INFO & FEEDBACK [Alpha 11] CPU Points and Tiers - How does it work?

Discussion in 'FAQ & Feedback' started by Hummel-o-War, Oct 26, 2019.

?

Did you understand the EXPLANATION on how the CPU and CPU Tier system works?

  1. Got it!

    46.9%
  2. Not really

    18.0%
  3. Do not care / do not see why we need CPU

    35.1%
  1. zztong

    zztong Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    1,512
    Interesting. Isn't there a Zirax Trader on one of those floating Zirax POIs? I can't remember. If so, I wonder what they trade. Probably food.
     
    #1101
    StyleBBQ likes this.
  2. sillyrobot

    sillyrobot Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2016
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    699
    No idea. I don't explore their POI because I have a tendency to click in the wrong spot / too fast and opening a box by accident is just too expensive. I got friendly enough they won't attack me and I stay away from them.

    It looks like I'll need to kick their favour up a notch though as literally every promethium deposit is inside their territory and I want their permission to mine them, but I'm just puttering around right now trying to build the endurance to work on the faction some more.
     
    #1102
    StyleBBQ likes this.
  3. zztong

    zztong Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    1,512
    Come over to Polaris. I'll make the introduction. ;)

    They sell me Promethium and Cobalt too. I've not mined any of those.
     
    #1103
    StyleBBQ likes this.
  4. Bob [OG]

    Bob [OG] Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2018
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    64
    i would still be opposed to this feature but it really should be accurately named. it is a limitation system. nothing more, nothing less.
    limiting what a game can do so less goes wrong is not a fix. giving the option to turn it off is not a fix either, if anything it divides the community. why is this still a discussion?
     
    #1104
    Israel likes this.
  5. sillyrobot

    sillyrobot Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2016
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    699
    Wasn't the whole point of moving cobalt off the starter world to force incent the player to go to space? Why take with one hand and give the same with another?
     
    #1105
    zztong and StyleBBQ like this.
  6. Ronewird

    Ronewird Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2019
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    89
    Anyway is never a good thing to provoke or underline some part of comunity as bad or good. Of make background and hided insinuation.

    Wr can keep the discussion under reasonable and civil way?

    The way you talk was a bit bold. Just take easy.
     
    #1106
    Tyrax Lightning and StyleBBQ like this.
  7. IndigoWyrd

    IndigoWyrd Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    954
    5500 CPU is certainly not outside the realm of "reasonable". I've seen at least one too many 9.8 million CPU builds. But it's the part quoted above I agree most with - HP should not directly impact CPU cost. This should be a combination of Function and Common Sense.

    A complex device, like an Advanced Constructor should have a higher CPU cost than a block of Combat Steel. A refrigerator should have a significantly lower cost than even a Basic Constructor. It has one job: Keep Contents Cold.

    A simple Box, like a Closet needs no CPU. It's a box. It doesn't even require power.

    Mass is a good enough constraint for physical size. Build a 100x100 block vessel, and yeah, you're going to need several Atlas-sized rockets to lift it off the ground at 1g.

    Thrusters I'm sort of mixed about - I think they warrant some CPU costs, but I'm not sure the current values are right for them.
    Which then brings us back to the actual CPU Capacity values - if the costs are adjusted to something more sensible, then the total CPU capacity will need adjusted too.

    What we want, need, to avoid is tail-chasing - reducing one set of costs, reducing the pool size, rinse and repeat. That won't accomplish anything.

    I don't like the idea of Hard Limits on devices so much either though. One Core, I get that. One Pentaxid Tank, sure, I get that. One Warp Drive - yep, makes sense too. Beyond that... ehh. I certainly get multiple weapons, especially on what is supposed to be a war ship, flag or capital ship. Wanted, even needed. Likewise, armor makes sense on combat ships, and even on trade vessels - hostilities happen.

    But assigning CPU costs for anything other than a powered block does not. Mass should be the limiting factor here. Mass and Thrust-to-Weight ratios. Clearly these are less meaningful in space then they are for reaching airspeed velocity and escape velocity on a planet, but mass is not weight, and still applicable in space. X amount of Force moves Y amount of mass, at Z velocity.

