Alpha EXPERIMENTAL 10.6: CPU, Flight model, HV>SV docking

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by EleonGameStudios, Oct 29, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    1,852
    I think it is interesting that over in the thread that some of us (myself included) are pointing out just how power hungry the CPU extenders are.

    Did you know that if SV thrusters were CV thrusters, they would burn about 10 times the fuel? [edit] That means the XL thruster for CV would burn 10 times what it currently does to be comparable to the fuel consumption of most SV thrusters. And RCS? The tier 1 would burn over 180 PU and the tier 2 would consume over 2,700 PU.

    This would mean you would also need bigger fuel tanks. Instead of the T1 fuel tank holding 1,200 units, the capacity could be 32 times the SV/HV fuel tank which would appropriate for the actual scale in size, or 19,200 units of fuel, and scaling up from there. Plus, at 2,700 units of fuel, my CVs hardly notice when I fill up the tanks even with mass-volume enabled. In complete contrast to my SVs and HVs that the couple tons can make a world of difference whether they can move freely or are grounded. Greater volumes of fuel might actually be enough mass for my CVs to take notice as well.

    Even if I could put enough fuel in such a CV to run for hours, days, or weeks, the sheer amount of fuel it would burn to move would mean I would self-regulate my use of the CV. Personally, I play this game for the building creativity and exploration, not to run a fuel depot 24/7. Now if I got crushed by someone that was burning through fuel to run their PVP behemoth, there would be the anger and frustration of getting crushed, but also a bit of respect that they are running an Exxon-Mobile operation the rest of the time. I would probably also try to make certain that my fuel is the one resource they couldn't loot much from my wreck.
     
    #81
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2019
  2. grg3d

    grg3d Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    96
    Small bug here...the solar panel count is 15 but it counts the solar battery as part of the 15 limit...also why are very small ships so squirrely? I mean small SV's turn so fast now I'm having trouble controlling them...
     
    #82
    Ambaire and Kassonnade like this.
  3. Scoob

    Scoob Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    6,791
    Google Drive isn't working currently, I can't upload anything it just hangs at the "Finishing" stage. I will try again later.

    Edit: It's back, check out this saved game. This is the modified version using regular Hover Engines, Thrusters and an RCS. It basically DOUBLES the speed but is still pretty terrible. I might have a backup of the older (pictured) design if you want, but I'll need to do some digging.

    Can I just add... I know this is apparently linked to some gremlins with aerodynamics and HV's. However, I'd also like to say how very weak the Hover Thrusters and most basic normal Thrusters feel compared to how they were previously. A light-weight HV using just the all-in-one Hover Thrusters used to be quite nimble and able to climb fairly steep hills...until it go a bit too heavy. Upgrading it to have just four of the basic "proper" HV Thrusters, T1 Hover Engines and a single RCS used to be a HUGE jump in how the craft responded. My HV's currently aren't just slow, they're barely able to climb even fairly shallow slopes without slowing down drastically.

    Additionally, they don't react to the terrain like they used to at all. Rather than following the contours of the terrain - each Hover Engine roughly maintaining an appropriate height - current hovers get stuck at a given attitude. Just now, I was driving up a hill and the HV did sorta follow the terrain - i.e. it was facing up the slope as you'd expect. When it went down the other side however, which was much steeper, the HV continued facing up, not down. Though it did gradually adjust.

    It's basically like HV's are driving through treacle, their whole behaviour is wrong. Is there a way to disable aerodynamics via the console to test whether this is indeed the cause of all these woes? I suppose I could just BP this HV and spawn it into a 10.5 game...

    Scoob.
     
    #83
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2019
    Kassonnade and malrose1 like this.
  4. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    These tiny starter 'bikes' have different 'aerodynamics' and it does effect their top speed.

    The listed "Hit xx" speed is from crossing over a slight sand spit; this reliably bumps HVs over the listed Max.

    Opinion: The 'aerodynamics' seem quite punishing for something this small, especially at these fairly slow speeds. 13 m/s = 29 Mph or 46.8 kph. 20 m/s = 44 Mph or 72 kph. These and other stripped down HVs using the starter engines should be able to hit the max of 50 m/s. It's fine if their accleration is a minimal 5, 6 or 7 m/s^2. Their only hope to survive an angry bug is speed.

    In comparison the classic VW Beetle (from wikipedia);
    "with the one-millionth car coming off the assembly line by 1955. During this post-war period, the Beetle had superior performance in its category with a top speed of 115 km/h (71 mph) and 0–100 km/h (0–62 mph) in 27.5 seconds with fuel consumption of 6.7 l/100 km (36 mpg) for the standard 25 kW (34 hp) engine."

    It only averaged 1 m/s^2 acceleration reaching 62 Mph. Using a 25 kW power plant vs. the hover bikes 1.8 MW.

