There is nothing simple about CPU or the flight model, especially for new players, and the simple reason for that is its not a logical system people can relate too. CPU is almost a direct copy of PU in SE, it stinks. Its so suspiciously similar. If I wanted to go back to the days of SE, 3000 hours already there, I would, then I can have my PU [ CPU ] limits and be merry bla bla bla, but why take a good game and make it simply worse. If I have millions of dollars maybe I would create a studio but I dont, I put all my effort into this game because it was heading in a great direction, until CPU. I dont give a hoot what you think about me personally, or how much is repeated because new people enter threads that havent read it all and ask question etc, so stuff gets repeated all the time, get over it, Im sure you would not be complaining if it was repeating what you agree with. You guys have the opinion that less diversification is better than an expansion of diversification, no classes are better than actual real classes, less flight control options are better than more, its as simple as that, and the system I proposed was much less complex and logical. As logical as it was when they built the game like that from day one. Sometimes flogging a dead horse is the only way to get the message across. You know, when logical doesnt prevail, when people keep throwing the same BS at me in threads, because they were not here before the game went live, do not understand how flight controls were done in this game from day one, do not understand how to properly define class of ship in flying game, you know, you guys need educating in some regards, and if it takes flogging a dead horse as you put it to do so, so be it, because I care that people understand how this game was built from day one and that the game should improve its sandbox not restrict it. But I guess thats just me. Ol dead horse flogger. A mistake, is a mistake, CPU is a mistake, copying a feature to such a close degree when its to restrict building just sux. You want to copy features, my proposal is perfect, copy flight control sets from other games instead and diversify the games flight across potentially hundreds of planets. Or support the less diverse, less options, more restrictive, non logical CPU system.
Adding more core types would ruin 100% of workshop blueprints, by obsoleting them all. What good will ships with generic cores be if you add a pile of specialist cores that make ships behave completely different in such ways that completely new designs are required?
Wrong, maybe you should have read the original proposal. The Cv block we have doesnt change, the new ones get the special features and new flight controls, the current CV block is effectively a space carrier, but it can do what it can do now still. The SV block would have become the scout. How do you encourage people to then build on new cores, and not damage a single BP for the last five odd years, you give those new cores special abilities, and specialize the game and ships. On top of that, new specific device blocks could have been created for each class, giving them even more specialisation and abilities. Then CPU system could have been used as a carrot system instead of a stick system. Right now we cannot build a proper specialized SV drop ship to carry an HV to the ground, its effectively just an SV, the only class of SV we have, SV, my proposal opened the door for things like an SVD, SVDropship, specifically for carrying an HV to the ground from orbit, doing it the way I proposed would have given the devs 100% control over class, size, weight, flight controls and specific devices. A much much more diverse system than the current CPU and flight controls. An SVD ship for simple example could have had a simple rule applied to it, any thruster pointing downwards gets a 3x boost or similar, this gives that starter core the SVD a special ability, a real, properly defined specialized vessel, which we do not have in Empyrion to this day. Thats before we even touch on how many sets of flght controls we could have had, from spitfires to Yaks to FA18s to Cessna to jets to jump jets, to vertical rockets to gliders to space rockets to warp drives etc. All flight control sets that NASA have worked with to get to space in the real world. It is LITERALLY the most unrealistic and un-relatable flight control system possible, straight of an 80's arcade pinball type machine is what it feels like. Buy a few RC planes and tell me they all have the same flight controls, its absurd how we have done it in Empyrion, 1 set literally does all, and the CV is a clone of teh SV flight controls wit ha few very minor parameter changes, not enough to define itself properly. So yes, the system I proposed would have expanded workshop, not damaged a single build, you right now would not need to modify a single BP for that feature to work perfectly. But you right now are looking at 65,000 BP damaged by the system we put in, instead of the logical system I proposed, that the game has used from day one, where the flight controls are defined by the starter core. We should have simply added more to that, not taken the ones we have and made them way overly complex with no actual gains, and worse, actual losses, we are now restricted in how we build, have a specific shape thats the best, so all builds are becoming similar, its literally the very worst system possible for creativity, proven by the fact inert blocks still have a CPU cost.
