The Future Of StarMade: The need for more creative agency.

    Joined
    Aug 18, 2013
    Messages
    9
    Reaction score
    0
    As Starmade's development goes onwards, and as I see the myriad of suggestions that flood this thread daily, there is something that has cought my attention that I feel needs to be addressed. Currently, I see a lot of suggestions wanting more stuff, or making changes to certain things and the way they work. However, while I think that many of these are great, I see a many of these as symptoms of a much larger issue that, if not addressed now, could ruin the game in the future. What I see is a lack of creative agency in how we build our ships. Let me explain.

    Currently, when you are building a ship in starmade you need several things for the ship to work properly. You need a power source, propulsion, shielding, power storage, weapons, salvage equipment, etc. Now, if you need more power regen, what do you do? Of course, you add more power blocks. Your shields are insufficient to protect your ship? Add more shield blocks. Your ship accellerates like a Yugo? Add more engines. Need more dakka? Add more AMCs. With all of these problems and needs to face, there is always one solution: add more stuff! This is the looming problem that I see coming. The lack of actual agency in the designs of our ship is a humongous problem that could ruin this game in the long-run and it needs to be confronted if not now then very soon.

    So, how do we go about solving this problem? Well, there are several things that could be done to combat it. The first and most basic thing to do is to add different ways to go about solving a design problem. For example: when you need to provide power to your ship, there should be more than one block that you could use to do so, each one having its own advantages and drawbacks. This should go for any and everything in the game. Having no one set way to solve a problem in a game like this makes the design desicions WE make so much more meaningful.

    The second thing to do is to increase the amount of design problems that the player has to deal with. There is a twofold reason for this. First, it allows for more varieties of ways that players could solve other design problems by having other problems crop up by solving them, making the above have much more meaning. Second, it allows for more ways that the game could be balanced in general. For example, if a heat mechanic was added, a battleships while having more armament than a fighter, also has to bleed off much more heat than a fighter, a weakness the fighter could use to their advantage. Thus, the new design problem that would have to be faced would add a much greater level of Counter Play that currently doesn't exist.

    Going forward, this game needs to give us much more creative agency in the way that we build our ships. There needs to be multiple ways for us, the players, to approach each and every design challenge that we encounter, with each solution bringing up other design challeges for us to solve. This would give all the design and play decisions we make so much more meaning, and would make StarMade that much better of a game.
     
    Joined
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages
    387
    Reaction score
    62
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen
    Even just two or three different versions of systems that have advantages and drawbacks would add a lot more depth to shipbuilding and the game in general.
     
    Joined
    Sep 8, 2013
    Messages
    151
    Reaction score
    0
    This is the kind of stuff I really want.



    I see people talking about how the game just needs straight upgrades from what we already have without adding any further function beyond a stat boost. And I can\'t stand it, because they don\'t even know how much they don\'t want that even if they think they do.



    Anyway +1 OP, this is the kind of objective that needs to be of mind with the next content updates.
     

    FlyingDebris

    Vaygr loves my warhead bat.
    Joined
    Sep 6, 2013
    Messages
    2,458
    Reaction score
    1,312
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Councillor Gold
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    This would make fleet gameplay much more tactical, with different ships having different advantages over others.
     
    Joined
    Oct 8, 2013
    Messages
    270
    Reaction score
    10
    I would love to have different power generators, like a normal, (low yield), nuclear high yield, (requires ore as fuel) and solar( mid yield, requires panels) or ion engines, warp drives, EM shields, energy shields, and plasma shields. This needs to be focused on and could fix so many problems, thank you, so much.
     
    Joined
    May 25, 2013
    Messages
    228
    Reaction score
    16
    But you did summarize the issues nicely. New mechanics would be needed to make ship layouts relevant in combat - heat radiation that promotes hollow volumes , unobstructed weapon and thruster outputs adding weak spots , solar cells making use of wider surfaces , and other shape-dependent block grouping.
     
    Joined
    Oct 6, 2013
    Messages
    15
    Reaction score
    0
    Great ideas (especially the heat venting for bigger ships!)

    The only possible generalized side effect I might caution with more variants of each block type is that it can get a hotbar and the shop menu a bit busy if we have too many block varieties. It feels a bit busy even now. I think there is a way around it, though, and If I understand you right, it could be compatible with what you\'re getting at.

    As things stand with the current version, the dimensions of any block grouping affect the stat line. Take power generation with the SD HTC Power Block, for example. While each block adds more power, the final dimension extremes for that grouping adds yet more power, a kind of multiplier. So while, say, eight blocks in a two by two by two cube add some power, those same eight blocks spent in an L-shape add far more power. This is innovative and makes building a fun challenge to optimize power generation (sidenote: also encourages people not to just build death-cubes for optimum efficiency in order to compete), but it could be taken farther.

