What to call "Tech Points"

    Lancake

    Head of Testing
    Joined
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages
    794
    Reaction score
    560
    • Schine
    • Tester
    The best one would be:
    • a short name
    • clearly points out what it is supposed to do
    • cool sci-fi element to it

    Many examples so far are cool, but they don't point out that it is only affecting chambers and that they're needed to activate/put the chambers online.

    Chamber Activation Points would probably be the best one to just see what it is meant to be. Abbreviation isn't too bad (CAP) but it doesn't sound cool.

    Variations:
    • Chamber Activation Fluid
    • Chamber Activation Plasma
    • Chamber Activation Energy

    Might be enough to give the 3rd word a fancy sci-fi look?
     
    Joined
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages
    13
    Reaction score
    7
    [Name suggestion]

    I don't believe that it makes sense to think about tech points as a physical resource. Instead, call it bandwidth, and express it as a percentage.

    I think this actually kind of makes sense: each chamber uses up a certain percentage of the reactor's bandwidth. The reason I like this name is because instead of just seeming like an arbitrary imposed limit, you could actually imagine that in "real life" a reactor would have a limited amount of bandwidth with which to control chambers. Plus, I think it sounds "techy" enough without being too cryptic.

    Now, I realize that the idea of waiting for chambers to fill up with "bandwidth" doesn't work at all, because bandwidth is not a physical resource. However, it was kind of arbitrary to give tech points the job of being built up in chambers before they can be used. Therefore, just give chambers a startup time or warm-up period. This also removes the need for tech points being unrealistically "dumped back" into the reactor all at once when a chamber is disconnected, because bandwidth is not a physical resource. Instead, when one is disconnected, it just frees up bandwidth for the reactor to use elsewhere.

    So basically, once you connect chambers to the reactor, they take a certain amount of time to start up, and then the reactor uses a certain amount of its bandwidth to continue to control them and receive their effects. The reactor only has so much bandwidth to allocate.

    TL;DR: Bandwidth and startup time

    [Separate, but complementary idea]

    About that last point: "The reactor only has so much bandwidth to allocate." With the current systems overhaul proposal, if you run out of tech points, you can't use any more chambers. However, it would be much less limiting if we could add as many chambers as we want, but with smaller and smaller efficiency. This works with the idea of "bandwidth" because it makes sense that once you go past using up 100% of the reactor's bandwidth, the reactor has to reduce the amount of bandwidth available to each chamber in order to keep up with its load. Thus, there would be more chambers, but they would be less efficient because they don't have as much bandwidth.

    The reason why this would be so great is because it would allow for a much wider range of ships. In the current proposal, you get to specialize in a few systems of your choice, but that's it. With this implemented, you would see more variety in ship systems; they would range from ones that are decent at most everything to highly specialized ships and everything in between.

    This would also allow for some interesting customization of systems. You could manually allocate certain amounts of bandwidth to certain chambers to give them greater effect, whether through a control panel/menu, simply by building the chamber bigger, or by hooking them up with more conduits. Overall, this idea of diminishing returns with chambers would give players more flexibility than simply picking their six favorite chamber boosts, and flexibility is what StarMade is all about.
     
    Last edited:

    Master_Artificer

    Press F to pay respects
    Joined
    Feb 17, 2015
    Messages
    1,588
    Reaction score
    612
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Thinking Positive
    The best one would be:
    • a short name
    • clearly points out what it is supposed to do
    • cool sci-fi element to it

    Many examples so far are cool, but they don't point out that it is only affecting chambers and that they're needed to activate/put the chambers online.

    Chamber Activation Points would probably be the best one to just see what it is meant to be. Abbreviation isn't too bad (CAP) but it doesn't sound cool.

    Variations:
    • Chamber Activation Fluid
    • Chamber Activation Plasma
    • Chamber Activation Energy

    Might be enough to give the 3rd word a fancy sci-fi look?
    I really like the CAP abbreviation.
     

