@Hummel-o-War , a couple questions. Edge cases but easily encountered; 1) Can a damaged or partially built, but non-mobile HV be docked? -- It doesn't sound like it, but since the current "docking" behaviour is simply triggered by proximity, I'm not clear on whether a busted up HV sitting in a field can be 'picked up' by a rescue SV. -- more useful would be if a partially built HV, just sitting on the deck, no generators, no bottom docking pads so not 'docked' to a base, but has a docking pad on the roof; could that HV be picked up? 2) if there are HV Docking Pads on the roof of the HV, and when the SV positions itself over the HV the raised HVs Docking Pads come in contact with the SVs Landing Pads, will the HV be able to dock? I understand that it's the HV Docking Pads that need to 'activate', wondering if there's logic in place to allow HV-Pad to SV-Pad contact & dock?
Empyrion Alpha 10.6 EXPERIMENTAL has gone live! Please use the threads in our EXP forum for GAMEPLAY feedback ( about values, balancing,..): https://empyriononline.com/forums/experimental-features-discussion.35/ Please proceed in this thread for general discussion about the feature itself! Thanks a lot for your contribution!
This doesn't work, at all, for me. This is the single most convoluted way of doing this... why in the world can't I just dock the HV to the SV while staying inside the SV?
Would it be possible to get more than 1 version of a docking pad. So we don't have to extend the dimensions of our HV by a level, since the current has to be the ONLY block on the current level.
Yes it can dock if the SV is positioned against the pad, once you enter the HV Cockpit it will dock. Undocking requires at least 1 Hover Thruster or Thruster as you have to move away from the SV. Just tested this in game.
What i have been thinking: How does weight/volume work if you dock a miner HV with decent armor and selfdefense (additional ammo, fuel, o2 weight) that is full of Ore to any SV with its week powered rcs. It seems the devs have implemented a way for minimal SVs using drag and lift mechanic. But whats with a heavy weight lifting VTOL SV? I am not a fan of todays jet fighter boring designs and also like asymmetric designs. Will thise be effected even more now?
Hmm... I wonder if you have a relatively low profile SV if you can just land it and dock an HV (with underside dock pads) by hovering up to full height and docking to the top of the SV? Which brings up another thought that I have never tried: If an HV travels over a base, it raises in height to remain at its same height relative to the base. Will an HV climb over an SV, or does an SV not count as "ground"?
Decided I needed to try it for myself. It is totally possible to mount your HV on top of an SV (see attached screenshot), and actually this might be the easiest way to do HV-SV docking. Plus, your HV probably already has bottom pads already for CV/BA docking. It seems like the HV does not try to jump up 3m when over the SV, so I don't think it is treated as "ground". BTW, this ship is about as big as you could probably get away with for this strategy... I had to point up a little and put up on top of the SV like climbing out of a hole. Another side benefit of this approach: I can enter my HV from inside the SV using the drone hatch!
ok some problems I see (this to me feels like we are being punished) SV&HV T4 base energy used 2,505 Size class 1.00 1.69tons 8 block count taking up 14 total block space and 59 Allocadted cpu (no thing but cores and extenders) total of 2,509 in ingots CV&BA T4 base energy used 6,205 Size class 1.00 3.79tons 8 block count taking up 14 total block space and 92 Allocadted cpu (no thing but cores and extenders) total of 3,487 in ingots this is the basic stats of your SV&HV CV&BA cores and extenders only this feels like a tax on us the thing that's supposed to give us CPU is using CPU that's dumb extra tons for a BA who no big deal but for flying crafts it's a big deal even for hovers they are taking up energy so they have to go with a minimum of a large generators for CV&BA and SV&HVs need 2 generators just for the cores they take up 14 blocks of space in a CV&BA no to big a deal now SV&HVs means a lot it makes stuff bigger and heavier than needs to be even after taking out unneeded RCs Simply make it a single core upgrade no CPU cost on it's self and have it just be the 90 kg and the base 5 pu that a core always use just up the cpu values (you could also add more levels easier if you do it this way)
why do regular blocks take up CPU that's dumb Shells should not take up CPU that's size class already so now we get double taxed Ship Size and CPU cost for do nothing blocks that's not fair
Tier 3 and Tier 4 are not expected of low level and starter ships. You'll probably be flying around in a CV before you even see a T3 extender. You're also using them wrong. You don't need T2 and T3 extenders to use T4; only for redundancy in the event one of your extenders gets destroyed would you ever use all 7 extenders. Since they're internally mounted, if something can take out one of your extenders through your armor you're already screwed. You're also putting this in the wrong thread. It should be in the CPU feedback thread, not the docking feedback thread.
