Schines stance on Chain Drives?

[RabidBat]

Does anyone know and can they link me to any statements from the devs on their thoughts regarding using logic on jump drives.

Is using logic to automate jump drives intentional or a exploiting a glitch?

I know there are quite a few discussions on whether players feel they're legit or not, but what I am looking for is does Schine consider them so?
So please no personal opinions or debates on whether you feel they should be in the game or not as there are plenty of threads discussing it already.
I really only want the official point of view thanks.

 

[Az14el]

Unintentional to the best of my knowledge, no direct source on that

The way it spam loads sectors technically isn't much worse than a max efficiency jumper, but then its easy to copy/paste in, can be left on all day until they've loaded another 20 galaxies & obviously saves a massive amount of blocks on larger ships. Doubt it would have been intended mainly for that reason.

But for now it's heavily countered by jump drive inhibitors, and is seen by most (at least from what I've seen) to be a good stand in until there's some new/alt mechanic for long range jump travel as opposed to short intermittent jumps.

 

[RabidBat]

There exists a mechanic already for long range jumps.

<DistanceInSectors>8</DistanceInSectors> <--------Increase this setting.

I mean heck you can pretty much customise every system in the game via blockBehaviorConfig.xml

Thanks for the feedback though Az14el, hopefully a member of Schine can weigh in on the matter.
I always had the impression they were not fans of such systems, this is why scanners for example aren't automated but I am not wanting to make any assumptions.

 

[Jaaskinal]

I'd imagine it's somewhat intentional, due to it's inclusion. It'd be pretty easy to remove the ability to charge them completely, on schema's part. They even have fixed exploits with them in the past.

I don't have their words, but their actions make it seem like it's at least okay for now.

 

[RabidBat]

I'd imagine it's somewhat intentional, due to it's inclusion. It'd be pretty easy to remove the ability to charge them completely, on schema's part. They even have fixed exploits with them in the past.

I don't have their words, but their actions make it seem like it's at least okay for now.

Yeah I don't want to say just because you can do it that it is intentional. Games in development and as such anything in the game doesn't mean it should be.
Could very well be a bug that is yet to be squashed. Wouldn't be the first time things have been possible in the game but were not intended.
Kind of like being able to clip through walls, we can do it, but we know it's not meant to be that way for example.

There are quite a few things that can be done with logic that are easy to abuse and don't come off as being intentional due to how they break the gameplay and balance in StarMade.
Chain drives as well as some off shoot systems are being debated in our servers community at the moment and Schines input would be a massive help either way.

 

[Heillos]

Yeah I don't want to say just because you can do it that it is intentional. Games in development and as such anything in the game doesn't mean it should be.
Could very well be a bug that is yet to be squashed. Wouldn't be the first time things have been possible in the game but were not intended.
Kind of like being able to clip through walls, we can do it, but we know it's not meant to be that way for example.

There are quite a few things that can be done with logic that are easy to abuse and don't come off as being intentional due to how they break the gameplay and balance in StarMade.
Chain drives as well as some off shoot systems are being debated in our servers community at the moment and Schines input would be a massive help either way.

I think I need to reiterate on Jaas's behalf:

It'd be pretty easy to remove the ability to charge them completely, on schema's part. They even have fixed exploits with them in the past.

Although we lack an official stance, the nature of the fixes schema performed (fixing "instanced" drives, which were unstoppable except by other exploits, and charged instantly) indicate that he is able to remove the feature entirely. By engaging with some of the issues present but leaving the fundamentals intact, there is an implicit acknowledgement of the fact that, although presumably unintended, such methods are acceptable on the basis that the game has shitty 'fast' travel otherwise.

 

[Tydeth]

Schema fixed the exploit wherein logic drives can be instantly charged by a powerful enough series of signals (by making them only accept one signal at a time each, iirc), and forced logic charging any one drive computer to always be slower than selecting that same system and holding down the left mouse button. This was in direct response to the Z-Drive, a high-end "instanced" chaindrive referred to indirectly by Heillos.

