StarMade v0.199.214 Auxiliary Power, Better Graphics, Better Textures, and Bugfixes

[Criss]

I have yet to see another solution for docked reactors that wasn't essentially some form of what we have just implemented. This is over the course of at least, the last 6 months of time where discussions on the subject were taking place, and repeatedly brought up.

I will say this. If we are wrong, we need proof that somehow our intention (to remove lag, without removing the concept of auxiliary power sources) has failed. So, instead of immediately complaining that we don't like a feature, we should test it, in a server environment, for at least a little while. That is after all the point of alpha development. There is no defined solution to these problems because StarMade, along with other block-based space sims are relatively new. There are no formulas for success, and success requires trial and error.

 

[TrainDodger]

I've never used docked reactors, anyway. If I needed mondo power, I always just built bigger until I had upwards of 100 million e/sec in my giant, flying ding-dong compensator. These blocks are kinda interesting, actually, but I think the presentation is a little bit off. You call them "auxiliary reactors", but with their vulnerability, they come across as something more like a primary power source that must be guarded jealously, placed behind multiple layers of defense. I would rename the original Power Reactor Module as Power Generator Module and simply call the new blocks "Reactor" blocks.

 

[Maxajax]

Oh, so your rant about all the work and competence was not crying about your lost toys? My misunderstanding then.

The new system adds a layer of decision making and design choices and for all intends and purposes is very new. If you had a better idea that doesn't lead to giganticism, I would be interested in hearing it.

Yes, it would have been helpful if you had read through the entirety of the post, but I'm used to people not doing that, so I forgive you.

I've already given a suggestion multiple times. Instead of a global power softcap, give each individual group of power a softcap. Pick any amount that seems reasonable to your "Council". 2 million per group, 1 million per group, 500k per group, 250k group, anything at all, but not a power generating warhead block that has to be turned on.

 

[Gonzalo]

I respect this opinion greatly, and I think this was a bad move.

why??? it literally gives you a more powerful alternative to docked reactors and makes them a bajilion times less of a threat to performance. i refit a 15 k mass ship with them in under 5 minutes just now....

 

[kulbolen]

theyre less powerful for me, but the performance increase is worth it. it was just fun building all the crazy docked stuff and trying to improve it.

 

[Top 4ce]

Yes, it would have been helpful if you had read through the entirety of the post, but I'm used to people not doing that, so I forgive you.

I've already given a suggestion multiple times. Instead of a global power softcap, give each individual group of power a softcap. Pick any amount that seems reasonable to your "Council". 2 million per group, 1 million per group, 500k per group, 250k group, anything at all, but not a power generating warhead block that has to be turned on.

I did read your whole post, and it came across as salty, thus my response.

That suggestion would lead to giganticism, for the cap limit would be worthless. Might make some interesting power configurations, but it easily goes to "bigger=much better" and smaller crafts would be less useful, which exactly why we have the cap in the first place.

 

[Maxajax]

I have yet to see another solution for docked reactors that wasn't essentially some form of what we have just implemented. This is over the course of at least, the last 6 months of time where discussions on the subject were taking place, and repeatedly brought up.

I will say this. If we are wrong, we need proof that somehow our intention (to remove lag, without removing the concept of auxiliary power sources) has failed. So, instead of immediately complaining that we don't like a feature, we should test it, in a server environment, for at least a little while. That is after all the point of alpha development. There is no defined solution to these problems because StarMade, along with other block-based space sims are relatively new. There are no formulas for success, and success requires trial and error.

Well, I like the new weapons system. I liked the new docking system too. Both of those updates worked better than what was before, and increased the learning curve. My main beef with this update is that it is essentially just slapping chunks into a ship. The concept of these generators is fine, but why create a new block that explodes, when we could have simply used the number of power groups as a mechanic?

Yeah, removing docked reactors was long overdue, but now we've been set back to the same chunk stack mechanic that we had three years ago, except they now explode. A man on Teamspeak just oneshotted a ship with an astronaut pistol. Does that seem balanced to you?

 

[Ithirahad]

increased the learning curve

Do you really think that StarMade, of all games, needs MORE learning curve right now?

A man on Teamspeak just oneshotted a ship with an astronaut pistol. Does that seem balanced to you?

Considering how horrible a ship would have to be for that to happen... Yes.

 

[Maxajax]

I did read your whole post, and it came across as salty, thus my response.

That suggestion would lead to giganticism, for the cap limit would be worthless. Might make some interesting power configurations, but it easily goes to "bigger=much better" and smaller crafts would be less useful, which exactly why we have the cap in the first place.

So? Most servers that work properly have a size limit on their ships. The one that I play on adheres to one million. If I want to put more power axis trees into my ship, I have to take out power cap, shield regen, shield cap and thrusters.

Smaller craft became more useful than they used to be thanks to the Fleet System, as we can now direct them somewhere in droves, but what you have to understand is that the majority of the players on this game don't want to fly an Isanth.

 

[Comradecolonel]

This mechanic will obviously be tweaked as time goes on. If there were a better suggestion in play I could understand why people would be mad. There isn't and this is what we have for now. Any solution that reduced lag would have to be block based. There could have been some really complicated power mechanic but I don't really see the point in that unless you're intentionally making this game more obscure and confusing.

 

[Maxajax]

Do you really think that StarMade, of all games, needs MORE learning curve right now?



Considering how horrible a ship would have to be for that to happen... Yes.