    [​IMG]
     
    #84
  5. Taelyn™

    Taelyn™ Administrator
    Staff Member

    • Developer
    • Administrator
    Joined:
    May 29, 2016
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    3,739
    Were looking at that actually :) seems strange
     
    #85
  6. Trig

    Trig Captain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    644
    I'm also noticing some oddities with a Repulsor Engine powered minimal HV (shown below, bp also attached).
    I have observed:
    -Same exact craft having slightly different max speed values when spawned again, and sometimes it will change when entering and exiting cockpit. Blueprinted with 13.1 m/s max speed, spawned a second one and that one had 13.6 max, spawned a third and it had 12.8m/s max.
    -Adding a small Light to the top could increase max speed, and removing the light could decrease max speed, and same for the docking pad, removing it didn't always result in a max speed increase despite losing the mass [this could also just be the random variance from entering and exiting cockpit]
    -While driving, tipping the nose up or down a bit changes max speed shown in hud (guessing it's recalculating drag value? or maybe just too much of the forward thrust is getting pointed down/up)
    -Extreme sensitivity to E / Q presses (tilt left / right) - a roughly half-second press could tip it on side, holding it could make it roll over (doing barrel rolls)

    Edit: Spawned about 12 of them checking max speed till I got one that showed 13.8 max speed, then drove that one straight over a large lake and it was able to reach 15 m/s peak.

    ~13 m/s max speed is too slow in my opinion. My guess is the lil green engines just don't have enough forward thrust built in for the new dynamic max speed calculations. I don't think it's just atmospheric drag that's affecting it, but having a very aerodynamic craft does help a fair bit.
    The craft below originally had a harvester built on the front, when it was there max speed was about 11.2 m/s. Took it off and tweaked front blocks to be as pointy as I could. Using a very aerodynamic cockpit style, and carbon blocks.

    20191031150833_1.jpg
    20191031150803_1.jpg
     

    Attached Files:

    #86
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2019
    iliapugach, cmguardia and StyleBBQ like this.
  7. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,564
    Likes Received:
    4,978
    And what happens if you turn the light the other way ?
     
    #87
    iliapugach likes this.
  8. cmguardia

    cmguardia Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    201
    The sensitivity in rotation (Q / E) is exaggerated in my HV. And it has no RCS. Also when you try to wash or lower your nose it is very sensitive!
    ToTo increase the speed and give more horizontal rotation I had to add the rear and side thrusters. The front one is not necessary but it helps to brake faster.
    Without thrusters I only get 6m / s and little horizontal rotation. With thrusters it rises to 16m / s with one thruster on each side (none up and none down)


    Las ensibilidad en la rotación (Q / E) es exagerada en mi HV. Y no tiene RCS. Tambien cuando intentas lavantar o bajar la nariz es muy sensible!
    Para subir la velocidad y dar más rotación horizontal tuve que agregar los propulsores traseros y laterales. El del frente no es necesario pero ayuda a frenar más rápido.
    Sin propulsores solo obtengo 6m / s y poco giro horizontal. Con propulsores sube a 16m/s con un propulsor a cada lado ( ninguno hacia arriba y ninguno hacia abajo)
     
    #88
  9. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    1,334
    To reiterate, I've not been able to test things due to hardware issues on my end.

    However, this video was an eye-opener, and I am now greatly concerned about the new flight model's effects. Highlight is from the linked timestamp of 5:50, up through the 13:00 mark (and a bit beyond, but that gets the main point across).


    To summarize: With thrusters gaining the ability to create torque and replace RCS, Empyrion is embracing realism that not even Space Engineers has fully forced on its players, and this realism will have serious consequences, reducing creative freedom.

    When I have brought up issues with angular momentum (the moment of inertia calculation being based on weight distribution) it was to have the opposite effect: Properly considering the placement of weight allows for tiny decorative features to have little impact, so people can be creative without cost.

    Making thruster placement matter this much is completely the opposite: Any thrusters placed so they are pointing at the center of the ship will be completely useless for rotation, and thus extremely inefficient. This forces way more constraints on design.

    This is way more of an issue than the CPU system. The new flight model is not optional. Ironically, it would not be such an issue if it were not for the emphasis that the tradeoffs are putting on the costs involved. People trying to avoid using costly RCS are driven into a corner...literally, as the corners are the best place for thrusters, and all other locations are wasteful.

    The new flight model is a step backwards for creativity, despite seeming more flexible and dynamic at first glance.

    Hopefully this clarifies once and for all that I am not for realism, just for consistency, and this is quite inconsistent with design goals of the past--and hopefully the future.
     
