Would there be a way to make extension assignment dynamic? Say I have a BA/etc. with with X extensions and controller A. Controller A has 9,000 SU and is assigned 1 extension(16,000 SU.) Then I add 8,000 SU of ore, when it reaches 16K it requests another extension, and if its available its assigned to controller A increasing the available to 24K. If no extension is available it behaves exactly as it does now. If A drops below 16K again it can either automatically release after a set time or manually be released. The current system attributes the logistics to short range matter transmissions so the Adjacent and no touch could be bypassed. I'm sure there are issues I don't see, but it seems workable.
I've played a longer game with mass/volume enabled, and think it is mostly ready for prime-time. A few issues/annoyances: When salvaging a base made from Combat Steel Blocks, I noticed that the volume/mass of the block far exceeds the source materials by an order of magnitude. I had a small SV that could only transport about 50 blocks and had a hard time getting off the ground doing so. Yet, I set up a deconstructor on this base, and reduced it to sathium ingots and steel plate, and was able to transport materials for several hundred blocks easily. I think the base blocks are too heavy - my impression was that they aren't really solid blocks, but contain electronics, pipes, ductwork, and so forth. So perhaps their mass is a bit extreme. There was a new "Small Constructor" introduced. As far as I can tell, the sole purpose of this device is to manufacture a "Large Constructor" because you can't really build many common base components with the small constructor. (The first thing I wanted to do was build a large solar panel.) If the small constructor is supposed to actually be useful, more recipes need to be moved into it. If the small constructor really is just intended as a stepping stone to a large constructor, then consider having the portable constructor instead make a "large constructor kit", which is 2x2x2 and you place it down, load it with some more materials, and then it builds itself into a large constructor. SV thrusters need to be rebalanced. HV got some attention recently, now it is time for the SV. It is needed because the average weight of an SV is now much higher than before since cargo mass is included. We need a T2 RCS for HV/SV very badly. We needed it already but it is even worse with cargo mass. I have one SV that has like 300 RCS in it, and since cargo mass was added, it turns really slowly when loaded with stuff. How can anything with 300 RCS turn slowly?? Putting stuff in a fridge or ammo box doesn't seem to affect the center-of-mass of an HV, seems like a bug. Not sure whether player inventory is affecting cargo mass either.
Well, even with their current masses, armor blocks actually are still mostly empty space. The only devices that actually are close to solid density are the CV RCS devices. Still, probably the best solution is to reduce the masses of every block and device while increasing the number (and thus mass) of ingredients (especially for CV/BA-sized blocks and devices). The main thing is that a block should have the same mass as its constituent components. The progression that would make sense to me would be for the small constructor to be the analog of a T1 mobile constructor, while the large constructor would be the analog of a T2 mobile constructor (but maybe with somewhat more in the way of capabilities, like speed). Essentially, this kind of setup would not penalize a player for choosing to develop an HV over a BA.
I don't think the block needs the same mass as the constituent components, although it should be closer than it is now. Construction is simplified in the sense that the things you are building do not actually consist of exactly the metal ores you are using as input - there's going to be all sorts of bonding materials, epoxy, screws/bolts, brackets, rubber, plastic, liquids and gases like coolant, and so forth added that aren't represented by the ingredients. The ingredients you have to supply are just a subset of what is actually used. (Case in point - glass is made of silicon dioxide, not elemental silicon.)
I'm just confused by the 2 fact that: 1. Have a SV 90t which can beat 6g (58m/s2) 2. Fill Cargo (300t +90t = ~400t) 3. See the ship beeing stuck at ~11m/s You know.. my perception/logic tells me this: When I can lift off 6g, i could lift off 6 times my own weight in 1g... But when i add 3 times my own weight, it's already down to LESS than 12m/s2. That is… aside of the fact that a 2x2x2m cube of steel uses LESS SU than a 2x2x2m cube of CS... Despite both beeing 2x2x2m.... how do they take different volume ?!? while having the same dimesions??!?!
Something's not right there; under those conditions, your acceleration ought to be ~13.3 m/s^2. Given that blocks and devices are mostly hollow, it would be possible for blocks to fold up/compress to higher density when stored. Personally, I'd like to see all items consistently fold to solid density in storage.
Im getting tired of.. use a hv as base.. mainwhile.. 'everythimg' is done to remove all purposes of a cv, other than to change orbits... But hey.. a hover base makes much more sense than a capital ship.. Specialy since there are so many sci-fi where everyone is livimg in hover vessels, and none in ships.. Specialy.. to not penalitize who wants to use hover as base.. What? But a cv as base is overkill (general saying, not you)? R u kidding me?!
