship with a large hanger, nice hallways, and rooms, spaces that could be filling with hundreds or maybe even a few thousand shields or power.

Let me say this again, this time in big, bolded, red text...


PEOPLE ALREADY BUILD NICE INTERIORS!!!

A twenty thousand (20,000) block ship, having just 1% of its space, presumably normally shield banks, taken away by interior instead would have two hundred (200) blocks taken up the interior, counting the space taken up by walls of the hallway. 200 blocks is capable of creating a 2x2 hallway with minimal interior hull plating 25 blocks long, which is an appropriate length hallway for a ship of that size, I would think. However, a basic ship interior is probably going to have at least 1 5x4x5 room (50 blocks) for computers, 1 5x5x5 (75 blocks) core room, and 1 4x5x5 crew quarters (100 blocks) (2 beds, with a personal plex storage next to each one, with no extra space), as well as numerous other rooms (plex storage, hanger, captain's quarters, bridge), which I decided not to mention because I felt I proved my point. Overall, these basic, minimal interiors I listed add up to four hundred twenty-five (425) blocks, which is 2.1% of a ship, far more than the under 1% you claim, even without additional rooms that most interiored ship have. On a ship with one thousand (1000) shield blocks, which is probably a bit of an understatement for a ship like this, that would gain the ship an additional 21 shield blocks. A ship with 1000 shield blocks vs 1021 shield blocks gives us 80,678 vs 81803, which is an additional ~1,100 damage the ship could take. So, ask yourself again, is it really a forced choice to use NPCs if this was added with a 1%-5% boost on a system?

Wrong scale for a less than 1% difference... you are also not considering that with empty space, it no longer has 20,000 mass. The logical problems in this line of thought are so massive I could fly titans through them. If something has less mass, it will turn and accelerate faster, it will also be cheaper. You are also underestimating the amount of shield blocks, once you stop you will notice that the difference becomes much smaller. You are making less and less sense(along with ignoring important details so that you can look like you know what you are talking about, but so that anyone that is paying attention can see how wrong you are), just stop.

Also, I'd like to bring up a topic that might get me some flak (on top of what I already get from Vyor).
What if you could also hire robotic crew members powered by a BobbyAI or something of the likes? They'd always work at 1.2% efficiency,
as opposed to the fluctuating efficiency of human or alien crew based on their morale, and wouldn't require anything beyond passageways throughout the ship to work. However, they would need power to run, and while they would use a ship's energy while on board, if you took them off for away missions onto planets or other unpowered places, they would slowly drain away from their internal battery, and be forced to use their backup battery, which cuts movement speed to a quarter and prevents them from using weapons or anything. I was thinking a 10,000 capacity battery that drains at 5 e/s, meaning you could use them off ship for 2000s/33 ⅓min.

This has the exact same problems... but far more exacerbated.

 

[Lecic]

No, it was just simpler.

It was also ruder.

Now you are ignoring entire posts... The blocks would be the cost

You mean like the cost of hiring NPCs / finding and hiring alien NPCs / purchasing maintaining a robotic NPC?

No... it's like saying that we don't need a new type of rock...

Not really. A new rock type probably wouldn't be a major game changer, as most people don't use rocks for anything, except occasionally as cheap hull by new players. My example of the upcoming hovercraft was (in my opinion) a much better example, because it would affect the game as a whole much more.

Let me say this again, this time in big, bolded, red text...


PEOPLE ALREADY BUILD NICE INTERIORS!!!

Wow, thanks Captain Obvious. I had no idea.

The point of the suggestion is so that people who build nice ships with interiors don't lose points for not having a hull stuffed to the brim with shield blocks. People already build land vehicles, mechs, waterfalls, etc, but that doesn't mean that we don't have a need for hover cores, mech parts, and water physics.

Wrong scale for a less than 1% difference... you are also not considering that with empty space, it no longer has 20,000 mass. The logical problems in this line of thought are so massive I could fly titans through them. If something has less mass, it will turn and accelerate faster, it will also be cheaper. You are also underestimating the amount of shield blocks, once you stop you will notice that the difference becomes much smaller. You are making less and less sense(along with ignoring important details so that you can look like you know what you are talking about, but so that anyone that is paying attention can see how wrong you are), just stop.

Ships do not all have identical scales for interior : function blocks. If the ship you used for this was a capital with a 50x2x2 hallway and 2 small 5x5x5 rooms for the core and computers, and it gave you different numbers, that's hardly my fault. Actually, I'd like to know exactly what kind of ship you used for your calculations. Would you mind sharing?

My calculations were done with two ships with identical volume, both built with 20,000 BLOCKS, NOT MASS, with one then given an interior. For my assumptions and for simplicity, the ship is 25 wide, 15 tall, and 50 long, in the shape of a box.

If something has less mass, it does not turn faster. Only dimensions control turn speed.

The number of shield blocks was just a basic number for easy numbers sake. I am aware that the average 20,000 block ship has a bit more than 1000 shield blocks. I'm not an idiot.

What important details am I ignoring? You are the one making less and less sense in your arguments.

This has the exact same problems... but far more exacerbated.

How do robotic crew members have exacerbated problems? You don't have to deal with pesky things like building living facilities for your crew, just have a small room to house your computers. In fact, most ships already have a little room for all the weapons systems, even ones where the only other interior is a core room and a hallway.

I mean, your main argument against NPCs is the whole "forcing people to build interiors", which goes against the creative parts of the game. These would fit within the standard design most ships already have, unless you enter from a core on the outside of the ship, that is.

Also, one final question, and I'm going to put it in bold, blue, and make it larger to make sure you notice it...

What exactly do you think NPCs are going to do if you can't have them control stations and turrets?