    Where I see the real issue with armor is how it handles damage. The splash-penetration of rocketry mandates a minimum of 3 layers of armor to protect internal systems. I think one layer should be sufficient to prevent incidental damage, assuming we're talking about one full block. Partial blocks (half and "thin" blocks), sure - it makes more sense to have them layered, even though they don't visually layer quite right due to the "absent" region being treated as a full "block" for construction purposes, but that is another story.
     
    #1107
    Tyrax Lightning and StyleBBQ like this.
  8. IndigoWyrd

    IndigoWyrd Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    954
    A clever player can obtain plenty of Cobalt, Erestrum and Zascosium on their starter planet with only minimal effort.

    I swear, one of these days I'm going to have to do an "Empryion - the first 4 hours" video. Just need a screen recorder that works well with Empyrion, as Lilo doesn't.
     
    #1108
    Tyrax Lightning and zztong like this.
  9. IndigoWyrd

    IndigoWyrd Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    954
    Neodymium, Cobalt, Erestrum and Zascosium can all be had on starter planets, just not found in deposits. Check POI's, Polaris traders, and wreckage sites. You'd be amazed at what you can scavenge.
     
    #1109
    Tyrax Lightning and zztong like this.
  10. Bob [OG]

    Bob [OG] Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2018
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    64
    salvage salvage salvage. that's how u get all the materials u need to get off the starter rock of choice. lots of POIs with CV trusters u can take a miltitool to and gather what u need. but this topic is about the cpu limitation system. there is a whole section for in game help.
     
    #1110
    Tyrax Lightning and zztong like this.
  11. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,558
    Likes Received:
    4,948
    Well I suggest you think again, because just saying it isn't proof. Have any numbers just for fun ?

    And this is the lamest excuse to support something bad.

    Frankly, what use are testers if they are all yes-men ? Do you think objections are evil by nature ? The way you present this, it looks like the game could break and we should still applause and dance all night, else we are not testers...

    I think the problem is... that people assume a lot and don't stop to think. Instead of basing a whole argument on an assumption that has already been debunked many times you could have at least tried to bring something fresh to the table.
     
    #1111
    zztong, paxxo1985, sillyrobot and 2 others like this.
  12. IndigoWyrd

    IndigoWyrd Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    954
    There's someone else's video above with numbers. That's a good start.

    As useful as responses to part of a post that clearly didn't read the rest of it, or previous posts on the subject for that matter. I've not once said the system is perfect, as it, launch it. It needs refining. It needs adjusting. It needs a little overhauling starting at the basic level - but for your benefit, I'll reiterate once more:

    1. The Extenders themselves are backwards. We should be building them as (Limit) 4 Tier 2's, (Limit) 2 Tier 3's and (Limit) 1 Tier 4.

    2. Extenders should be cumulative in the valuation. A single Tier 2 should add 1/4 the Tier 2 maximum CPU. A single Tier 3 should add 1/2 the Tier 3 maximum, and the single Tier 4 should put us to the CPU cap.

    3. Inert, unpowered blocks should not have CPU values. They require no power, they shouldn't require any computational power either. This would be Armor, or floors, or potted plants - whatever decorative items that do nothing except make things look nicer.

    4. Existing values should be recalculated as should Maximum values.

    5. Bases should have near unlimited CPU potential, as that's sort of their niche, aside from being the only places we can put Furnaces, Deconstructors and ATM machines (is there any other Base Only device I missed?).

    Pretty sure those are what you would call "Objections", and no, they're not evil by nature. I am. I am also tired of arguing about this, especially with people who refuse to get it, simply because I will not wave their particular banner and jump on the "this sucks, scrap it" bandwagon, because that doesn't benefit anyone either, except perhaps those with whom I really want little to do with anyways.
     
