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

[0ldSkull]

if it couldn't go anywhere anyways

How is that determined other than checking for collisions?

 

[Keptick]

Suggestion 1: Leave undocked entities in the reference system of the mothership (like a ship-aligned astronaut), if it couldn't go anywhere anyways. This would avoid most collision checks.

"Most collision checks" isn't good enough (since even a low amount of collision checks causes a good amount of fps lag). Not to mention that reactors inside of ships would still cause collisions because they would still touch the ship, and if there's no space between the reactor and the ship it would still bounce around, meaning that they would, in fact, still cause a fuckton of collision checks. Docked reactors also increase the amount of docked entities, and therefore the amount of computing power required to do collision checks ship-wide collision checks. Finally, even if there was no collisions at all, the beams from the power transfer system cause lag by themselves. For example, turning on the 40 reactors in my titan caused my fps to drop from 60 to ~40.

Suggestion 2: Replace the power soft cap by a logarithmic or similar curve for the dimensional bonus, which would still punish size, without making docked reactors necessary.

The power bonus is already on a curve, changing the curve won't do much of a difference (it can be increased, changed in shape, etc... but it's still a curve in the end). Assuming that the base regen is always the same, having the bonus have endless growth means that power becomes more and more efficient the large the group size, which is super fucking bad for obvious reasons. Having it so that it flattens out at a certain point is the exact same thing as having a soft cap. Having it where it continualy decreases means that it'll eventually reach 0, is the same as having a cap.

Unless I misunderstood and you're suggesting something completely different. In that case such a change would completely alter the balance of the game (everything is balanced on power), which means that every ship in existence would require to have their systems completely rebuilt, which is bad.

 

[Malacodor]

That would completely alter the balance of the game (everything is balanced on power), which means that every ship in existence would require to have their systems completely rebuilt. Having power on a curve like that would also mean that there would still be a "soft cap", by which I mean that after a certain point the power bonus is negligible, which is almost exactly what we have now

The curve could be linear above a certain point, which would be similar to docked or auxiliary reactors. The curve could have pretty much any desired shape.

 

[Keptick]

The curve could be linear above a certain point, which would be similar to docked or auxiliary reactors. The curve could have pretty much any desired shape.

You could easily achieve that by giving normal power blocks a higher base regen (the same e/sec per block as an efficient docked reactor), and to alter the power bonus curve to achieve similar power generation levels to now. The problem with that is that it'd completely remove any downside that docked reactors had (which was part of the game's balance, albeit unintentionally), meaning that you could have power efficient megaships with absolutely no risk or downside.

The new system basically allows the devs to keep the balance as close as possible to what it was with docked reactors while fixing a major issue. In addition, it still provides them with the liberty of balancing afterwards. For example, they could remove the explosions completely if they felt that large ships are underpowered (which would achieve what you're suggesting), or they could increase the explosion's power.

The whole point of the new block is to fix the lag issue while maintaining the game's current balance and risk VS reward aspect that docked reactors provided. Not a single suggestion I have seen so far manages to achieve that.

 

[Malacodor]

The whole point of the new block is to fix the lag issue while maintaining the game's current balance and risk VS reward aspect that docked reactors provided. Not a single suggestion I have seen so far manages to achieve that.

Probably because the fixation on such a narrow goal wasn't properly communicated to the community. It's only natural to make suggestions, which reduce the risk, if people don't know that's not allowed.

 

[Pacific_Jim]

Something else to remember is that whilst docked reactors weren't necessarily game breaking, this change also eliminates shield injectors, which where massively unbalanced.

 

[Keptick]

Probably because the fixation on such a narrow goal wasn't properly communicated to the community. It's only natural to make suggestions, which reduce the risk, if people don't know that's not allowed.

That's very true, good observation. The update post should have been more specific on the goals of the new block to avoid confusion.