65,000 BP....where do you get this number from if I may ask? I mean the WS currently contains over 83.000 BPs, not included POI's HV/SV/CV/BA
At the time of the release of version 11 it was 65, 000 - 66,000 I dont remember the precise number but I did post it on the forums here somewhere in a CPU thread. Of which we were told would not be effected for the most, which turned out to be, not true. Because the CPU arbitrary levels were set so tight, pretty much almost every ship was just stuck on the ground. The number itself came directly off steam workshop entries for our CV, SV, HV categories. BA were not included. At 83,000 we now have at least, 17 odd thousand working BPs again, its hard to say how many of them are re-works though and how many are ''new'' builds. You know under the proposal I suggested, there would be thousands of new entries in workshop now, bugger all re-works. The numbers would have reflected much more accurately how many ''new'' builds were on workshop. We could be looking at 5 categories for each ship type by now, 5x SV type, 5x HV type , 5x CV type, people would have loved to build on new cores with NEW abilities. People love new toys. That system is nothing but new toys to play with bringing true specialisation with it. People would have loved the chance to be one of those who made it to the front page of workshop, being more categories, opens that up to be much more diverse also. You would be seeing right now, some truly special builds with some truly special abilities. People would have loved that whole system in general. I think some people see the huge benefits of this system, how can they not when its been explained in such detail, but refuse to acknowledge it, Im not sure why, pride, dislike of me, wanting to be the devs best yes man, I just dont know why, but its so obvious the current system we have with flight controls and CPU is utterly garbage and will never make this game super popular, like a couple of dozen new starter cores, classes of ship and real flight controls would have. Doesnt make sense that anyone supports such an inferior feature like CPU and the flight controls we have now to me, its such a poorly designed system, with the intention of restricting us over freeing us. And it was designed with that in mind, inert blocks CPU cost, stupid , goes against creativity in every way. Just not the sandbox voxel way at all. The proposal I made Jermanicus, was never intended to offend you, it was intended to help expand your game as much as everyone else's. It was a proposal that followed the very way the devs did it in teh first plce, it was a proposal put in SO LONG before version 11 there is no argument for it being proposed to late. It as how they did flight controls from day one, it gives the devs complete control without damaging our creativity. Something CPU utterly fails at. It was, and I challenge you here, the best proposal for proper specialisation of this games building and flight control system this game has seen in over 5 years, and that criteria, is literally build freedom, specialisation, diversification of flight controls. Whats the criteria of CPU ? To restrict players into building to a style the developers intend to help performance. To achieve a breaking down of the leveling up system into more segments reaching the same end point. Not actually extending the end point. Whats the criteria of the flight controls, well my guess is, its something like this, Whats the most simple and easiest way out of this, clone the controls, as seen from SV to create the CV in the first place, and then, to expand those flight controls to every ship in the game, so every thing flies similar, utterly destroying any real specialisation there was. Second criteria, force players to build in a set style that helps the strange flight control system, rather than have set and defined flight controls specific to each type of core, that could have then been expanded on with specialised blocks and features, just such a huge fail this is. Or incorporate both. But Im sure you can se the advantages that system would have had. It would not have left any workshop builds outdated in need of repair. Every single build Ive ever done needs repair because of CPU. I cant even count how many that is. When there are good options to avoid such disruption to workshop in this game available, its really such poor form to not use such suggestions over something that literally outdates 65,000 plus workshop builds. I mean that is literally asking for forum grief, bad reviews, and a long term drop in average sales.
