Recognized Simple solution for a horrible problem

[Master_Artificer]

When the rail connection is "destroyed" it stays and overheats the docked entity chain above it.

It also removes or unlinks all logic blocks in the entity chain above it.

How about that?

 

[spunkiethefirst]

server config option "destructible rails"

enabled:

-upon rail destruction the docked entity flies off (how things are now)​

disabled:

-Upon destruction the rail remains in a damaged state, the docked entity maintains its position but logic on the docked entity (including downstream entities to prevent bypassing) is put in "stasis" (logic links maintained but no signals transfer which should disable clock swarmers and reactors), the rail no longer transmits power, the rail no longer allows movement of the docked entity, and the rail no longer accepts logic signals to change position or undock.​

-Players can not use arrow keys to transfer through damaged state rails.​

-turrets: Upon turret axis destruction that turret axis is locked in position, meaning killing the base turret axis removes rotation function but the downstream elevation function remains (barrel axis still functional). Power does not transfer through damaged state rails but turrets onboard power still functions as does its bobby ai.​

rail docker: Upon destruction of the rail docker, the docked entity can not move on rails, can not receive power through rails, can not dock magnetically or by rail docker beam, and for as long as it is docked with the rail docker in damaged state its logic will not transfer signal. This function only applies to the rail docker in damaged state undocking and redocking with an undamaged/backup rail docker will allow normal function.​

 

[ltmauve]

-snip-

Don't forget that shield transfer needs to stop.

 

[RODLON]

The original suggestion is pretty good. Just add that turrets will keep floating away as they don't usually get stuck and it's awesome to see turrets floating away.

server config option "destructible rails"

Logic systems of an entity can't be hold in stasis just because the docking broke. It makes no sense.
Also, logic signals are not transferred through rails/docks and each reactor can have its own login running onboard so the reactors would still working upon rail destruction... just like if they get undocked.

 

[Master_Artificer]

The original suggestion is pretty good. Just add that turrets will keep floating away as they don't usually get stuck and it's awesome to see turrets floating away.


Logic systems of an entity can't be hold in stasis just because the docking broke. It makes no sense.
Also, logic signals are not transferred through rails/docks and each reactor can have its own login running onboard so the reactors would still working upon rail destruction... just like if they get undocked.

I thought the purpose of this was to make sure they didnt continue to work.
When they undock (after the lag) they clip out and spin any direction, so now it is basically useless. Being attached to the ship and still functioning (despite some holes in it, yes), you are still getting a lot of power or shields from the thing, way more than if it had detached and the beam washed over you for like, maybe a second every minute as it slowly spins and drifts away.
It would be better and less cheaty to make the logic clocks on board the thing freeze up and not work rather than have a still functioning piece of equipment.

So shield sharing would stop, power sharing would stop, and the mothership would lose the benefits of the docked thrust.
You are basically now carrying around a dead weight instead of a lagbomb and that is a good tradeoff for using docked entities.

 

[RODLON]

I thought the purpose of this was to make sure they didnt continue to work.
When they undock (after the lag) they clip out and spin any direction, so now it is basically useless. Being attached to the ship and still functioning (despite some holes in it, yes), you are still getting a lot of power or shields from the thing, way more than if it had detached and the beam washed over you for like, maybe a second every minute as it slowly spins and drifts away.
It would be better and less cheaty to make the logic clocks on board the thing freeze up and not work rather than have a still functioning piece of equipment.

So shield sharing would stop, power sharing would stop, and the mothership would lose the benefits of the docked thrust.
You are basically now carrying around a dead weight instead of a lagbomb and that is a good tradeoff for using docked entities.

A docked reactor is independent of the ship. If you enclose a reactor inside the ship it would still working, except for the lag and the collision checks overload. Also the game don't know that is a docked reactor, maybe you have some system that only works when it gets undoked...

Edit: I think the point of this was to remove the lag they cause...

 

[Winterhome]

My suggestion:

Disable all collisions between the object being undocked and the parent ship (as well as all entities docked to the parent ship) - then forcibly eject the object being undocked.

