Brainstorm This Thruster Fuel

[BrotherLazarus]

Now that I've got a bit more time to write up a better reply to the OP...

ZektorSK : First off, though I voted "no" it is a provisional no.

A secondary drive type or drive enhancement requiring fuel I can entirely get behind. The reasoning behind this is a blend of universal consistency and a dislike for contrived means of artificial difficulty (which is a rant for another time). The current drives appear to be reactionless/inertialess; which does not mean they do not impart force, simply that they tend to circumvent thermodynamic modeling by providing thrust without using fuel. Given the somewhat labyrinthine and arcane methods required to properly power even relatively simple designs already, adding another fuel-tank block or fuel requirement would cause already cramped interiors to take yet another hit--and with crew and cargo coming soon that has the possibility of turning real sour, real fast.

Second, we have a large number of materials we absolutely need to build even the simplest of ships or stations, which in solo can really cause some heavy duty grinding time--I covered this in the previous reply in-depth so I think I can safely leave this passage as is with a simple "RNGsus is not kind to new players, and new players tend to drop a program within 5 hours if little visible progress is made".

Third, I continue to use the term "artificial difficulty" and this likely needs some explanation. This is a different concept from actual challenge, and frequently represents scenarios like heavy grind reliance in a game that otherwise has little challenge (a good example of this is Warframe--many of the bosses are challenging the first time, but after the third hour of grinding said boss for a drop it's not a challenge, it's a unit of artificial difficulty enforced by heavy reliance on very low loot drop chances in order to sustain player interest), or scenarios with actually outright unfair "difficulty" in the form of intentionally broken fail-states (Ninja Gaiden 2--the original Ninja Gaiden 2, not this silly 3d breast-fest--was very easy to beat... except for large platforming zones with birds that could stunlock you into pits, causing you to restart. The game was very short and it was later revealed to be a contrived method to keep players from the end for far longer than they otherwise would have taken). A new fuel source would take months to balance fairly, and in the interim many players would simply switch to creative (as we've seen in Minecraft, Space Engineers, and a rather substantial glut of other titles) or outright leave rather than deal with the sharp uptick in upkeep requirements.

Frequently, artificial difficulty is misrepresented by certain hardcore elements as an actual challenge, and any dissenting view is met with "lrn 2 ply n00b" rather than a rational discourse on the pros and cons of the concept itself--see the one word "rebuttal" above for a good example of this.

My opinion on the matter is open to change based on further information--as I've made clear in this long-winded response.

An optional fuel source for increasing speed is acceptable, in fact would make certain builds more interesting to tinker with (scout frigates, anyone?). A required fuel source would also be acceptable if coupled with a discrete engine--a fusion torch with a fuel cost but a higher TWR would be quite interesting for, say, tuning interceptors and light fighter/scout craft--but in these cases, it's not an artificial difficulty element being introduced to make the game more "hardcore/challenging", but an optional element that provides builders with more options to choose from, which is important in a sandbox title--you don't need to rewrite an entire system to make the most players happy, you just need to provide them with the toolbox to do what they want to do; which the developers seem to have been doing quite well so far.

 

[Byamarro]

What about making thrusters without fuel very uneffective but still working? Starmade really needs strategic resources.

 

[BrotherLazarus]

What about making thrusters without fuel very uneffective but still working? Starmade really needs strategic resources.

That's what the end of my more in-depth post was suggesting, however not the same direct route or end result.

A larger/more powerful discrete thruster variant (useful for currently sluggish capital ships, surely) that required a fuel source but granted a higher TMR would certainly provide said strategic resource while retaining a simpler learning curve for new players--as well as not requiring a total overhaul of existing designs for endgame players.

I'm not unwilling to support the introduction of such a feature provided there are compromises--this game has an arguably broader engineering toolbox than Space Engineers (again, the closest relevant title I've dumped a large amount of time into) and does so by not providing forced avenues, but by adding more tools (and simpler to initially grasp tools to boot) for creative users to work with. The simplest and easiest example would be the rail system--it's not required in many builds to have something like an elevator (especially now with teleporters), however the rail system gives us the toolbox to make things like elevators, retractable docking booms, cavernous retractable doors, and the like--all without being forced to take that route. Conversely, SE elevators are... I'm trying to come up with an inoffensive term for them, but I cannot. They're bad. The piston system is buggy and tends to detonate rather than deposit you to the next floor. The same can be said for their docking tools, ramps/rotational arrays, etc. It's not a bad game, but the toolbox provided and the complexity of the systems is often viewed harmful to the new player; which currently is not as large an issue with Starmade.