If you have thrusters on the sides, you don't need RCS on an HV, but it helps. If you have RCS and no thrusters on the sides, there's nothing to stop it from sliding sideways due to an off-center COM. So thrusters are always needed for an HV (unless you're using Ground Repulsor Engines).
Considering some SV's are really big and you can't just jetpack on them, and even the HV itself can be so big you can barely jetpack over it, you cannot expect player to exit SV in order to undock the HV. At least not in singleplayer. You can only do that if the SV contains a hangar or you dock on top. Size class 1 is not the only way to build ships. So is it possible to have a undock ships button that would drop them and subject to gravity? Don't necessarily need a keybind (although why not), but at least a control panel button. If you do that when SV is stopped in air and HV is in hangar, it should propably attach back again in seconds, but the real purpose is for the underside docking.
Ah. It's small and I don't see any thrusters. So it must be using Ground Repulsor Engines. Ship thrust calculations for HVs are currently screwy; especially with Ground Repulsor Engines. Look at the ship statistics and you'll see the HV has 0 thrust (or negative, depending on the mass piled on top) since GREs and Hover Engines aren't technically thrusters. So the game thinks it's dragging along the ground.
@xelthor , just a guess but if your moved the L/R thrusters as far to the rear as possible, that might help w turning? Not sure but it seems that the further out from the center of mass you can get your thrusters the more torque they'll add. So things like swapping out the 1ea Med Front/Rear thrusters for 2ea Smalls, and have the smalls out at the corners instead of in-line to the mid-line should help as well. Edit: just did a quick test. Pic shows very different thruster layouts. The one w just Smalls out at the corners is on the edge of twitchy, the one with centerline & Mediums F/B barely turns at all.
I haven't read all of the posts, but I'm seeing a problem here and wanted to know if others are aware of it. As cool as the HV to SV docking is... I don't see the point of it. Literally everything a carrier SV could do, a CV can do infinitely better. For example: HVs have three main roles: scout, miner, and tank. Scout HVs are a thing of the past, since the new 'single-thrust' SVs are cheaper on CPU to make (one/two thrusters vs hovers and thrusters). Plus they are faster. I can see an SV carrying a mining HV or a tank around. But you're taking a big risk with drones shooting your HV while docked (since it's not shielded), and when you undock to do whatever in the HV, your SV is completely vulnerable (you can leave the shields on, but there's no turrets, meaning drones can eventually tear it apart). A CV can defend itself. Finally, the role of HV tanks is generally to take out a cluster of bases. Again, during that time, your SV is unprotected, requiring you to park far away from the bases (where drones can still find it). Again, this is solved vy using a CV because CVs have turrets, and can protect themselves. CVs also have higher storage. If you take out four POIs with your tank, fitting all the loot into the tank and the SV and then being able to move is going to take a LOT of CPU (as it should). With a CV, you can do it with small thrusters (I've done it before). To top it off, CVs can cure anything with their medical devices. So what are we supposed to use HV to SV docking for? I honestly don't see any use for it except as a VERY early game feature, before you have the neo for a CV. Then you can haul your miner around. It will make mining the neo for your CV easier, since you can warp to a different planet with your miner. Once you have a CV, you COULD use your SV to transport your HVs to the surface. But why would you? Why not just take a CV which can actually defend itself? Otherwise you're just risking ships. @Hummel-o-War Could you perhaps tell us how you see the new HV to SV docking feature being used in a survival game? Notes: This can be solved by putting turrets on SVs (which I don't think is necessary), OR by making some sort of mobile defense post (very small, one/two turrets, maybe minimal shielding at max levels). Make it a device like the water generator, which you can put down and pick up, and have to put fuel in. That would solve the problem easily, open up a ton of new gameplay options, and remove any need for CVs to land at all.
Trainer its rely simple it's not got SP it's for MP so you can work with a partner bring them in a tank with your fighting ship if they lost one so they can get back into the fight or to scout out the area with the SV then pick the HV up and drop it off near target so you can both attack it it's for fun RP and strategies
What does this have to do with size and mass ? Advanced ships can't be small ? Building small while being forced to add many heavy blocks that need power makes a vicious circle, requiring more generators (then fuel) to compensate, which in turn add mass which need more power (then fuel) to move, etc.
