LVs and WVs.

Discussion in 'Suggestions' started by TNTBOY479, Aug 10, 2017.

  1. TNTBOY479

    TNTBOY479 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2017
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    48
    LV- Land Vessel
    Alot of people are asking for wheels, and i would indeed love this. Id also love to see tracks though for land vessels. These would be slower but have more health, more stability and, if they add weight limits to wheels (which i hope they do) they would be able to carry alot more. (Of course the limit could be "extended" by more wheels and tracks but i think there should be a maximum limit.) They should also, like wheels, come in different sizes.

    WV- Water Vessel
    When we get larger planets (im certain we will) it would be nice to have water vessels. They could have powerful guns of them and be pretty big to make up for the obvious disadvantage. Now this is probably not the most wanted type of vessel,but for planets with alot of islands it could spice things up in a battle. Also, they could be relatively cheap carriers for LV tanks if that gets added to get to said islands without CVs.
    WVs could work by having a "floater block", kinda like hover engines on an HV in the way that you have to consider stability. These would also mean that water physics wouldnt need a complete revamp. The heavier the ship, the more floater blocks needed. Destroy these,and it sinks. Destroy them only on 1 side and it rolls. Front only, front goes down. Sinking could be like an SV being dumped in water. Doesnt have to be incredibly complicated. Also floaters could be enabled and disabled individually. That way, if balanced a WV could go along under the water and voila you have a submarine that can dive and rise. Should be size limited though to prevent collosal battleships rising up like the Flying Dutchman. Submarine could also be its own class. I feel that would be easiest as it allows for unique weapons like torpedoes and other unique characteristics.

    Just an idea though. Feel free to add more or show your disagreement. I enjoy opinions.
     
    #1
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2017
  2. Xenophon

    Xenophon Commander

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    195
    HVs do both, though none can go underwater (which is needed)
     
    #2
  3. Sofianinho

    Sofianinho Commander

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2016
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    116
    Yep GV gonna add a new dimension to the game, tracks would also be great but I'm not sure about WV, why would you need that ?
    Well theoretically GV's can go underwater, you can drive in the bottom of the ocean.
     
    #3
  4. Xenophon

    Xenophon Commander

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    195
  5. Sofianinho

    Sofianinho Commander

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2016
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    116
    Ground vehicle.
     
    #5
  6. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    I'd much prefer to see this sort of tech integrated into the existing ship classes; I really don't think we need any more, and I further think that merging SVs and HVs would be best in the long term.

    Also, I guess I really don't understand the fascination with wheeled vehicles when we have ridiculously powerful hover technology in-game already. If you can hover, why would you ever want wheels? Plus, the terrain on most of the planets isn't conducive in the slightest to wheeled vehicles (it's barely conducive to HVs, for that matter, given the lack of a suspension system).
     
    #6
    Frankyln and Mortlath like this.
  7. Xenophon

    Xenophon Commander

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    195
    and we have a wheeled vehicle:[​IMG]

    it cant move up anything slightly hilly. Hover is simply better.

    wheels may look cool to people as theyre the first ever land vehicle tech that is used to this day. maybe if hover used more power and wheels not (because they dont do anything when not moving unlike hover hovering).
     
    #7
    geostar1024 likes this.
  8. Exacute

    Exacute Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    263
    I highly recommend, that you try the vehicle in ME:Andromeda.. That was such a pleasure to drive. That is exactly the kind of thing I'd love to see in Empyrion
    -For fun
    -For early game
    -For AI
    -For diverse approaches

    As for the thread itself:
    Yes! More yes! But I would prefer seeing both integrated into the HV, so that you can use it as a submarine/groundvehicle/ship. It would really depend on your design. And you *could* mix the things, to have a truly diverse HV.
    Hover is working fine for getting around. But it's just not as.. exciting/fun to drive, as a wheeled (see ME:A)
     
    #8
    TNTBOY479 and Sofianinho like this.
  9. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    I can't comment on the ME:Andromeda vehicle, but I will admit that the previous ME vehicles were decently fun to drive, as are the wheeled vehicles in NMS. Even in NMS, though, the hover vehicle is just all around better at traversing terrain. Maybe I just don't go on enough scenic drives, as I'm usually very focused on quickly getting to a specific destination (I have been known to do a suborbital hop in Empyrion just to get around a planet faster).
     