 

[blalblagoo]

I think that redundant docking and collision damage could take care of this. If you had redundant docking where all docking point are keeping the reactor in place then having like 24 docking points on your reactor would make it so that the reactor would be shot to crap before it undocked. Plus if we make collision damage high enough a undocked reactor would rip itself apart. Another idea is to add when a core overheats, reactors blocks explode destroying themselves and the blocks touching them. (This might make salvaging ships hard so maybe have two stages of overheating stage:1 overheating ship can be rebooted /stage :2 destroyed with reactors exploding.)

 

[jayman38]

I think instant complete detonation (vanishing, until proper explosions are introduced) needs to be the solution to destroyed docking blocks. That's what you see in SciFi media. A lucky hit sets off a big explosion. This change would require that docking elements need to be better-protected by builders. It would be sad to see a lucky hit completely obliterate a turret, instead of allowing it to continue fighting, but you don't see continued fighting in ordinary Sci-Fi media normally. Turrets get blown up; they normally don't transform into fightercraft.

(Let me know if you know of a movie or TV show where turrets detach from the mothership and go fighting on their own. I would enjoy that.)

 

[Madman198237]

The big difference is that turrets in sci-fi are almost always non-self-contained. They rely on the mothership for ammo/power/mobility (In the form of horizontal or even vertical (I'm looking at you, oscillating turrets) traverse machinery....and often explode because they contain some ammo or stored energy or similar. That, and normal sci-fi has weapons that are far different and more powerful than ours. In Star Wars, a TIE Fighter can, with 2 laser cannon, each of which fit into a 2 cubic meter space, blow a fully shielded X-Wing to pieces in a single hit. In SM, that TIE fighter's never gonna hurt the X-Wing.

That said, I prefer the shielding mechanisms in the X-Wing series of books, where shields do something....up until the point they get shot off.

 

[Lukwan]

In Star Wars, a TIE Fighter can, with 2 laser cannon, each of which fit into a 2 cubic meter space, blow a fully shielded X-Wing to pieces in a single hit. In SM, that TIE fighter's never gonna hurt the X-Wing.

Fully shielded yes but some tactical genius in the rebellion ordered shields " Double-Front" to deal with the withering turret fire of the Deathstar. No TIE fighter could one-shot a Rebel star-fighter that had 'front & back' shields up (default).

 

[Madman198237]

Yes, but still. An armored (Yes, they have lightweight composite armor) X-Wing can still be blown to bits by a single TIE fighter shot. Don't even get me started on TIE fighters (Disposable piles of lightweight, useless materials, no shields, no hyperdrive, no care).

That said, TIE fighters can still disable or destroy shielded X-Wings (Happens in the X-Wing series. Shots can make it through the shields of an X-Wing (In a badly reduced state), and, if they hit something critical (Like R2-D2), can still disable or seriously impair the X-Wing.

 

[JonasWalker]

So we all know how much lag is created when reactors undock during a fight via destruction. This is currently a massive issue for servers, clients, and pvp itself. However hardly anyone has addressed the problem other than "make reactors go away! >".

The solution is simply to leave the docked reactors DOCKED, even after the rail docker is destroyed. These entities will still overheat while docked and will lose all shield value. Only rails will be included, not the turret axis or rotator. Reasoning behind this is that small ships can shoot off turrets giving an advantage. This tactic should still viable when this fix hits.

I think this is a very simple and realistic option to solve this problem that plagues PvP. Please tell me what you think.

The Dev's have the right idea in wanting to eventually get rid of docked tech in general vs onboard systems. The only reason why any of these quasi-exploits exist is because of fundamental problems with the underlying mechanics. Soft power cap currently means entities can only efficiently generate up to 2 Me/Sec, so you dock a ship whom is a flying reactor with power transfer beams let you get around it. Shield Regeneration is severely reduced under fire, so you dock a ship which is nothing but shield rechargers to get around it. Defensive Effect system size and power consumption are both determined by entity mass, so if you dock a hull to your ships core any defensive effects used for the 'hull' will be far cheaper for the same effect. I could go on but the point has been made that every attempted limitation due to alpha ship mechanics has been bypassed to some degree by "Slap a gear docker on it and call it steampunk Advanced Tech".