However; again... the basic thruster just simply doesn't have a need for a new element, and with the currently large array of things we need to just get into a basic industrial complex adding fuel from the get-go just doesn't have enough benefit to outweigh the cost in my mind.

Remember to account for the starting player as well as the end game player--it's a hard balancing act regardless of medium (the majority of my "real" developer experience comes from universal roleplaying systems for tabletops, which require a large number of similar considerations, as opposed to my experience as a QA tester), and the more you account for all of your players, the more smoothly it comes together with a minimum of fuss.

Of note, part of the reason I'm replying with this much text is to make it clear that my stance isn't a matter of "NO. YOU'RE WRONG BECAUSE I SAID SO".

 

[Yrjosmiel]

Dear, here we go again with the fuel talk.
In favor of both sides, let's just add another kind of thruster!
The old one will be weaker, but will not require fuel and instead depend on stellar power!
The new one will be much more powerful, but will require fuel!

With that, you can implement the "fuel should be an end game thing" and the "fuel will make things have sense!"

I tried.

 

[BrotherLazarus]

Dear, here we go again with the fuel talk.
In favor of both sides, let's just add another kind of thruster!
The old one will be weaker, but will not require fuel and instead depend on stellar power!
The new one will be much more powerful, but will require fuel!

With that, you can implement the "fuel should be an end game thing" and the "fuel will make things have sense!"

I tried.

My argument for it remaining some form of late-tier strategic resource type concern rather than a universal replacement stems entirely from the learning curve that Starmade already has. If you (the reader, not the poster I'm quoting specifically) continue lobbying for more and more stuff that might be cool in the later stages of progression without some form of thought for the coherency of the game itself and more importantly, new players; you're going to shoot the playerbase in the foot, as it were.

The amount of time I've dumped into this game and I still haven't mastered proper subsystem building, someone that doesn't adapt as quickly or is more easily frustrated can (and often will) simply say "I'm out, nope" and either refund the title or, if they're trying it via the demo, not go forward with purchasing the game at all. This is what is known as a very bad move--difficulty curves work best when they're more gradual--setting the bar too high for a non-technical title can and often does create a barrier of entry that too many players will just blow off, or in some cases ignore (ala Creative modes/mods).

 

[NeonSturm]

Fuel would encourage players trading.
Aircraft-carriers have many different oil types, each with it's purposes.

• One type for landing ropes
• One type for starting jets
• ...

They even require fresh steel-ropes to replace the worn-down ones which catch landing aircraft.

Assign each effect-module a different capsule-type and when a thruster has this effect-module as slave, it loses x% efficiency but gains (x+y)% efficiency when it is supplied with the right fuel type/types.

 

[alterintel]

One word is not an adequate rebuttal.

Actually a one word rebuttle is the most awesome rebuttal there is. Kudos

I actually don't agree with Byamarro one this one. I aggree with Lecic. Fuel should be more of an end game thing.

 

[nightrune]

It sounds like many people in this thread would enjoy battling it out over a specific resource, and this sounds like a good type of resource to be gathered via passive resource gathering. The type that may show on planets or nebula.

I propose you change the conversation a bit, what if the fuel was only for the jumpdrives then? That's pretty late game, and makes the jump a bit more expensive.

 

[Byamarro]

It sounds like many people in this thread would enjoy battling it out over a specific resource, and this sounds like a good type of resource to be gathered via passive resource gathering. The type that may show on planets or nebula.

I propose you change the conversation a bit, what if the fuel was only for the jumpdrives then? That's pretty late game, and makes the jump a bit more expensive.

Intriguing idea! There could also be more propelling systems and power reactors some of them could require fuel.

 

[kiraen]

Jump drives are not late game. I generally have one on my starter ship. It's small and inefficient, but it's a priority.

 

[lilheartless]

Jump drives are not late game. I generally have one on my starter ship. It's small and inefficient, but it's a priority.

so much this the starter systems are destroyed soon after server startup on servers that have high traffic so its either an in efficient jump drive or an hour of having something stuck in your w key i'd choose the drive....

