A perfect example of Very specialized vessel (or even overspecialized since it purely for interior combat), yet it doen't fit in limit...
I'm a Survival PvE player, and personally I don't care how the CPU system works. I rely upon the workshop factory system, and have enjoyed the vast diversity of bases and ships. My beef is with Empyrion NOT updating the Pre-Fab Generic Blueprints IN THEIR GAME! Seriously, who dropped the ball here? If you are changing the game mechanics and the flight models, doesn't it make sense to include UPDATED PRE-FABS as examples of how to do it? I'm now marooned planet side in my game waiting for updated blueprints. I have no interest in ship designs, I just want something that works to do the task. If I wanted to deal with PvP attitudes I would have never left EvE Online!
They are updating them currently but it takes time. They already have some of them ready in the experimental branch if you want to test them. https://empyriononline.com/threads/alpha-experimental-11-1-patch.91347/
Okay I thought I was loosing my mind here for a second. Mate you already posted the same thing https://empyriononline.com/threads/proper-flight-controls-new-cores.37118/page-3#post-376478 So I'm not sure what your asking for here again. Your worry about the prefabs was already answered. It's not like there is an army of builders in here making the prefabs. The few that have been creating and updating have been hard at it doing just that and they are being tested now. All anyone can really tell you is to wait they are coming.
Nice! I've built similar in the past. I find them a bit... clumsy when inside the POI. Too long and too wide. Mine has a turret on the rear though so that adds to its length.
Hilarious irony that the Devs were proposed the idea that they could Implement CPU in a way comparable to CC + CE & the Devs feared it would be Complex because it looked Complex thus couldn't make a simple system... so instead they Implemented CPU in a way like Fuel Tanks/Generators/O2 Tanks because it looked simpler thus couldn't make unnecessary Complexity... Whoops. Hmm... ya gotta point here... hey, this feels familiar. I think i've seen this somewhere before...
I mean a sense of progression is a good thing, but you could have still used a modular system for that. Something like... Having CPU extenders that increase your ship's CPU, but also requiring you to upgrade your ship's core through the tiers to raise the max number of CPU extenders you can install. So: Tier 1 core = max of 0 extenders. (base CPU) Tier 2 core = max of 2 extenders. Tier 3 core = max of 4 extenders Tier 4 core = max of 8 extenders. This way your ship's total CPU is based on how many extenders you have, while still maintaining a sense of progression by upgrading your ship's core with rare components.
Well i do not argue about the poor way it is implemented. But the intend behind accelerated max speed cap is actually less a fail than you think, and actually severs a purpose. If i tell you that it feels more natural this way. You will disagree. And i know why: you are thinking of your natural feeling based on your knowledge. But try to think about this way: Imagine a little child, 5-8 years of age. It is standing at the shore watching two ships. One is a speed boat, one is a big container frighter. Now the speed boat passes by the container ship going full speed. Eventually it gets a book in its hands about ship and he learns that the Speedboat has 3000 hp, a couple of sites later he sees the container ship and learns it has 104,000 HP. So lesson learned bigger means slower in acceleration AND max speed. Natural feel in its average sense is totally independant from physical knowledge. Force to mass ration, atmospherical density, drag, drift, draft, gravity is all knowledge and has only little to do with something feeling natural. You are right that it is possible to reach high speeds in space with a huge ship. But in EGS there are two things colliding with that: very limited max speed due to technical issues, and the need to balance unlimited variations of possible builds. So it feels natural that bigger heavy ships can't go to fast. And since the game has a very limited top spead there is only very little room to take care of that through only acceleration alone. Not to forget space.... we do not have unlimited playfields to make an acceleration scenario possible. So to make up for small distances and a small acceleration min max range bigger/heavier ships need to fall behind somehow for that natural feeling to the whole thing. Only conclusion: max speed has to drop too. But i admit: they wentvover the top with it, and left out other aspects that are directly effected by it (reaching warp speed). Edit: It should be more in line with => additional mass 100% the vessels mass should only reduce max speed by 10%. This makes up for the limited acceleration frame we have to create this natural feeling to it.
Sorry, technical limitations don't make arbitrary and incorrect physics feel natural. Large (NOT heavy) cross sections naturally result in lower max speeds in water because of friction, viscosity, and displacement. Similar forces affect objects in atmospheres to a much lesser extent. Vacuum does not have them. This is not a game revolving around naval travel. It is a game revolving around space travel. It should make space feel like space not like submarines under water. People make spurious connections and false hypotheses all the time. They shouldn't be expected nor coddled when they form. If someone goes "wow, I never thought of that!" that's a good thing.
mass should have no bearing on max speed. That's a function of atmospheric pressure & aerodynamics. I was 9 years old when I learned that a feather & a bowling ball fall at the same speed in a vacuum. The only thing mass should affect is rate of acceleration when gravity is not a factor. When the same force is applied, more massive objects change speed at a slower rate. Mass has no logical bearing on maximum speeds.
