So... It's apparently wrong that large ships with large cross sections catch more solar radiation than small ships with small cross sections.
Make a note of it, guys, you heard it from RabidBat first.
Larger internal space to heat up and dissipate the heat.
Explodey should be saved for meteors, i believe it was skylord luke that suggested hull melting, which would be alot more realistic.
As for the hostility of this thread, arent all topics like this? Doesnt help when sarcasm jumps in. Keep it to the topic and stop sniping at each other.
Internal space doesn't help with radiation. External surface area does, but external surface area also increases the amount of radiation one's ship takes in. The modern space shuttle doesn't maneuver with its main thruster - it has monopropellant for that, and monopropellant is freezing cold when expelled. The majority of the time that the modern space shuttle is thrusting, the majority of the heat is lost with the propellant, and much of the heat is removed via convection while in contact with the atmosphere of the planet. Burns to circularize orbits while already in vacuum are generally comparatively short, and take up sufficiently low amounts of time that they do not give the opportunity for connected components to melt (and rocket engine nozzles tend to have extremely high melting points)
Thruster burns are never continuous unless taking off from the atmosphere. Otherwise you need enormous radiator panels - and, indeed, the modern space shuttle does include radiator panels built into the internal cargo bay doors, which are sufficient for reducing heat over the very long periods of time inbetween usage of the main thrusters.
They still radiate heat in perfect vacuum, as EM frequencies(the glow of molten metal or other hot objects is those EM frequencies entering the visible spectrum). However, due to the surface/volume ratio, this effect is negligable at 'low' temparatures, when there are no large dedicated radiator surfaces on the outside.
However, my main point is: In relatity, assuming heat radiation is negligable, the temparature increase of an object near a star depends on the (exposed surface)/mass ratio. mass increases by a power of 3, surface by a power of 2, when scaling an object up. Thus, the larger the object, the more does this fraction decrease, and thus, the slower the temparature of the object rises. Thus, the object would take longer to reach a critical temparature. I agree, that larger objects should take more damage from stars, but that damage should not be proportional to mass, but proportional to mass^(2/3)
Internal space doesn't help with radiation. External surface area does, but external surface area also increases the amount of radiation one's ship takes in...
Would an additional bar representing heat be a better idea? Instead of 5secs before death? Surely you can see where the other side of this discussion is coming from
Imagine I'm a noob, I just spent 3 or more weeks building my first big ship. I'm excited to go and kick some arse and explore the universe. I put all my resources into this project, days of droning away mining planets (the most boring part of the game). Being new and ignorant I don't look at my navigation course before traveling, and bam I jump into range of a sun and can't get away in the complementary 5 seconds. RIP in peace all that work. Would I start over, or would I ragequit and go play a less punishing game?
The solution to this is extremely simple- teach newbs to not fly a ship they can't afford to lose in the tutorial. Have the player lose in a (rigged) battle in the tutorial and lose something expensive that can't be replaced.
Would an additional bar representing heat be a better idea? Instead of 5secs before death? Surely you can see where the other side of this discussion is coming from
Something like that would be pretty neato, tbh.
A heat mechanic would also greatly help with making a replacement reactor system, I think, to make ship design a little more intuitive and a lot less silly.
Ship heat too high would turn into reactor blocks and power capacitors exploding violently, or something, and even higher heat would result in conventional explosive missiles exploding in their tubes, and cannon and beam weapons melting into slag.
it was unforgiving before too where it would kill you as the astronaut with that bug, now it just kills your ship instead.
just watch where you fly and plan your jumping route properly?
People are already accepting the exploding and saying it's your ship's systems exploding.
hello
you should try to play elite dangerous, then you will know how unforgiving stars can be.
depends on how far in a star your ship was lost and if you were able to get enough stuff to get it out, and a noob would probably not know about the pull effect.
No of course it isn't, I was using Elite Dangerous as an example of unforgiving stars that would kill you in mere seconds if you were not careful.
Surely the sun damage should scale by distance, rabidbat was on the edge of the suns range and his pothole ship didnt fair to well, if it was aiming directly into the sun i wouldnt be worrying about getting it out with pull beams! Its gone haha
Surely the sun damage should scale by distance, rabidbat was on the edge of the suns range and his pothole ship didnt fair to well, if it was aiming directly into the sun i wouldnt be worrying about getting it out with pull beams! Its gone haha
Talk all you like about snazzy fleet dynamics and advanced off line controls. If I can send a mining ship to mine all the local asteroids and get two escort frigates to fly alongside me when I'm zipping about the universe, I will marry the entire dev team.
Why oh why was sun damage boosted and explosive added to boot? And it seems backwards that larger ships take more damage, I'd think a larger ship would be better protected.......