 

[Darkkon]

Man, I am surprised at all the drama over this update. Ever since becoming active in the forums, the foremost issue with SM has always been the lag. No matter who I asked. So Schine comes out with a block that helps reduce lag in a specific area of the game and people get pissed off because their favorite exploit no longer works. Seriously? Calm down for (insert god here)'s sake. This game has a ton of features planned we know nothing about yet, it is still being built from a very small team, and just about everything is constantly changing and being improved. If there is truly a major issue with a feature, it will be resolved. There is literally zero reason to get this pissed off about a work in progress feature/game.

Alright rant over. I personally haven't experimented with this system yet but everything I have heard and read (including this ENTIRE thread) looks pretty good to me and I can't wait to add this onto my current titan project. So I say A+ to Schine ^_^

 

[jorgekorke]

Probably because the fixation on such a narrow goal wasn't properly communicated to the community. It's only natural to make suggestions, which reduce the risk, if people don't know that's not allowed.

Don't make quick assumptions. You, alone, are not the embodiment of the community.
Those issues and narrow goals were already talked to the death by many people in the past.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

From what I've read above, the overall problem is with the docking and not the reactors. Perhaps if more time and energy was put into solving the docking issue, this whole argument around docked reactors versus auxiliary power would be mute and they would actually be a great compliment to each other.

In my opinion I think the devs have taken a easy way out to avoid addressing the root cause and real issue of docking, docked entity bloat, entity bloat in general and collisions surrounding docked entities either docked or undocked.

 

[Madman198237]

It's not docking that's the issue.


It's the undocking that causes problems (Although collision checks for nonmobile entities and potentially eliminate-able checks for turrets are also not a great idea to keep).

 

[Lone_Puppy]

It's the undocking that causes problems

And how do you get to be able to undock?
Please explain how the undocking causes the problem.

From what I can see, it's the docking/rail system that is at the root of everything lag related here. If you didn't have the ability to dock anything, would you have the issues people refer to?

 

[Darkkon]

And how do you get to be able to undock?
Please explain how the undocking causes the problem.

From what I can see, it's the docking/rail system that is at the root of everything lag related here. If you didn't have the ability to dock anything, would you have the issues people refer to?

No, but its kinda hard to have a space sandbox game without docking. Plus it's the only way for us to really have turrets.

 

[Groovrider]

From what I've read above, the overall problem is with the docking and not the reactors. Perhaps if more time and energy was put into solving the docking issue, this whole argument around docked reactors versus auxiliary power would be mute and they would actually be a great compliment to each other.

In my opinion I think the devs have taken a easy way out to avoid addressing the root cause and real issue of docking, docked entity bloat, entity bloat in general and collisions surrounding docked entities either docked or undocked.

Not accurate. Not too long ago you couldn't get a moderately sized ship with turrets anywhere near a station without going down to single frames. That has been all but eliminated through their hard work. Don't exaggerate.

 

[Madman198237]

The LAG comes from when items are UNDOCKED inside another entity....and promptly begin a CPU hailstorm of collision checks.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

No, but its kinda hard to have a space sandbox game without docking. Plus it's the only way for us to really have turrets.

I absolutely love the rail system! Primarily for the mechanical properties. I'm not wanting it to go away, merely pointing out that if it wasn't there, would the problem be?

Not accurate. Not too long ago you couldn't get a moderately sized ship with turrets anywhere near a station without going down to single frames. That has been all but eliminated through their hard work. Don't exaggerate

So am I not allowed an opinion in your universe?

The LAG comes from when items are UNDOCKED inside another entity....and promptly begin a CPU hailstorm of collision checks.

Ah, that would be the collisions between the two entities causing the lag would it not? When I undock my ships from a ship or station I don't see lag?

Either way, I'm asking these questions because I've never used docked reactors and want to understand what all the complaining and arguing is about and hopefully bring to light a root cause to be solved. Is this not what everybody wants?

 

[TheGeek007]

The whole point of the new block is to fix the lag issue while maintaining the game's current balance and risk VS reward aspect that docked reactors provided. Not a single suggestion I have seen so far manages to achieve that.