Hey all I've not been around much of late, but fancied starting a fresh Survival game to kill some time. Things progressed well and, when it came time to build my first HV, I over engineered it somewhat vs. base spec. So, rather than using the Ground Repulser Engine, I used the "Proper" T1 Hover Engine - eight of them, more than I need. I also used "Proper" Thrusters, just the basic one but I had three in each direction for 12 in total. I then added a Constructor, Armour Locker, Fridge and seven of the highest capacity Cargo boxes - I've not unlocked Container Extensions yet. I also took advantage of the new, tiny Generator and Fuel Tank - nice additions. I loaded up all my worldly belongings and off I went. The HV, while a little sluggish to turn, flew across the terrain at the full 50 m/s. Nice. During my travels I found an Alien Unknown Structure, from which - after killing two Nightmares - I looted a Laser Rifle, 15 Erestrum and 14 Zascosium. Nice. Setting off again, it took me a moment to realise that my top speed was now limited to 32 m/s. In my defence, the terrain was rough, so I wasn't really able to get up to speed. Finding this odd, considering the only mass I'd added to the HV was that Laser Rifle, 15 Erestrum and 14 Zascosium, I moved these into my personal inventory (this still works, right?) to see if I went back up to 50 m/s, but I did not. I'm a little surprised by this, the HV was doing the full 50 m/s - albeit somewhat over-engineered to do it - but just adding a little more weight appears to have nerfed my speed permanently. Has anyone else seen this? The HV is well under the base 5,000 CPU allowance, so is 100% efficient. In the past, my basic, minimalist HV's have been, well, crap once I started to load them up. Hence why I over-engineered it this time. I started where I'd usually evolve the HV to, after I loaded it up, but it's been severely compromised already. HV is carrying just 2.2t of cargo, yet is slowed despite having three thrusters in each direction. It's also nothing special, very much a basic HV made from Carbon Composite blocks, the most decadent item on it is the Constructor. Just thought I'd share my experience. I really don't like cargo mass reducing top speed you know... Hopefully A12 will change things further back in the right direction in this regard. Scoob.
Changing the existing blocks would wreck 100% of existing workshop blueprints, whereas just adding optional devices you can slap on an existing ship to give it special abilities would not wreck any. All you'd need to do is add a single block to an existing blueprint and you're good to go.
If you have mass/volume enabled, your ships total mass can reduce it's max speed. Adding more thrust can help.
Nope, as I explained thats not true, read the proposal again if you must, but all current starters are uneffected, that was one of the great things about it. They effectively became the space version of there class. Most of the new starter cores would have been for atmosphere flight. Something this game desperately lacks, to this day. But a few would also be for space, to bring true specialisation to that arena also. Things like a Stealth starter core, with its own unique flight controls and devices. A heavy Ore hauler in the CV variety, things like that could really have been a game changer for Empyrion. Had we done that, posts on forums like, oh, War Thunder or a Microsoft Sim forums and a few others that dont come to mind as I dont play them a whole lot, then posts on forums of theres about this games ability to build your own with unique flight controls, I just know it would have brought thousands, because thousands of players have talked about such things on there forums for years, no game has really done it and Empyrion has the potential and system to do it, already built into the game, since 2013-2014. So why not have multiple new sets of flight controls ? Why not ? Just why not ? There has not been one single reason Ive ever read that justifies not doing it. Even if its done with current CPU. The flight control systems of the game should still evolve into something much better than they currently are. Anyway the current flight model just feels like NMS flying now, its ok for Space, but for every other medium, ie, all atmospheres it feels utterly STUPID. Instead of having specialized aircraft for different environments in Empyrion, we have the lazy approach of one glove fits all. Rather sad it didnt take advantage of something that could have potentially dragged thousands of new players from another genre into teh game, while not alienating its current playerbase , something Empyrion used to be really good at. Empyrion was a game that brought hundreds of people from different games and genres together. Its one of its most valuable assets, to move away from that principle is sad to say the least. Its what got the game off the ground in the first place, dont change a winning formula.
Heh, yes, I am aware of that...I may have mentioned it a few times on the forums lol. My point was more regarding that I knew this and I was surprised how adding so little weight made such a big impact, then removing that weight did not increase the top speed again. Scoob.