    What if the very shape of the power core block arrangement forced a balance of Generation against Battery and against Heat? Three is typically the best number of stat components to balance if it can be helped. Classic Rock-Paper-Scissors arrangements are easy for everyone to understand but complex enough to keep a ship build constantly rethought to match any new enemy (especially if each system has its own three-fold dynamic)

    Power Tanks (the capacity increasers) are currently a different block (with an identical graphic, but red replacing blue and faintly emitting a green glow). I think these could be reintegrated into one block with the generating ones, at least for a while. So, here\'s my proposal. Say I have X # of power blocks. If I take all those power blocks and build a tree (rather an L with two legs) for maximum contiguous block dimensions, that should increase generation most efficiently, as it does now. If I build one that is one continuous 1-dimensional line, that should be the least heat, because heat should be determined by how many power block faces touch other power block faces minus venting, whatever way that is determined. Lastly, if I make a solid block, that should be the greatest power capacity (Battery), which should be determined by the density of block numbers within the cubic area of the system. All these are fairly manipulatable mathematical formulas that can be set up to reflect in the final ship\'s stat lines.

    So, if you have 100 power blocks and I have 100 power blocks, we might build some very different ships.

    I might build one that can unleash a massive barrage of energy (into weapons or into thrusters or anything using power) but have to then sit idle to await slow regeneration or to vent off all the overheating coils.

    I might build something that never runs out of energy, continuously maneuvering, or firing from an admittedly smaller energy pool, or perhaps if it does have a stupendous energy pool, the overheating can start to melt random parts of my power core, rendering them useless (perhaps destroying them!) from the inside, slowly decreasing my efficiency the longer I\'m in battle but without the downtime of the power capacity (battery) cap. I\'d just burn her out, she\'ll last longer than this battle I\'m in, right? Of course, outside \"vent\" blocks could make me last even longer (or the power core itself exposed, like mentioned in a clever comment above by Stakhanov).

    Or I could build something reliable that never, ever overheats but can only either plink/maneuver away the enemy consistently with power regen or blast in a brilliant broad stroke or two before a small power exhaustion downtime.

    AMC and Missile stats are affected some by shape. More stat elements might be linked to shape even in these, I\'m sure it\'s in the works. It would be cool to extend this principle better to thrusters (which have only a bit of it) and shields (which seem to have none and can literally be tacked on \"Add more!\" anywhere).

    Heat venting! That\'s so crazy-sauce brilliant, my friend! It just makes sense! There are many other ways than what I\'ve stated above to implement it for sure, but personally I hope it gets integrated with the power-core blocks somehow.

    In any system, one big contiguous chain should be more efficient with its multipliers than many smaller separate chains - using the same block number. This encourages a player to have one grouping of each block type, making for specialized regions in any ship, as set against the battle-endurance advantage of redundancy.

    As to the more general vision of \"creative agency\" being applied to as many systems as is feasible, I wholeheartedly agree, and I think the development is taking this road to some degree already.

    Just helping drop this encouragement to designers that there exists a very numerous target market: the Strategy and Counter-Strategy Builder, which should be carefully looked at. This can be a very cool game within the game, and a huge draw to keep any multiplayer experience humming along. This is what we crave! Dynamic ship-design interplay! It\'s the heart of this game. The bells and whistles can come later!
     
    Joined
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages
    194
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Multiple ways to go about any feature? I like. Also means that shipyard groups will likely tend to focus on one particular design type, meaning you end up with different styles.

    Also means you can have different \'types\' of ship that drive differently beyond the quantity of the components, if that makes sense
     
    Joined
    Aug 2, 2013
    Messages
    64
    Reaction score
    2
    Firstly, I agree that more variety in design solutions for building ships would add depth to the game. Unfortunately, the more stuff that is added, the more difficult it will be to balance and it may affect the accessibility of the game through complexity. Not to say that is reason to not do it, just a consideration.

    But it really comes down to what the vision of the game is, in the developers\' eyes. Any gameplay/activity within the game can be scrutinized in this way, as there is more to the game than building. Is it more important to add depth in the game for existing activities, or breadth of the game for many varieties of activities? I think the former would result in a more satisfying single player experience and the latter would enhance the multiplayer experience in terms of roles within factions.
     
    Joined
    Oct 8, 2013
    Messages
    270
    Reaction score
    10
    This is so good! This means that shipyards and star ports would have to keep in supply of different materials, and captains will have to learn their ships, which would add to their relationship with their ship, and battle damage will be more crushing as great lengths will be taken to repair that vital conduit, or fix the damage to directional thrusters. Great ideas all around!
     
    Joined
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages
    3
    Reaction score
    0
    My group of friends and I have had this idea too. We have a small server, and all of our ships look really cool, but we can\'t really do much with them since they all do pretty much the exact same thing in the exact same way, so it gets boring. Adding more variety to power sources, weapon types, shields, engines, and other things would make the game immesurably better!
     
    Joined
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages
    239
    Reaction score
    2
    Starmade definitly needs more variety in builds and in combat. Your ideas could lead to vital parts of a ship needing to be taken out and more creative builds.
     
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    116
    Reaction score
    0
    +1. The game really needs more depth, and more options and challenges regarding shipbuilding would certainly help in that regard.
     
    Joined
    Jun 21, 2013
    Messages
    17
    Reaction score
    0
    I particularly like the heat idea, it could be a way to counter the infamous \'shotgun ships\'. Also, I\'d love to drop an incendiary bomb into the heat-sink of an enemy capital to overheat its cannons!
     
    Joined
    Aug 18, 2013
    Messages
    9
    Reaction score
    0
    To those of you who have posted, thank you for your kindness. I really think that this is a change that has to happen in order for StarMade to be successful as a game. It seems that many of you share this sentiment with me. I wonder, do you think I should make a ppost discussing specifics? Or should I let Schema come up with those?