    The_Owl

    Alpha is not an excuse
    Joined
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages
    325
    Reaction score
    293
    Ovaloid Wellness Linkers
    Intergrated Stabilizers
    Blasting Overdrive Resource/Energy Dampening


    Quarkoid Energy
     

    lupoCani

    First Citizen
    Joined
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages
    504
    Reaction score
    127
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 10
    Come to think of it, I would like to advocate the use of the word "pressure". In the vein of Lancake's suggestions, I suppose that would be "Chamber Pressure".

    Pressure has a long history as an energy system in pre-electric society.

    Pressure in a system is generally maintained at some stable level, not outputted and consumed, which fits with the image we're trying to evoke.

    Pressure is, intuitively, something created by reactors and stored in chambers.

     

    madman Captain

    Self-appointet Overlord of the Scaffold
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages
    263
    Reaction score
    491
    • Purchased!
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    Because of the blocky kind of the Starmade universe I demand the following:

    -Blockonium Charges
    -Octazid Cells
    -Cubic Fuel

    Wait I have a better one: Shine-ium Force
    Because why not.
     
    Last edited:

    alterintel

    moderator
    Joined
    May 24, 2015
    Messages
    869
    Reaction score
    596
    • Likeable
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Legacy Citizen 3
    I REALLY LIKE THIS!
    [Name suggestion]

    I don't believe that it makes sense to think about tech points as a physical resource. Instead, call it bandwidth, and express it as a percentage.

    I think this actually kind of makes sense: each chamber uses up a certain percentage of the reactor's bandwidth. The reason I like this name is because instead of just seeming like an arbitrary imposed limit, you could actually imagine that in "real life" a reactor would have a limited amount of bandwidth with which to control chambers. Plus, I think it sounds "techy" enough without being too cryptic.

    Now, I realize that the idea of waiting for chambers to fill up with "bandwidth" doesn't work at all, because bandwidth is not a physical resource. However, it was kind of arbitrary to give tech points the job of being built up in chambers before they can be used. Therefore, just give chambers a startup time or warm-up period. This also removes the need for tech points being unrealistically "dumped back" into the reactor all at once when a chamber is disconnected, because bandwidth is not a physical resource. Instead, when one is disconnected, it just frees up bandwidth for the reactor to use elsewhere.

    So basically, once you connect chambers to the reactor, they take a certain amount of time to start up, and then the reactor uses a certain amount of its bandwidth to continue to control them and receive their effects. The reactor only has so much bandwidth to allocate.

    TL;DR: Bandwidth and startup time

    [Separate, but complementary idea]

    About that last point: "The reactor only has so much bandwidth to allocate." With the current systems overhaul proposal, if you run out of tech points, you can't use any more chambers. However, it would be much less limiting if we could add as many chambers as we want, but with smaller and smaller efficiency. This works with the idea of "bandwidth" because it makes sense that once you go past using up 100% of the reactor's bandwidth, the reactor has to reduce the amount of bandwidth available to each chamber in order to keep up with its load. Thus, there would be more chambers, but they would be less efficient because they don't have as much bandwidth.

    The reason why this would be so great is because it would allow for a much wider range of ships. In the current proposal, you get to specialize in a few systems of your choice, but that's it. With this implemented, you would see more variety in ship systems; they would range from ones that are decent at most everything to highly specialized ships and everything in between.

    This would also allow for some interesting customization of systems. You could manually allocate certain amounts of bandwidth to certain chambers to give them greater effect, whether through a control panel/menu, simply by building the chamber bigger, or by hooking them up with more conduits. Overall, this idea of diminishing returns with chambers would give players more flexibility than simply picking their six favorite chamber boosts, and flexibility is what StarMade is all about.
     

    Jarraff

    filthy neutral
    Joined
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages
    113
    Reaction score
    62
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    Cubatomic force capture system.

    Somewhat like the strong nuclear force.

    The chambers could be collecting some sort of leftover energy from the reactor process.
    [doublepost=1495111790,1495111674][/doublepost]The Chambers could be cubatomic containment chambers.
    [doublepost=1495111938][/doublepost]Or cubatomic force manipulators.

    I like the use of cubatomic for Starmade