Mouse and Keyboard are exploits with teh flight control system. You can fly straight, in atmo, throw the ship into a 360 turn at top speed and keep flying. I mean seriously, do that to any military jet and its toast, not to mention the completely un-survivable G-forces the pilot would cop, this must be some sort of joke. Thats seriously how this game wants to go into teh future with flight controls and not even offer some new sets of flight controls ? The keyboard and mouse are so sensitive they are effectively cheating physics, and distorting the flight controls, making it much easier for CVs to turn on a dime, and much harder for the devs to control that. But so many people want to fly with the mouse, which is fine, and why flight controls should be properly defined. Why air craft or space craft should have set parameters to things like turn rates and CPU should be a booster to that not something restrictive. There is even a great example of how to do flight controls where a mouse and keyboard can be used, WarThunder. They really nailed it spot on, no matter how hard you throw that mouse to the side, you simply cannot go past the aircrafts actual max turn rate for what its physically capable of under our current laws of physics. They used real data from the real planes to define and set the parameters of there flight controls for each model of plane. No reason Empyrion cant add some new flight controls for atmospheric flight, there are so many examples of how to do that its a simple thing really. And what would it hurt ? Having a few new flight control sets ? Having flight control sets that actually slightly relate to our laws of physics would make flying much more immersive and believable. Empyrion feels like flying space games from the 90s. This game, and the developers absolutely can do much better than the current flight control set. Why not add a few new ones, what does it hurt ?
Eventually you did not calculate YOUR "Dead Weight" correctly? You were still sitting in the Vessel, right?
Well, I have put on a few kg since the lock-down started, but no need to get personal eh Joking aside, does my weight actually count now? I mean, I put the heavier, but not too large, items in my inventory and the weight in the vessel did go down, so I'm guessing not. Scoob.
No, I don't believe that our weight lifting Champions are accounted for this issue...or charged for their Eating habits
Shoooh, the infamous they, them will tax you if they find out your eating more ! Instafudtax ! The tax you get when your in lockdown !
Since this is related to the flight mechanics and those are technically speaking A11 feature, I'll drop it here. I have to admit I have serious problem with the way the mass affecting max speed. First, let's differentiate between the two separate environements, space and planet/moon. A) SPACE In space, I do not see any logical reason for the ships to be affected by some max speed limit, other than the technical max speed of the engine. It is extremely immersion breaking when ships in space have varying top speeds depending on their mass, force of thrust and side they are facing. Realistically, max speed is something present in planet/moon environements due to external forces acting against the ship's motion - gravity, atmospheric drag atc. Those forces are simply not present in empty space or are extremely minuscule. To quote my other favourite sci-fi game: "Sir Isacc Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-b*tch in space!" I understand there has to be a speed limit due to the limitation of the game engine, that one is a no-brainer, but due to a basic laws of fyzics, there isn't any reason for the max speed to be different between ships in space. Unless we are talking about relativistic speeds, when mr. Albert Einstein would get his say, the speed limit in space should be the same no matter the thrust or mass of the vessel. Now, pitch, roll, yaw and acceleration, those are of course different beasts, it does make a difference if you're riding an overloaded freighter with a minimal thrust or a racing ship with minimal weight and massive thrust. Keep those things and let go of the variable top speed in speace, please. Don't make me beg you. B) PLANET I admit, in planet and moon playifields, the variable maximum speed does make a sense, there is simply a point where the resistance of the environement can't be overpowered by the thrust force anymore, however, please, don't use differents values for one ship. Yes, it's probably actually realistic a ship can get faster flying forward where the pointy nose is, than sideways, where there is larger area of the hull and probably less thrust, but the way these different top speeds on different sides affect the flight moidel currently is really painful. Sure, it affects some vessels more than others, but it get's extremely weird an annoing when the ship has significantly more thrust in one or two directions than in the rest. Basicaly, even slightest turn can rob a ship of a lot of her speed and momentum, and basicaly stalls the ship in mere seconds. Please use the highest possible speed of the ship for the whole ship or at least significantly reduce the deceleration when the orientation changes, otherwise some ship designs will inevitably suffer.