I'd like to argue that the new blocks offers little reward (inferior power) for high risk (slow explodey systems). Granted, this system is far superior to docked reactors as it reduces complexity and lag by decreasing entities needed to produce the same power. However, I see some glaring flaws that are fairly easy to correct:

1. Complexity of use.
All the ships I've ever seen use docked reactors used them for the singular purpose of producing CONSTANT power. While the idea of a "backup battery" is intriguing, I've never seen anybody use it in their ship designs. Suffice to say, its not a desired feature. What will likely happen is that Auxiliary Batteries will be on 100% of the time, and it will be only by accident that anyone ever switches them off.
*Proposed Solution: Split off the "backup battery" functionality into a separate block, the Auxiliary Capacitor. Then add an "Auxiliary Reactor" block that works like Aux Batteries do now, only without the capacity function. Simple, effective, and idiot-proof. This also solves the problem with AI using auxiliaries, as it always puts out power.

2. Wonky "slow explosion" mechanic.
Imagine if you were an engineer who made ship reactors. People use your designs, and rely on them working well. Then some idiot shoots your ship. Things start exploding. They keep exploding. Then you remember, you never put a way to shutdown the reactor and stop the chain reaction. People stop using your reactor, space lawyers sue you for trillions, and you starve to death on a backwater planet.
The current mechanic makes no sense. If a aux group gets hit, it repeatedly explodes, whether you turn off power or not. Any power system I've ever seen, sci-fi or otherwise, has some way to shut things down and stop the reaction so things can be fixed.

*Proposed solution 1: Aux explosions can be stopped by turning off auxillaries. There would either be a delay in re-activating them, or the affected group would be "disabled" until after a system reboot.

*Proposed solution 2: Aux reactors start a countdown when hit starting a "meltdown"(so not as to be confused with overheat), that on reaching the end of the countdown, that reactor group would explode with dramatic effect. The method to stop the meltdown should involve the player getting out of the core and interacting with something, whether it be using a repair beam on the core, or an engineer's console, or an aux block in the group. Perhaps logic could be used to trigger an emergency shutdown. This may be overly complicated to figure out which group is the one melting down, so perhaps a meltdown is only triggered if a set percentage of aux blocks was destroyed and the meltdown would affect the aux system as a whole. I personally think mechanics that encourage multiple players on a capital ship is desirable; could be used for new crew systems as well.

3. It is trivial to puncture armor and hit auxiliaries
Ever since cannons have been given innate punchthrough effect, it is trivial for a weapon to puncture even multiple layers of armor and hit system blocks, and now that things explode when hit, this makes cannons imbalanced. In exchange for buffing armor, I'm willing to have auxiliaries explode with dramatic effect when hit. Even with the new armor HP system introduced earlier, they now provide insufficient protection to ship systems
*Proposed solution: Buff armor! Either have armor innately block cannon punchthrough for armor blocks(similar to how beams block the piercing effect), or increase the absorption rate that damage is transferred to the Armor HP pool to 74.9% (can be buffed to 99.9% with passive effects). I've done some testing with turning rates up this high and was pleased with the results: it was very hard to damage armor until the Armor HP pool was depleted, but a focused heavy bombardment of a single area could break armor.

 

[Darkkon]

I absolutely love the rail system! Primarily for the mechanical properties. I'm not wanting it to go away, merely pointing out that if it wasn't there, would the problem be?


So am I not allowed an opinion in your universe?


Ah, that would be the collisions between the two entities causing the lag would it not? When I undock my ships from a ship or station I don't see lag?

Either way, I'm asking these questions because I've never used docked reactors and want to understand what all the complaining and arguing is about and hopefully bring to light a root cause to be solved. Is this not what everybody wants?

I've never used docked reactors either, but i also did not relish the though of dealing with them for my 2km long cannon so XD

 

[Lone_Puppy]

I've never used docked reactors either, but i also did not relish the though of dealing with them for my 2km long cannon so XD

Nobody wants lag no matter what the cause. And voiding the causes is a great way to avoid the lag.

 

[Groovrider]

So am I not allowed an opinion in your universe?

Since when is disagreement not allowing you to have your opinion? Your voice is a free as mine.