    #1112
    Tyrax Lightning likes this.
  13. casta_03

    casta_03 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    383
    Basically this. The only things CPU does well is gating off higher end vehicles. The fact that this was never mentioned in its FAQ is a sign of one of two possibilities:
    1. the devs are lying
    2. it's terrible programming
    Even if I go with the best possible scenario & blame dishonesty, I'm still stuck with a steaming pile of incompetence because it impacts the game in the most hamfisted way. Even when CPU is not constraining my design, it's still stifling.

    Yes, except none of that. Others have pointed out the flaws in your reasoning, so I'm going to try to not repeat their points.

    Every criticism I've made of CPU comes from a position unrelated to anything you just said. The highest size class CV I've built was size 10, & that's only because it was made of glass. Even then, its CPU was so low that it could actually benefit from having backup T3 extenders. My physically largest ship (size 9) could easily fit under the 10 mil cap if I could prevent my computer from blowing up long enough to give me time to modify it. The biggest SV I've ever made was built using CPU, fit into T3, & "specialized" in turning left just to show how that concept line was so much BS.

    I'd even like to test out some of those builds in survival, if I could ever farm out the CPU extender parts before losing interest. But when it comes to building, the only times my designs feel constrained at all is when I'm trying to build small & CPU insists I can build smaller. Then I stare at it for a bit before it realizes it broke character, gets that manufactured glassy-eyed look back on its face, & says, "have you tried specializing?"

    Here's where I'm going to agree with you- there are a large number of people talking about how CPU is too constraining & needs to have its limits expanded. There are people saying that T4 CVs need to go up to 20 mil CPU, or T4 bases need to go up to 30 mil CPU, or T4 SVs need to go up to 500k CPU.

    Those people are idiots. They're also lazy. Problem solving takes more energy than ranting on forums. I don't even bother responding to them because they're never coming back.

    ...I swear I was going somewhere profound with this, but I've entirely lost interest in what I've been saying. So I'm just going to get to the end.

    Why are your lift, thrust, chassis size, cargo, armor, & manually-controlled weapons limited by an arbitrary numeric function labelled "CPU"? Why are you okay with this setup as long as it's "balanced properly"? Why do you sound like someone who believes in horseshoe theory?

    Maybe not that last part, but I stand by the rest.
     
    #1113
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
  14. Ronewird

    Ronewird Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2019
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    89
    I thinh you cross the line on this one mate.
     
    #1114
  15. sillyrobot

    sillyrobot Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2016
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    699
    I raid very little. I am terrible at it. I prefer to scavenge where things aren't trying to kill me (and succeeding) and build.
     
    #1115
  16. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,558
    Likes Received:
    4,948
    You watched it ? Then you have the numbers ? You want to share them with us ?

    Just so you don't lose track : how many is "too many people have been playing for too long and only know how to build city-sized vehicles, with 18 layers of armor and 8 of every device - and that just doesn't work any more with CPU enabled, and they just don't want to learn a new way" ?

    We all know the "how it works & what it needs" but no need to tell you that because you read all these posts. Well... I assume you did.

    But what about all these posts that ask a simple question regarding CPU : "Why"?

    Can you answer that for us in a manner that's not going to make us laugh once more ?

    I can spare you some typing here: avoid themes like "specialization", "balance" and "roleplaying".
     
    #1116
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
  17. casta_03

    casta_03 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    383
    Duly noted, underlined, & subsequently crossed out. My point was that just because people are noisy & repetitive doesn't mean their position holds any logical weight. I insulted a strawman & would do it again because it's not a real person.
     
    #1117
  18. casta_03

    casta_03 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    383
    1. people have been saying something along these lines since the beginning. It's been ignored
    2. people have been asking for modular design since before 10.6 EXP was released. It was never addressed.
    3. this was the first complaint after 10.6 EXP was released. The closest thing to a "response" was increasing caps on higher tiers.
    4. vague, but okay.
    5. Most people agree with this sentiment. I believe base values have been reduced since initial release.

