CPU Base/Vessel Observations, Issues and Suggestions @ELEON Devs- I have been reviewing my BPs (Bases & Vessels) for the impact of the new CPU Tier system and some the Thruster changes. I was only looking at my current in game BPs use and a few new ones that I held off on Until the Public release of A11. This is what I have found after completing these reviews this week. As a note here, I only build vessels that can support use on 4G planets (For Weights /Volumes) to save having to build Special 4G versions. I just use Signal Logic to reduce Thruster usage to save power/fuel on less than 4G planets. My BPs range from a Hover bike-Day 1 to Size class 5 late-game CV and CV support base with Large CV landing pad. I modified each vessel to try to comply with the CPU tier requirements by removing All RCS, Adding CPU Extension blocks as needed and making some other changes to help reduce the CPU numbers (I.E. reducing/changing the Thrusters since the larger ones have more thrust now). For the bases I only added the needed CPU Extension blocks. HV/SV seemed to be the hardest to make CPU compliant. Many of these went from a mid-game vessel to a late-game without having anything that was late-game on them other than the CPU cost pushing them One or TWO Tiers higher. The larger HV/SVs (mostly size class 2+) are NOT compliant and cannot be modified enough to get them there. Adding a constructor to Starter HV/SV should Not cause it to go to a Tier 2 CPU. These are Early game builds and you do not have a Base yet. I use them as a mobile Mini-base until I can find a Temporary base to use and to build stuff (Like 15mm Ammo) on the move. Mid-game Cargo haulers, Mid to Late Game Tanks and the New SV Hauler vessel need lots of Blocks/Thrusters which raises the CPU numbers to higher Tiers or just Not even complainant. The CVs and Bases all were made CPU compliant, BUT several were higher than I expected and should have been a lower Tier for their size and components used. These were less problematic to get in compliance, but many of the Blocks and components are still a bit high in CPU cost. I have listed the Vessels/Bases with general specs., what happened after changes and my suggestions for each Category. The Level Unlock listed is Before any Core Extensions have been added to show the starting number for the Vessel/Base. I can supply additional information as needed. HV: Hover bike-Day 1, Sparrow, Blu-Ice, Tank, We-Haul Cargo(HV) -Level 1 Unlock, Tier 1- 1.3K CPU, Class 1 (1.00) just basic parts. Complied with no issues. -Level 5 Unlock, Tier 2- 5.9k CPU, Class 1 (0.30) Starter HV, Steel, Gats, Constructor. 2k Storage, No Shield. Should be Only Tier 1, can NOT make T2 extension at this point. -Level 12 Unlock, Tier 4- 61k CPU, Class 2 (1.55), Mid-game Lite Attack/Salvage HV, Hardened Steel, Gats, MG & Rockets, Constructor, Shield, Multi-tool, 23k Storage + 29k Ore/wood. Used for Taking / Looting Medium & smaller POIs that do not have shields. Should be at most a Tier 3, which still requires getting enough Loot to sell for buying T3 Extensions OR getting lucky and finding the parts needed. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 3. -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 4-85k CPU, Class 2 (1.87), Mid to Late game Tank, Combat Steel, Shield, Constructor, Maximum Weapons without Artillery, Multi-tool, 21k Ore/wood, 3k Ammo. Used for Taking / Looting Medium & Larger POIs that have shields. Can NOT be made compliant and big changes would defeat purpose of it being a “Tank”. Blocks, Weapons & Thrusters are what pushed the CPU cost up. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 4. -Level 12 Unlock, Tier 4- 50k CPU, Class 1 (1.01), Mid-game Cargo HV, Steel, Gats, Constructor, Shield, 2x32k Storage. Used for moving cargo and has multiple docking on 4 sides to use SV hauler or CVs. Should be at most a Tier 3. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 3. Current CPU Tiers T1-5k, T2-12k, T3-30k, T4-70k Suggested CPU Tiers T1-8k, T2-20k, T3 50k, T4-100k Other suggested changes: Reduce the CPU cost of the following- Blocks in general (Especially Hardened/Combat Steel), HV constructor, Cargo controllers/ extensions, Thrusters and Hover engines, Shield, Weapons. Need to change the T2 extension build in a Small constructor and not just a Large/Advanced constructor. Lower Tier 4 Unlock to L17. NOTE: Maybe Add a new “XL” thruster (Size 1x4x1) to reduce the number of thrusters needed for larger HVs. SV: SVS, Mini BA, Viper, We-Haul Cargo(SV) & Hauler -Level 7 Unlock, Tier 1- 3.7K CPU, Class 1 (0.25) Starter SV, Gats, No Constructor, Shield or Warp. Only 500su storage. Complied with no issues. -Level 12 Unlock, Tier 3- 40k CPU, Class 1 (0.76) Mid-game SV, Steel, Gats & Rockets, Constructor, 2k Storage, Shield, No Warp. Used for Taking and some Looting of small POIs in particular the Airborne ones. Should be Only Tier 2. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 2. -Level 17 Unlock, Tier 4- 78k CPU, Class 2 (1.60) Later Mid-game SV, Hardened Steel, Gats, Rockets, Plasma Cannons, Constructor, 18k Storage, Shield, Warp. Used for Taking / Looting of Medium & smaller POIs in particular the Airborne ones, although Ground based ones are doable too. Has Warp for going off-world without using a CV. Should be Only Tier 3. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 3. -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 4- 266k CPU, Class 2 (2.47), Later Mid-game Cargo SV, Steel, Gats, Constructor, Shield, Warp, 6x32k Storage. Used for moving cargo between Bases and/or CVs. Blocks, Cargo Extensions & Thrusters are what pushed the CPU cost up. Can NOT be made compliant. Would defeat purpose of Heavy lift Cargo SV. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 4. -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 4- 214k CPU, Class 3 (3.49), Later Mid-game Cargo SV, Steel, Gats, Constructor, Shield, Warp, Large Docking area. Used for moving 1 or more HV/SVs around on Planet or off. Blocks, & Thrusters are what pushed the CPU cost up. Can NOT be made compliant. Would defeat purpose of Heavy lift Hauler SV. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 4. Current CPU Tiers T1-6k , T2-15k, T3-40k, T4-100k Suggested CPU Tiers T1-10k , T2-25k, T3-60k, T4-175k Other suggested changes: Reduce the CPU cost of the following- Blocks in general (Especially Hardened Steel), SV constructor, Cargo controllers/extensions, Thrusters, Shield, Weapons. Need to change the T2 extension build in a Small constructor and not just a Large/Advanced constructor. Lower Tier 4 Unlock to L17. CV: Mitey Mite, Pugna Navis -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 4- 2.8M CPU, Class 1 (1.49) MG, Cannon & Flak Turrets + Sentry Guns, Standard Steel, T1 Shield, Warp, Repair Bay/Console/Station, 2 each Small & Advanced constructors, Full Medical suite, 36 Plot farm. Storage = 2x320k, 2x240k, 2x216k, 32K Ammo. Used for Mid-game Multi-role, High-gravity capable CV. Complied, BUT should be Only Tier 3. Requires changes to CPU cost/Tier levels to get to Tier 3. -Level 25 Unlock, Tier 4- 6.5M CPU, Class 5 (5.07) Maximum Weapons with NO Laser drills, Combat Steel, T1 Shield, Warp, Repair Bay/Console/Station, 5 Small & 4 Advanced constructors, Multi-tool & Drill turrets, Full Medical suite, 12-T1 Generators, 72 Plot farm. Storage = 6x320k, 4x128k, 1x288k Ore/wood, 2x120K Ammo. Used for Late-game Multi-role (Mobile base, Mining, Salvage & Combat), High-gravity capable CV. Complied with no issues. Current CPU Tiers T1-200k , T2-500k, T3-1.5M, T4-10M Suggested CPU Tiers T1-500k , T2-1.0M, T3-5.0M, T4-10.0M Other suggested changes: Reduce the CPU cost of the following- Blocks in general (Especially Hardened/Combat Steel), Constructors, Cargo controllers/extensions, Repair Bay/Station, Thrusters, Shield, Warp drive, Weapons. NOTE: Please Add a De-constructor to CVs. Many folks use a Large CV with their support HV/SVs onboard to roam around, But need a Base to de-construct Loot/salvage. BA: Defense towers, UG MK3, Mini-Support, CV Support -Level 7 Unlock, Tier 1- 44K CPU, Class 1 (0.21) Cannon & Flak Turrets, Armored Concrete, No Shield. Only Small Generator, a few solar panels, 8K Ammo. Used for Base perimeter defense. Complied with no issues. -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 3- 470K CPU, Class 1 (1.64) MG, Cannon & Flak Turrets + Sentry Guns, Armored Concrete, T1 Shield. 13 Large solar panels, Repair Bay/Console/Station, De-constructor, Furnace, 2 each Small & Advanced constructors, 36 Plot farm. Storage = 2x288k, 2x192k, 1x32k, 24K Ammo. Used for Mid-game Deployment base with landing pad on top and built-in defense towers above ground. Complied with no issues. -Level 12 Unlock, Tier 3- 355K CPU, Class 1 (1.12) MG, Cannon & Flak Turrets, Armored Concrete, T1 Shield. 4 Large solar panels, Repair Station, De-constructor, NO Furnace, 2 each Small & Advanced constructors, 27 Plot space left. Storage = 1x216k, 2x192k, 1x32k, 16K Ammo. Used for Mid-game Deployment above ground base with NO landing pad. Complied with no issues. -Level 15 Unlock, Tier 4- 1.01M CPU, Class 5 (5.15) MG, Cannon & Flak Turrets, Armored Concrete, T1 Shield. 14 Large solar panels, Repair Bay/Console/Station, De-constructor, Furnace, 2 Small & 3 Advanced constructors, Full medical suite, 90 Plot space left. Storage = 4x320k, 8x200k, 1x104k, 40K Ammo. Used for Late-game below ground CV support base with landing pad sized for Class 5 CVs. Complied with no issues. Current CPU Tiers T1-80k , T2-200k, T3-500k, T4-1.3M Suggested CPU Tiers T1-100k , T2-250k, T3-750k, T4-2.0M Other suggested changes: Reduce the CPU cost of the following- Blocks in general (Especially Armored Concrete, Hardened/Combat Steel), Constructors, Cargo controllers/extensions, Furnace, Repair Bay/Station, Shield, Weapons.