    #89
  10. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    For giggles I built a hover bike with a frontal cross section only 1x2. Max Speed was 26 m/s.
    Used all 4 starter engines, 1 in front, then the 1x2x3 cockpit, then vertical genie then the other 3 engines with the tank & core above them.
    Thought I took a ss but guess not.
    Anyway, removing one of the starter engines dropped the max speed down from 26 to 20.1
    Oh, and slapping a pyramid and angled glass on the front dropped speed by 0.1

    Playing around with a couple other HVs leads me to think that there's a portion of the code directly tying m/s^2 to top speed.
    So if your acceleration is less than X m/s^2 your top speed starts getting reduced.

    While, in a general sense, I can see the attraction of using accel as a metric for top speed, it's entirely artificial, and, as far as I understand it, it's acting in direct opposition to what the CPU limits are supposed to be doing; at least viewed from a players perspective.

    CPU is saying to reduce and 'get by', yet if I remove thrust and accel falls below around 15 m/s^2 I start to get heavily penalized in top speed.
    A Catch-22 for sure.
    Example: an HV I built to haul 500 tons only has ~7 m/s^2 accel when fully loaded, and that is fine by me, but it's top speed falls down to something like ~32 m/s. Which is also sort of ok. Yet while I would be fine if it's loaded accel was only 3 or 4 m/s^2, I'd guess that would drop it's top speed to below 18 m/s, and that I wouldn't be ok with.

    And unfortunately you can't combine thrust with available power for a more rational result. Since not only are the 1.8 MW genies making 2,400 Horsepower, even if the draw from the Shields and CPU Extenders wasn't so high as to result in multiple genies on anything mounting them, the untapped available 'power' is just too much to act as a constraint.

    not to beat up on ya or anything but the code is saying, "that's slow!" when I'm lookin at this & scratching my head :D;

    [​IMG]
     
    #90
  11. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,564
    Likes Received:
    4,978
    I was able to achieve 24,2 m/s max speed with my banana !

    NewGame_0_2019-10-31_17-41-08.png

    Same devices as previous examples from @StyleBBQ up here...

    Note: just carrying a rifle, 1000 bullets, a multi-tool and 25 charges. Any change in these will affect the banana's performance.
     
    #91
  12. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    huh. who knew? I thought banana yellow just -looked- slow, guess it really is! :D

    cause mine went a fantastic twenty -six- meters a second! :p

    Edit: I'd even just had pizza for lunch!

    [​IMG]

    Edit2: what are those colors...? The Jamaican flag? Maybe that's why it's faster, heh :)

    Edit3: actually, ya know @Kassonnade , I spawned on a 1.00 gee planet, wonder if yours might be a tad higher and that might explain the top speed difference?
    Plus, I did try adding a pyramid and 45d glass on the nose, it slowed it down by .1, maybe your fairing is slowing yours?
     
    #92
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2019
    Wellingtoon and Kassonnade like this.
  13. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,564
    Likes Received:
    4,978
    Well there's something very unfair going on here...

    I used the same design you just did :

    NewGame_0_2019-10-31_18-21-58.png

    I emptied all my inventory (wearing medium armor though), and I still get that :

    NewGame_0_2019-10-31_18-21-37.png

    Maybe a difference in the playfield ? Planet here is 1,00 G, atmosphere density is 1,28 kg/ m3. Can't be the color, or I'm done with this game for good !!
     
    #93
    StyleBBQ likes this.
  14. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    double weird; just checked, my atmo density is higher at 1.33 kg/m3

    may be due to my not starting a new game when the patch dropped today... o_O
     
    #94
    Kassonnade likes this.
  15. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,564
    Likes Received:
    4,978
    You use biofuel or Promy Extra ?
     
    #95
    stanley bourdon likes this.
  16. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    ok, wow. Just started a new game, same seed, built the same hover bike, wearing Med armor and now it only goes 14.5 m/s... fourteen wth??

    Planet stats the same, same name. Even gave myself xp to lvl 10. Gonna build another, brb

    2nd bike top speed is 26.0 m/s ... I have no idea what's going on here... :confused:

    Edit: got it. I had thrown on an Armor Locker to put on the Med Suit, then taken it off the bike.
    When I just re-did those steps bike was initially 26 m/s
    add Armor Locker, dropped to 24.7 m/s
    Remove the Locker, drop to 18.3 m/s

    Edit2: fuel wise they were all 50%, 2 of the 150 Prom ones

    Edit3: just restarted the new game, now all three bikes show 26 m/s as top speed... even the two that I'd added then removed the Armor Locker on.

    Edit4: @Kassonnade if you decide to build another one I can see one small thing I did differently than you did; I flipped the genie upside down so it would attach to the fuel tank.