    #9
    Exacute likes this.
  10. Exacute

    Exacute Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    263
    Indeed. Same should also be the case. As SV is quicker than a HV, as that touches the terrain even less ;)

    I think that's the strength of any game. That you can choose. Sure, sometimes I couldn't care less about the scenic route, and just wants to get to my objective, but others, I like to take my time.. (Sorta like how you sometimes nuke a POI from orbit, and others actually go inside it on foot).
    When the game progresses further, I'm very much hoping to see prng creatures, and prng envoirenmnet.. That, combined with better terrain, will make the scenic route so much more appealing.
    Either way. I like having the option, and the diversity :p
     
    #10
    Sofianinho likes this.
  11. TNTBOY479

    TNTBOY479 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2017
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    48
    Very valid points on the superiority to traversing terrain with hovers, but i would still like to see tank tracks. A well built HV i know doesnt have problems with flipping over but tank tranks would be way more stable. They could also be physically larger as they could take much more weight as they dont have to hover, just drive. That way we could get fast light attack HV's and heavy slow GV tanks. Atop of that, a mining vehicle with tank tracks also seems better (to me at least) than an HV drill. Also wheeled vehicles could be nice inside BAs, especially in space. Having small buggy-like vehicles to move around large stations would be great in my opinion.
     
    #11
  12. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Unless hover engines get severely nerfed (which, as you'll see shortly, they really might need to be), it's hard to make an argument in favor of treads solely for their mass-carrying abilities. The 1x1 hover engine puts out 200 kN (for only 5 kW!), which is enough to comfortably support 100 tons. For an extreme example, consider the crawler used by the Saturn V and the space shuttle: according to wikipedia, the crawler with the mobile launcher platform and an unfueled space shuttle on top massed about 8 kt. You'd only need 20 2x2 hover engines to comfortably lift that entire mass, and they'd only take up a percent or two of the crawler's volume, as well as require an order of magnitude less power (400 kW vs 4000 kW).

    Honestly, wheeled vehicles probably do make some sense as lower-tier tech; I just really like things that hover :).
     
    #12
    TNTBOY479 likes this.
  13. TNTBOY479

    TNTBOY479 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2017
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    48
    While thats true stability would still be in favor of the tracks. Also a mining rig on tracks would be way better to use as you wouldn't need to worry about it suddendly pointing downwards (while making tunnels) if it bumps into anything. It would also open a whole heap of possibilites for enourmous tracked vehicles and maybe also slow moving mobile headquarters. Another obvious thing with tank tracks is a new type of tank that could be made. I would prefer having heavy attack tanks on tracks as opposed to hover as i prefer hover tanks being light and fast. I know you can make heavy hovers but id prefer it being on tracks.
     
    #13
  14. piddlefoot

    piddlefoot Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    3,488
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    + 1 for Wheels.

    + 1 for pistons.

    + 1 for ball joints !

    Unity does them all well.
     
    #14
    ion_storm, Sofianinho and TNTBOY479 like this.
  15. GauHelldragon

    GauHelldragon Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    135
    I get the feeling that adding wheels would be a lot of work for the developers. It sounds like an easy thing but getting all the physics working properly isn't trivial. Just look at space engineers wheeled vehicles. They've been working on it for what, years? And it's still super buggy (especially in mp) You'd have to introduce all sorts of stuff like friction and detecting collisions for all the wheels, and steering and probably a dozen more things I can't even think of.

    And all you'd end up with is just a basically a HV that is even harder to control and can go less places
     
    #15
    Mortlath and geostar1024 like this.
  16. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Exactly; KSP has been struggling with the same problem for years as well, and only very recently have their wheels become pretty stable (as of some months ago, a kraken drive based on wheels was still possible, though). And since the bulk of the work would fall on the coders, that would delay more much important projects, like spherical planets, and reworked weapon, energy, and propulsion systems.
     
    #16
    Mortlath likes this.

Share This Page