 

[NeonSturm]

so much this the starter systems are destroyed soon after server startup on servers that have high traffic so its either an in efficient jump drive or an hour of having something stuck in your w key i'd choose the drive....

That is what a default-faction (like trading guild) should fix. With giving you some default-jump-gates.

 

[Nickizzy]

Dear, here we go again with the fuel talk.
In favor of both sides, let's just add another kind of thruster!
The old one will be weaker, but will not require fuel and instead depend on stellar power!
The new one will be much more powerful, but will require fuel!

With that, you can implement the "fuel should be an end game thing" and the "fuel will make things have sense!"

I tried.

I like that idea, it would be like space engineers hydrogen, an alternate fuel source that works better but requires fuel. A hydrogen engine is like 10x as efficent as an ion thruster, but they aren't needed for anything, only if you want a faster ship. This fuel in starmade would be made in a fuel factory, and would require 100 block capsules(the ones you get from asteroid blocks) and one cell and would give you one fuel cell. You put fuel cells in tanks. Tannks would have two settings, one that would (like a factory) turn the fuel cells into cells, and fill up the tank until it was full(mass increase). Groupings would share inventory, and have a boosted fuel capasity. The second setting would discharge fuel into fuel cells(for transport between ships). The fuel in the tanks would be able to be used by fuel-users(thrusters, reactors,ect.) , they would each have on/off switches that could be grouped together. Some things would use more fuel than others, and would consume fuel at a faster weight. Fuel would be later game, and would be for intergalactic travel and short range fighters. Like boost.

That is what a default-faction (like trading guild) should fix. With giving you some default-jump-gates.

This would be great with the new stations the devs are adding.

 

[jayman38]

People understand fuel, especially if it is used for some kind of small, but powerful thruster system. And one of the first ships a player will want to make is a small-ish fighter, especially when the economy is further refined and end-game economic status is much harder to reach. So a fuel-fueled enhanced rocket block will be perfect for that, without making anything else too overpowered. This new thruster should be place-able on the hotbar (for ease of use by new players) or activated by logic, and should be activated for afterburner. Afterburner = pulse thruster, in that you get twice as much acceleration (not necessarily twice the speed, but twice the thrust) for 3 times the fuel usage.

This new thruster should never leave the player completely without thrust. With empty fuel tanks, maybe at 10% acceleration and associated top speed, as if it had some built-in aspects of the conventional thruster block (which kinda makes sense).

To avoid use on larger vessels, fuel use can be on a curve that increases fuel usage exponentially in relation to mass, so these new kinds of thrusters are really only useful on small ships. Yeah, someone will manage to use them on a larger ship, but that boat will be nothing but rockets and fuel storage, so it won't be useful for anything but "going". (Hey, just like a real spaceship! Ha!)

Additionally, getting more fuel should be stupid-simple. Refining should be a basic-factory-one-step process, involving rock (fracking for hydrogen!) or other natural elements (hydrolysis!) of which there is an abundance.

Furthermore, the first thing a player driving with rocket blocks should receive when approaching a neutral or friendly station or planet is an offer to refuel automatically (without having to dock, even) at the price of x credits out of your y credit amount. This refueling mechanic is even easier to use than in the original Elite, which required docking to refuel. Maybe have a star "offer" to refuel for credits within the damage radius, to simulate fuel-scooping. Same for gas giants and nebulae.

 

[djthekiller]

hey guys instead of fuel being thought of as just something that will add weight or something, why not a star trek like substance (warp plasma) which would add to being the Fuel for the power reactors (your nuclear reactors) to be used as a power source

 

[Shaker]

Jeez resurrection of bad fuel idea...

Having to fuel your ship is just another annoyance and doesnt add realism to the game. Schine has said there wont be any hunger in this game and fuel is ship hunger.

 

[ZektorSK]

The thread is still alive ? I am surprised

 

[Shaker]

Djthekiller the 6month resurrector

 

[ZektorSK]

Djthekiller the 6month resurrector

6 months ? Wow, time flyes fast

 

[djthekiller]

ok so i just thought up from my days of playing minecraft modded galacticraft

this as a block
[DOUBLEPOST=1466034428,1466034365][/DOUBLEPOST]oh hey so what i forgot to look at the date but so what, its important to keep it active if we want it added