You do know that if there's even a tiny bit of lag on a server, warhead torpedoes are liable to explode inside of a ship, bypassing the armour completely?

 

[AssIn9]

Um... how, exactly?

Using a large ship, and spawning in a small base when needed, powering using a set of docked reactors. Only thing in the base was the base only parts and ability of homebase.

 

[Maxajax]

This mechanic will obviously be tweaked as time goes on. If there were a better suggestion in play I could understand why people would be mad. There isn't and this is what we have for now. Any solution that reduced lag would have to be block based. There could have been some really complicated power mechanic but I don't really see the point in that unless you're intentionally making this game more obscure and confusing.

It ought to be tweaked. For starters the exploding problem could be fixed. I could teach a guy how to make a power axis tree or design a docked reactor in a day. I agree that this is easier, by a long shot, and causes less lag, but it is essentially a glorified warhead block.

 

[Top 4ce]

So? Most servers that work properly have a size limit on their ships. The one that I play on adheres to one million. If I want to put more power axis trees into my ship, I have to take out power cap, shield regen, shield cap and thrusters.

Smaller craft became more useful than they used to be thanks to the Fleet System, as we can now direct them somewhere in droves, but what you have to understand is that the majority of the players on this game don't want to fly an Isanth.

I do understand that. I also understand limitations create roles and challenge when building.

Your issues seem to be with power limitations, and the current answer to get past the cap. Test the new feature, find out what works and what doesn't, give feedback. Be glad you have a influence with design changes, and utilize it.

Throwing a fit because you don't like something that is very new and doesn't give you the easy way to get past the power limitation doesn't help, no matter how competent you think you might be.

Edit: Fixed you're to your lol

 

[Kingofanime]

I've been testing the new Auxillery Power blocks and I can't make sense of the math.

I have 9310 Auxillery Power blocks. My build mode screen says the auxillery power stores around 11,000,000 auxillery power, yet I'm able to fill a 27,000,000 power storage with it. And there are no power reactors on the entity. It dumps the whole auxillery tank in about 10 sec, so even if I add the 350,000e/s passive regen of the auxillery system I still can't figure out the math of how it fills a 27,000,000 power storage???????

 

[Ithirahad]

Power Auxiliary Systems continue providing regen once their internal storage is empty, just at a reduced rate.

 

[Drakkart]

What do you propose?


The majority of large entities that were causing server issues when they were separated - and the entities that would spend the most time bouncing around inside their chamber lagging the server to hell - were not turrets, not little fancy doors, not turret power-blocks - but docked power injection reactors. That problem is solved. And the behavior of docked reactors immediately losing their benefit for the ship once shot off is simulated by the explosions.

since any equally sized loose entity still would cause the same lag it is not solved.
What happened was that instead of just providing an alternative so people could adapt and we figure if it is a good one or not 4 blocks in the game got rendered useless a new block got introduced that explodes. the problems causing the lag still exist but other mechanics like missile turrets storing their power in the ship got killed as well.
So now how about we take a quick look in what schines job is.
Gamedevelopers put mechanics in the game in order to provide their players with options and possibilities.
It is not their job to kill options just because someone has an idea of how stuff could be handeled diferently.
It is also not their job to train their players to play in a way the game works. It is their job though to make the game work.
well the problem still exists so besides all the beautyfull changes and performance tweeks (sorry still had not read to that point) we have another update that causes frustration because people are without working ships.
It is about time schine stops rushing out stuff and makes drastic changes just to please the crowd.

 

[Maxajax]

I do understand that. I also understand limitations create roles and challenge when building.

You're issues seem to be with power limitations, and the current answer to get past the cap. Test the new feature, find out what works and what doesn't, give feedback. Be glad you have a influence with design changes, and utilize it.

Throwing a fit because you don't like something that is very new and doesn't give you the easy way to get past the power limitation doesn't help, no matter how competent you think you might be.

A fair amount of said challenge got patched out today, for all it's downsides, using em properly was challenging. We're all still on a level playing field, so that is good at least.

As I said, I've avoided using docked reactors as much as possible since I knew this day would come. I only bothered to use one ship design that had 16 of them. All other 14 blueprints were designed to operate within the 2m e/sec limit. I don't see how I've lost anything here.

- 1: I am not throwing a fit.
- 2: Docked reactors were not easy. They required skill to build
- 3: A three-year-old mechanic that required competence has been removed in favour of something equal to a new player stacking a giant chunk of power into a ship because he doesn't know about power axis trees. Except now it explodes.
- 4: Despite the fact that you never seem to have figured out how to use docked reactors without crashing a server, I have not accused you of incompetence. Yet here you are, accusing me of such.
- 5: I like the fact that you lot are making the game simpler for new players, but I disagree that power-generating timebombs are the way to go.
- 6: The word "Your" is not spelled "Y - O - U - ' - R - E".

 

[StormWing0]

For all you fools whining about the new system either shut up or come up with a better one.


In the mean time if I remember right docked reactors were used to get around the power regen softcap so why not make it so the new block when used like the power reactor in setup it has really high regen and low capacity, while when used in clumps like the power capacitors are they have really high capacity but low regen?

 

[nightrune]

I appreciate the introduction of volatile systems. I do want the aux power systems to be a bit more versatile, but I think its a small config change. Also if you find the explosions are too dominant. Please play with the configuration values and see what might be more fun for both sides!