Suns seem to of been just fine at wrecking people who get too close already.
Man, would of rather seen Universe Simulation in it's current form working again in the patch than already deadly suns being made deadlier.
Hope the guns have a first person view and not just 3rd person, that would be a nice change.
Before the patch, I could fly through a star in my fighter and come out almost unhurt. That's through the center of the star. They were only a minor inconvenience unless you were going to park there for a while.
so are they going to move the shops that are too close to a star(yes this newb got nuked by an old sun while visiting a shop)what a pita to get my ship back.
I think coronas should kill ships quickly, but there should be a star-proximity area where you take less damage, and a warning that extends a sector or two beyond that.
(Fly in/out of stars with damping. Corona is bright, but see-through. Corona/surface damage the same(corona's hotter IRL), and further in you get fusion'd.)
Talk all you like about snazzy fleet dynamics and advanced off line controls. If I can send a mining ship to mine all the local asteroids and get two escort frigates to fly alongside me when I'm zipping about the universe, I will marry the entire dev team.
So... It's apparently wrong that large ships with large cross sections catch more solar radiation than small ships with small cross sections.
Make a note of it, guys, you heard it from RabidBat first.
Anyhow: Heat shielding should be extremely heavy (0.35 mass or so?) with very little armor value and relatively little HP for its mass, so as to balance it out. If you intend to use a star as a weapon against some dipshit that tries to follow you into its kill radius, there needs to be some sort of significant drawback, because seriously, stars are a lot more deadly than anything your ship can carry.
Also: Adding in a warning for border sectors on the edge of a star's kill radius would be good.
I don't think heat shields should be too bad. If they're that dumb, they get what they get. Though there is the dangerous possibility of players getting a free retreat/camp area.
(I think heat shields would be like shields, not armor. Perhaps even a strengthening effect?)
More damage for large ships, but less relative to their size. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law
Very basic physics, that is familiar, simple, and is not a barrier to gameplay or arcadey-ness.
(The common examples of why not to go with realism: calculation-heavy atmospheres, realistic fuel consumption, annoying "ship goes on forever", limiting players to lightspeed, planets that are computer-breakingly huge like real ones, etc.)
?-20xx mass should last about 2-3 minutes in the border area.
21xx-25,000, 4-10 minutes.
50,000+, 20-30 minutes.
(random thrown-out figures, depending heavily on desired average ship size, which varies wildly. Assuming no heat shields, and a moderate balance of systems. Note that the border area is well outside of the sun's atmosphere, which would probably eat mega-titans in less than 5 minutes. The atmosphere, at least of our sun, is hotter than its surface. This could be reversed for intuitiveness. I think it's best to keep it equal for balance of the two, and have the inner ~50% be an insta-melt.)
Talk all you like about snazzy fleet dynamics and advanced off line controls. If I can send a mining ship to mine all the local asteroids and get two escort frigates to fly alongside me when I'm zipping about the universe, I will marry the entire dev team.
Yeah, sure, but I somehow doubt that sending ships off to mine will be packaged in the initial releases... For now I think it's mostly for battle fleets.
Looking at the config, it seems we need to increase the minimum heat damage by a decent amount. It's now 100 damage while it should be between 1 000 - 10 000. That should make small ships receive more damage than they're getting now and make people think twice to go near a star in any ship.
The other issue is that damage is spread over all entities equally. Meaning that if you have a lot of docks, there's a big chance a dock will get damaged and your main ship will remain unscathed.
Prioritizing mass/block count should solve that.
Looking at the config, it seems we need to increase the minimum heat damage by a decent amount. It's now 100 damage while it should be between 1 000 - 10 000. That should make small ships receive more damage than they're getting now and make people think twice to go near a star in any ship.
The other issue is that damage is spread over all entities equally. Meaning that if you have a lot of docks, there's a big chance a dock will get damaged and your main ship will remain unscathed.
Prioritizing mass/block count should solve that.
For starters the 5 secs needs to be increased, with lag you can be taking damage before you know you are taking damage.
If damage is going to be increased even more in addition to the crazy stupid explosive effect then at the very least the jump auto-nav should disallow/"are you sure" paths that pass through the 'invisible on the map' damage zone (which needs addressing also IMO), we have such advanced tech and AI there is no reason that a nav computer would not warn of such things.
On the subject of heat shields:
IMHO heat shields should extend the time before taking damage but not by any stupid amount that allows someone to park in the corona.
Heat Shield idea: Heat shields should absorb heat then require a heat disappation time, think the reverse of damage shields without a recharge block where a bar fills *up* then begins to drop once you leave the damage zone. This would allow for some protection from corona incursions without allowing the sun to be used as a briar patch gambit.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