    Here's the fun bit: those were all opinions I held when I first started testing out CPU. That thing you said earlier about the cost of thrusters? That was my second key issue after ranting about hull blocks having a CPU cost. You're going with a position I held a month ago. I imagine other people here had similar opinions as well. The reason people seem to be talking past you is because your points started getting aired over a month ago. They were stale before you first typed them. Let's take what's being said here & hold it up against the basic explanation of how CPU works:

    People are suspect of that "specialization" bit. RCS isn't needed. Weapons are only limited at lower tiers on smaller vehicles. This basically leaves "thrust" as the key factor being checked by CPU. I've already pointed out that that should be controlled by a power system, with CPU as something of a backup limiting factor.

    This only comes into play within the confines of a single tier & is a moot point across multiple tiers.

    You (& others) have already stated an issue with how this is set up. Both the device counts & concrete values are flawed in their design.

    As has already been explained, losing an extender makes a vehicle inoperable. For the rest, see the previous point.

    Points 3 & 4 in your post address this- some blocks (like hull blocks) should not have costs associated with them. Most other equipment needs to be rebalanced (personally, I think the point system needs to be taken out entirely).

    Two major points of contention here. First off, the method of gathering parts for higher tiers is nothing more than a terrible system of gating content. Second, devices that aren't running shouldn't cost CPU. Nothing about that design choice makes sense.

    Now, when we look at all of that, what's left of the CPU system? We can turn it off. When we take into consideration all reasonable criticism of CPU into account, there's nothing of value remaining. I'm not saying that a CPU system shouldn't exist. I'm saying that the present one should be scrapped & rebuilt from scratch, starting with deciding what it's intended to do & building from there.

    Why not a system where everything has its efficiency lowered across the board & then boosters are equipped to the core to raise the efficacy of certain parts?

    How about something where each device has a CPU tier associated with it & then you select which CPU extenders control which devices?

    I'm fine with being limited in some way, but the current system is broken & accomplishes nothing except adding pointless complexity to the game with no apparent aim or goal, only a PR line about "specialization" with nothing to show for it.
     
    #1118
  19. Ranger_Ric 2

    Ranger_Ric 2 Ensign

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2019
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am glad that when I saw the announcement I took their advice to read this thread before playing.... Now I won't have to waste any time on this game that I used to love. Actually, I didn't take the time to read all 57 pages. Just that it's 57 pages alone should tell you something.

    I play games to have fun. I'm an engineer and have to work all day irl, when I get time for some gaming at home, I'm not interested in a complicated mess like this. Logistics ruined this game once but since they can be disabled, it's no big deal. I've read enough here to see that just switching off this cpu madness has other consequences and is not really an option. That's all I needed to know. Back to Red Dead or 7 days, later.
     
    #1119
  20. sillyrobot

    sillyrobot Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2016
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    699
    I mostly agree with what casta_03 typed. I have a couple of quibbles -- less than disagreements and more clarifications.

    There are two main systems that end up constrained in my view especially at lower tiers: thrusters and armour. Neither is particularly attached to a specialty line of vehicle. Neither affect bases (armour looks like it would until you realize you can build exterior walls as a separate "base" without power or devices efficiency can harm and that bases can be further balkanized to maintain low tier levels with minimal pain). Both these systems ARE strongly tied to survivability.

    Something untouched on is that tiers have a hard limit -- they are just penalized prior to reaching it. Currently, the hard limit is at
    3 * maximum CPU points. The devs propose shifting that to 2.25 * maximum CPU limit.

    If you sit back and look at what the CPU system actually does pushing aside claims made as to its purpose:
    1. It acts as a gating mechanism for larger / more complex constructions.
    2. It adds a lot of effort (i.e. grind through raiding or vending) to acquire each construction of the largest tier.
    3. It enforces fragility of lower tier constructions.
    4. It gates specific devices (vehicle constructors, shield) seemingly arbitrarily.
    5. It substantially increases energy drain and thus reduces operational time.

    The only one of those that actually promotes specialisation is the first and that promotion isn't particularly strong in correlation. A smaller less complex build may be more specialised, or simply unarmoured and slower.
     
    #1120

Share This Page