i start to lose will to post here...also because look as all the argument are in place already. But the message look as is clear. Personally i like the cpu system. But need to be rebalanced and a little improved...because at the moment is just a complication. Really need to improve drastically the torque and power of the engine.....because for that cpu they take is simple not enoughr or adopt plan B. ( remove the fly dynamic ) Regarding the the new fly dynamic the best word who i have read inside the whole tread is Horrid.......and i really agree with that....is just bad as a overrall. A part for that as some one noted on this tread, respect before all. Is really bad see flame and player insulting each other o show a lack of respect.....just calm down....life is short.
can we get also a real drop rate about the optronic matrix and optronic bridge ? since the beginning of the A11, and several planet purged from zyrax and alien every days ... got ony 2 small matrix and bridge and 1 large matrix ... i know i can buy it , but i'm not very friendly with polaris , and farming gold
The first issue i'm seeing with your builds' description working with CPU is that you're putting too many unneccessary things into your ships and overcompensating for situations that don't exist; trying to multi-role builds that simply don't work together. The Tank/Salvager is a clear one. You can have a tank or you can have a salvager, you can't have both; at least not without compromising the effectiveness of one or the other aspect. Another is Shields: You've got a dedicated cargo hauler SV for moving cargo between BAs and CVs and it has shields. It doesn't need them, in fact 90% of ships people claim absolutely must have shields, don't because they don't see combat. And while someone may come up with some hypothetical situation where they're attacked by a space drone or patrol vessel travelling between planets in their cargo ship, that will never happen because neither spawn like that and both are too slow to pose a threat, provided you don't fly straight into them. Constructors: How often do you use your constructors on a Tank? How many constructors do you need to run at your base at any one time? I certainly doubt you need 4 advanced constructors AND 4 small constructors to process a single miner's worth of ore into ingot; and any combat vessel is better off losing the constructor and a supply of parts (both become useless if one or the other is destroyed) for extra storage containing replacement devices. Generators: Use generators equal to your maximum power consumption in-atmo. I see you're using 14 T1 Generators on your mobile base and there's nothing that could possibly use that much power. They're also heavy, so every extra generator you don't use you're weighing down your thrusters. Armor: I bet your hardened steel and combat steel builds are solid, aren't they? Cut down on interior design costs by using weaker materials like carbon composite or just steel on the interior and you can shave off thousands in CPU and build costs (and mass, which makes you faster). Even exterior details, like those tiny little end-cap blocks and thin strips could be replaced with ordinary steel since they provide little physical defense to your ship, while adding full weight, CPU and build cost. Weapons: You don't need maximum weapons to be effective. Look at the HP of an AI turret and the amount you'll find on a POI. 4 rockets is enough to take out any AI turret and a rocket launcher/turret can fire around one a second, whether that comes from 4 turrets/launchers or 1 is up to you. But you're never going to fit inside the limit if you have 8 rockets, 8 gatling, 4 plasma AND 4 laser turrets all on the same HV/CV. For every device you add that's excessive, you add more weight. More weight means more thrusters, which in turn means more CPU. Check your PDA missions. I believe there are repeatable quests added a few weeks ago that give optronic parts. I don't know what they are though, because I forgot they added them until yesterday.
I personally love the CPU restrictions, and M/V. I like that there is a dynamic to building. The game is still in development, and we can see there is room for improvement. If the current direction is an indication of the future, I think its going to be great. NOW, if only we could get a crouch function!
Plus people in the past, including but not limited to @LiftPizzas has talked about before how it can really suck how long it can take as is to get from Interesting Thing A to Interesting Thing B & back & have nothing fun to do in-between... surely THIS does not need made worse...