So while we can charge multiple drive systems with logic, they're always slower (which makes them more vulnerable to inhibitors) than manual, and splitting them up to make a chaindrive means reduced modules per drive (making them even more vulnerable to inhibitors). Most chaindrives are 1 block, so even a 1 block inhibitor could shut them all down. Maybe a 2 block inhib, just to be sure.

 

[AndyP]

[...]
I really only want the official point of view thanks.

Unintentional to the best of my knowledge, no direct source on that
[...]

Thats fitting the situation the best.
Initially we wanted to limit the number of jump drives per structure, but that limits also many design ideas.
Discharging all drives on a jump is also not a good solution.

And that is the point where it gets complicated.

We are fine if a small ship has 10 jump drives and charges them all while docked to a station with huge power supply.
Undocking and then jumping 10 times in a row, to reach the next 'chargepad' would be totally fine.
We also do not want to limit the ability to charge them by logic, as this would give an unfair advantage to multi-manned ships that have more people pressing the button to charge.

We are not sure about the final solution to this, but it was intended as short range travel aid, while warpgates were meant for long range travel.
(Or the charge at station and jump-on-its-own without big power supply model would be fine)

So, having 10 jump drives, charge 9 at the same time and jump with one, in a round-robin system to do quick and infinite jumping is NOT intended. However we did not yet find a clever solution for the problem that would not limit the freedom in the use of it too much.

- Andy

 

[alterintel]

Thanks Andy

 

[RabidBat]

I don't think I have ever seen multi crew operated multiple jump drives on a single ship.
I honestly doubt a huge majority of solo players would be at a massive disadvantage if they couldn't use logic operated chain drives.

 

[Lecic]

I don't think I have ever seen multi crew operated multiple jump drives on a single ship.
I honestly doubt a huge majority of solo players would be at a massive disadvantage if they couldn't use logic operated chain drives.

Chain drives are pretty much the only way I can enjoy the game in its current state. Unless you dedicate a ridiculous portion of your ship to JDs, getting anywhere takes an incredibly long and boring amount of time. No one enjoys holding the left and right mouse button for 20+ minutes.

 

[Heillos]

Thats fitting the situation the best.
Initially we wanted to limit the number of jump drives per structure, but that limits also many design ideas.
Discharging all drives on a jump is also not a good solution.

And that is the point where it gets complicated.

We are fine if a small ship has 10 jump drives and charges them all while docked to a station with huge power supply.
Undocking and then jumping 10 times in a row, to reach the next 'chargepad' would be totally fine.
We also do not want to limit the ability to charge them by logic, as this would give an unfair advantage to multi-manned ships that have more people pressing the button to charge.

We are not sure about the final solution to this, but it was intended as short range travel aid, while warpgates were meant for long range travel.
(Or the charge at station and jump-on-its-own without big power supply model would be fine)

So, having 10 jump drives, charge 9 at the same time and jump with one, in a round-robin system to do quick and infinite jumping is NOT intended. However we did not yet find a clever solution for the problem that would not limit the freedom in the use of it too much.

- Andy

If warp-gates are to be useful as a long-range travel mechanic, they should have a far greater default range in config. The disadvantages (publically visible pathing, requirement for many highly-vulnerable nodes to travel far at all) make networks hard to maintain, in particular on PvP servers, which form the majority of popular servers.

In the long term, chain-drives should remain until a full FTL rework, primarily for the reason Lecic stated: the game is unbearably slow-paced, in terms of travel, without such use of mechanics.

I'd like to see the oft-proposed "hyperdrive" mechanic fill the same role as a continuous (but not instantaneous) travel mechanic, with jump drives becoming a high-energy-cost system for strategic maneuvering, especially of large, slow ships that can't reasonably operate a hyperdrive for long.

Alongside this, multiple jump drives might be discouraged by similar means to the "waffle-board" nerf; introducing a power multiplier per simultaneously-charging drive.

 

[alterintel]

If warp-gates are to be useful as a long-range travel mechanic, they should have a far greater default range in config

In Danger of going Off Topic from OP... but I would like to see Warp Gates not have a maximum range. The distance shouldn't matter.