That is your opinion. But if only acceleration is the deviding factor it is amlost non existing on the game as it is with such low max speed. Because mathematical there is a difference, practical it doesn't feel like much if acceleration changes in the 0.000x range. So there is no outrunning by smaller and lighter vessels. I don't actually see that as a great gameplay. Most of us learned that a feather and a piece of lead fall at the same speed in a vacum.... while your natural feeling is that a light and empty car can go faster than a heavily loaded truck. It just would FEEL wrong that a Stardestroyer would pass the fighters, even though you have LEARNED that it should be able to considering those huge engines in the back. So for a game iz should go more in the direction of Starwars rather than according to the physics law textbook. Long story short: for a only acceleration based system there is simply not enough room. Both distances and speed ranges. But we can keep on looking on details ignoring the bigger picture.
Sorry but you are mixing up "feeling" with "knowing". It would simply feel wrong if a huge battlecruiser could be as fast as a small gunship/corvette type CV. Even though you know it is technically incorrect. Edit: Many people probably know how naval travel feels, most people probably know how land travel feels, but unless you are an astronaut, you don't know how space travel actually feels... you only know how it should feel in a physically correct environment. But since this game can not be based on the theoretical knowledge of a few, the feeling should resemble something most people actually experienced. I am not saying you are wrong. Not saying geostar is wrong. I am just saying: unless this game doesn't have the scope, distances and speed limits of a Star citizen, just acceleration is not enough of a clear deviding factor. How can you ensure otherwise that a slightly heavier vessel slightly falls behind? If you can always reach max speed, it only falls behind for a few seconds but than stays at the same range. Not exactly what i call "out running".
No, I'm not. 'Feeling' doesn't matter when the experiences being drawn from aren't applicable to the ostensible situation. It's part of the joy of engaging a game where you can't experience the situation firsthand. If Empyrion was a naval game then the hypothetical people's 'feeling' would matter more as their experiences swimming and taking a bath would be applicable and informative. My feeling is the game feels very wrong when space has a large friction coefficient.
The laws of physics are not my opinion. Your belief that game mechanics should ignore the laws of physics to suit your aesthetic is an opinion.
I get what you're saying, in sci-fi smaller ships are typically shown as being faster than larger ships. But there's some problems with the way things are currently being done, namely that then your freighters can barely move and can't even warp when they are loaded with cargo. It's no fun to build an awesome freighter but only go 30m/s in space and be unable to warp simply because you have too low of a max speed. Likewise, if you add even more thrusters, suddenly you're super agile when you don't have any load. Freighters should be big bulky ships that are hard to speed up or slow down, but that doesn't mean they should be slow. Maybe a compromise is cargo doesn't affect max speed? It still wouldn't be realistic but it would give players better knowledge and control over their ship's stats. Still though, I'm firmly of the opinion that mass shouldn't affect max speed in space.
Except that same knowledge is the reason why people want a 'space' game, because they expect speeds, 3d movement, ranged combat and wast avaliable space. That's not the right thing to teach a child... bigger dosn't mean slower, it often doesn't mean less accelleration either. More inertia - yes, but inertia doesn't mean that bigger is slower, just that bigger uses more energy to gain speed. Freighter is slower not because it is bigger, but because nobody wants to spend money onto powerfull thrust (why bother when 25 is cheaper, requires smaller engine and does the work?). Most container ships are designed to work at 20-25 knots, aircraft carriers can reasonable reach and maintain 30 knots, yet they can be both heavier and bigger. Speedboats are around 50 knots, yet there are specialized military corvetes and frigates that can reach up to 60. No idea why it would feel wrong... Cars that are outruning bikes feels normal. And there are APCs that can outrun normal cars without much trouble despite having 8 wheels and being significantly bigger (they usually have limited speed because that's not what they are geared towards). P.S. The thing devs are doing wrong is their aproach. Instead of implementing 'why would large ship need to be fast? it's expensive!' approach they are simply doing artificial limits. I think simple specialization of thrusters will solve the issue just fine (into small, powerfull yet inefficient and into large, less overal power per kg, but much more efficiency). If done right, such specialization by itseft will split ships into at least int0 combat and cargo/heavy specialization.
Okay so what if a feather and lead will fall at the same rate in a vacuum on earth. It just means there is no air friction being applied. This can't be applied to the vacuum of space, there is no gravity being applied unless your close to a planet.
I like grinding! There is not much else to do without it! Finally some items that requires active search instead of autominers! Love it!
1. There is gravity of a star at least in case of Empyrion. Stick both into same orbit and they will have identical speed. 2. If you have a 10g feather and 1kg lead, if you apply to them proportionate amount of kinetical energy/s (lets say 10N/s and 1000N/s) they will gain identical accelleration and over 1 second will gain identical speed.