I understand the concept behind the CPU mechanic but I struggle with the implementation. The way the tiers are done is an outright size limitation. I know the devs have said it isn't but it obviously is. the hard cap on how high the CPU limit goes makes this obvious. I've played with this and I have some suggestions ... well a recommended complete rework. Complaints: A) Why are general blocks included in this? I build my bases in survival (I play in a co-op PvE server with 5 other people) and my biggest CPU cost in my base? Armored Concrete followed by Concrete Blocks. If the CPU mechanic isn't meant to be a size limiter then why do purely structural blocks contribute to this? I could have a small hollow base with nothing but a core and armored concrete blocks and already be over the CPU limit. This should be rethought. B) Why are there CPU POINT tiers instead of CPU BLOCK tiers? Why hard limit the CPU points if it is not a size limiter? This part of the implementation seems strange and overly complicated. Recommendations: 1) Remove structural blocks from the CPU calculation. These already have a mass penalty, why not utilise this more effectively rather than implement yet another size control? If a lack of CPU power is not going to effect it, why is it in the calculations? Are the Armored Concrete blocks going to crumble or get weaker if there isn't enough CPU power? 2) Keep the CPU block tiers. Have each block individually contribute a set amount of CPU points rather than having a number of blocks create a CPU point tier (this just over complicates this system and arbitrarily cripples it). Each block tier can follow the progression system you already have. Each higher tier block is double the size of the previous but is far more efficient in terms of CPU points, size, power and mass ratio. This is the player's incentive to build better CPU blocks. Those with only the more common resources can still chain together several lower tier CPUs to achieve a result but no where near as efficiently. We've already seen this idea in the Xenu Mainframe (the middle floor, those rows of computer decos). The higher CPU tiers can (and should) still require rare and difficult to acquire resources. 3) Lower the points each CPU contributes to account for what it covers. This is a tweaking game. What points should lower equipment cost vs higher equipment and then work backwards from there. How many low / mid / high tier CPUs should be required to support these? Balance as required. This would, IMO, create an open ended CPU system that would still drive the upgrading of CPU blocks. High gravity / Large CVs would probably still require high tier CPU blocks to make them mass and size efficient. It would also create the idea of computer rooms in large CVs / Bases devoted to housing and protecting CPU assets. Smart designs would distribute CPU blocks in redundant nodes in combat ships so their CPU capacity cannot be taken out in a single hit. I can see much more open ended possibilities in such a system. Unless of course, it's a size limiter.
Hello, have thinking long about, to write my Opinion. The Volume and the CPU System are not thought-out. Why must the whole BP Stock be aligned to the CPU and Volume-System? it should be the other way around. New Systems/menchanics must aligned to the BP and existing Engine/Mechanic. I dont cut my Toes off to fit in a small Shoe! Most of the Vehicles i use are unusable with the CPU/Volume On. And i think 95% of the Workshop has this Problem. All the People, that have worked many Hours to give us very good Stuff, is now Crap and must Redesign. At first, the Volume of Cargocontainer for SV/HV must Increase. 125 l is a Joke. And the Cargo-Extenders increase not enuogh. SV/HV Container with 1000 lb is a first Step. And is it an example, not carved in Stone The second Thing is, that the Amount of CPU-Use must reduce. A SV Constructor need 3000 CPU and that the half of usable from a Tier 1 SV. At last, all must be craftable! That is in my Mind
It's math, not a joke. It's the actual physical volume of the block. Small blocks are 0.5m x 0.5m x 0.5m, or in other words 125L. Large blocks are 2m x 2m x 2m, or in other words 8,000L.
100 in each leg, 75 in each arm, 75 in your torso, the rest depends on a good proctologist (that's why it's called a butt cask)
There is no math when the player backpack comes into play. It's intentionally made larger than it should because otherwise it becomes near impossible to get going in the game. Be careful what you wish for. If the backpack is to be realistic as well it should be somewhere around 40-70L, maybe 125L on the very high end.
As a nod to realism (and laughs) maybe have an expanding backpack on the player model that grows as you gather more stuff, all the way up to 500L.
I have never wrote, that iam want realistic mechanic/gameplay! You have it in your Mouth, net me ;-) It´s a Game and not the Life. And its in the Future. What can be Possible with the Science in 100 Years or more? I hope, there come changes in this Point. I can carry 500 l, HV msut Carry factor 10x(one Container) of a Person . Thats in my Mind.
I swear the personal drone is following me, carrying all my stuff... except when I make it fly around corners to get shot. Then my stuff is in a pile behind me, instantly picked up by the immediate drone replacement. I wouldn't mind a realistic backpack assuming two things: 1. I was asked to put realistically sized loads in it. 2. The game quickly led to tools that let me carry more. We're kind of close there. I offload a lot of stuff to an HV. I can think of some improvements to personal equipment that would justify more. How about an exoskeleton to improve my weight capacity? The different suits already expand on the volume allowed.