None of these hacky solutions address the actual issues making all this docked tech desirable and rather than strengthening said broken work-arounds I'd rather see the mechanics themselves fixed that are making them felt desirable in the first place. The game in the long run will be better off for having addressed them in preference to making the current bandages more sturdy over a festering wound. Plus to be blunt none of these solutions are exactly difficult to engineer to a functional degree, even I'm playing around with a few of these SP out of personal curiosity and I've only ever finished one ship. So the whole "advanced players' argument doesn't hold much water either since if I can manage it most any other player can as well.

 

[KuramaFox]

Yes, but still. An armored (Yes, they have lightweight composite armor) X-Wing can still be blown to bits by a single TIE fighter shot. Don't even get me started on TIE fighters (Disposable piles of lightweight, useless materials, no shields, no hyperdrive, no care).

That said, TIE fighters can still disable or destroy shielded X-Wings (Happens in the X-Wing series. Shots can make it through the shields of an X-Wing (In a badly reduced state), and, if they hit something critical (Like R2-D2), can still disable or seriously impair the X-Wing.

Star Wars weapons have a LOT of power behind them supposedly. Though I don't recall a Tie-Fighter ever doing any one-shots. They tend to fire a very rapid burst of separate shots in a row.

Its the X-wings that seem to have the one-shotters in most movie sequences.
.

 

[Madman198237]

X-Wings have far more powerful laser cannons than TIE Fighters, not to mention twice as many laser cannons.

I just wish we could pack that much firepower into the same amount of space.....

 

[Valiant70]

Please tell me what you think.

This would help a lot. I'd like to see this as a config option enabled by default.
[doublepost=1467907649,1467907526][/doublepost]

What about like, a push effect in the opposite direction of the ship's momentum, while making the undocked portion have no collision detection for a second or two? I suppose that might look wonky too.
MUH IMMERSION

It might be good to include something like that as an option.

 

[Edymnion]

Personally my preferred way of fixing the problem is to add a new Power Control Computer. Link generators to the computer like you do weapons. Put the power cap on the individual computer, not the ship as a whole.

So what you end up with is essentially the same concept as docked reactors, multiple self contained groupings generating power, but since they're not docked blowing them up doesn't cause lag.

And just like with a docked reactor, they have a single point of failure, the computer, which stops the entire array from working if you take it out.

 

[Valiant70]

Personally my preferred way of fixing the problem is to add a new Power Control Computer. Link generators to the computer like you do weapons. Put the power cap on the individual computer, not the ship as a whole.

So what you end up with is essentially the same concept as docked reactors, multiple self contained groupings generating power, but since they're not docked blowing them up doesn't cause lag.

And just like with a docked reactor, they have a single point of failure, the computer, which stops the entire array from working if you take it out.

The OP would help with all manner of docked entities, not just DPRs. We need a whole new power generation system but much of the community (and probably Schine) won't recognize this.

 

[Edymnion]

The OP would help with all manner of docked entities, not just DPRs. We need a whole new power generation system but much of the community (and probably Schine) won't recognize this.

Well, its only really an issue with entities that are docked inside of other entities, so really that only applies to docked generators and drones/shuttles at this point.

If we got some kind of modular docked fixed weapon system I would agree, but right now the actual applications that encounter the problem are pretty limited.

 

[Emporer88]

So we all know how much lag is created when reactors undock during a fight via destruction. This is currently a massive issue for servers, clients, and pvp itself. However hardly anyone has addressed the problem other than "make reactors go away! >".

The solution is simply to leave the docked reactors DOCKED, even after the rail docker is destroyed. These entities will still overheat while docked and will lose all shield value. Only rails will be included, not the turret axis or rotator. Reasoning behind this is that small ships can shoot off turrets giving an advantage. This tactic should still viable when this fix hits.

I think this is a very simple and realistic option to solve this problem that plagues PvP. Please tell me what you think.

make the power beams have a 50% to 75% inefficiency, that way people would not build "power bricks" and ships could be balanced better. power could still be given using the power beams but it would be used in certain Tactical or Logistical situations. there. fixed.