    1) placed a base block, then dropped HV starter onto it, then removed the base block and steel blocks around the HV core. Core floating in air.
    2) stick fuel tank on front of core.
    3) flip genie upside down and stick to tank
    4) stick 1x2x3 cockpit onto genie
    5) place hover engines, front to back
    6) add 2ea of the 150 unit Prom fuel cells

    [​IMG]
     
    #96
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2019
  17. Scoob

    Scoob Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    6,791
    @StyleBBQ - good work with those examples, really shows what a problem this is. (also a fan of the colour pallet :) )

    Guys, with your super simple HV's, as well as the speed issues, do you also find they follow the terrain...weirdly? I.e. they might be going down a slope, but take ages before their attitude adjusts appropriately? Driving through treacle is still an apt description from what I'm seeing.

    I've been testing via normal play for me, so I started with a super basic HV - the one pictured above - and have built it up a little over time. It's useful of course, but can barely do 13 m/s currently and the slightest hill slows it to a crawl. The idea of a larger, more ponderous HV actually has some appeal, but not being able to build a light, nimble and fast one is a problem.

    Personally, I think HV's should be largely unaffected by aerodynamics / drag until they're going at least 30 m/s. So, regardless of design, if it has sufficient thrust it should travel at a decent speed. Being able to go beyond 30 m/s though, enforcing aerodynamics might be quite interesting.

    Edit: I reloaded my save this evening. The same HV is now only reporting a max speed of ~8.4 m/s now. I may have added a little cargo weight to it, but I'd not expect that to impact top speed so.

    Edit 2: Btw, do you guys notice that sometimes the reported MAX speed is all over the place? I.e. my HV is currently usually showing a max speed of 7.6 m/s but sometimes, after I've been stationary for a moment, and try to speed up, it shows as low as just 1 m/s. It does go back up again once I start moving, but it's like the HV is resisting it lol.

    Edit 3: I just upgraded my HV further. Having unlocked the Thruster M I added two to both the front and rear, removing the existing thruster. HV will now do 50 m/s and handles fine. This issue appears to be exclusive to super low-tech HV's - or the base Thruster is just too weak even for a bear bones HV build.

    My updated HV - a joy to drive! I don't have quite @StyleBBQ's colour style, but it does me lol.

    CPU Testing 10.6_2019-11-01_02-45-23.png

    Scoob.
     
    #97
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2019
    Kassonnade, StyleBBQ and Wellingtoon like this.
  18. Scoob

    Scoob Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    6,791
    Just to add... I've been using this HV for a short while and it's been great. However, it's just been limited to 31.7 m/s after I gathered some ore. The ship is a little more sluggish on acceleration, as you'd expect, but why is the top speed limited so? This is a small HV designed for haulage, it has 2,578 Volume (2,223 used) and its load weighs just 11.3t. It feeling a bit more ponderous is classic Weights and Volumes, but the slow-down is something else.

    Anyway, thought I'd just add that as this is an example of an otherwise perfectly functional HV suddenly getting a huge speed penalty. Nothing aerodynamic about it this time! :)

    Scoob.
     
    #98
    Kassonnade and StyleBBQ like this.
  19. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    @Scoob , ja no be makn foon of me coulors arr ye mon? :D

    Yep to terrain following slowness.
    Agree 60% of max Tech HV Speed of 50 m/s; 30 m/s. But only for things like a 'big truck' piled down with lots n lots of mass. Even 3 m/s^2 acceleration should get you to the capped speed, imo.
    "Edit2" question, yeppers, Max does tend to bounce from 1 to X and back.
    "Edit3" heh, I was writing, 'be careful with how much you load your HV, too much and top speed will fall way off...' then you posted again :D
    & you're 100% right, no reason for that kind of penalty. What did accel fall off to? ~12 or 13 m/s^2?

    Edit: btw, the color scheme was inspired by the local wild life; this place is crawling with those hideous tenacle faced mothers that go into the water & up on shore... yech!
     
    #99
  20. krazzykid2006

    krazzykid2006 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,524
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    They are limiting top speed by shape of vessel (and I feel this is WAY too severe the way it's done), but that's only part of the equation.

    You also have to have forward acceleration over X amount or it has an atrocious top speed.
    This part of the equation is terrible in how it's implemented. I understand it's a game, but these penalties are WAY over the top. It's not fun having to make a very specific shape AND then also having to add a minimum amount of thrust just to make a craft that doesn't have a snails top speed.

    They need to lessen the penalties for one, like really lessen them.
    I feel we should always be able to reach at least 65% of top speed no matter what. So if a vessel has an absolute max speed of 70 m/s then it should never be penalized below 45.5 m/s

    Having an extremely slow acceleration and deceleration is already penalty enough.
    Messing with the top speeds like this is way overkill and took a lot of fun away from my gameplay.
    I'm forced into VERY specific designs if I even want to reach anywhere near the old top speeds, let alone trying to reach the new top speeds. This saps all my creativity into nothingness. I've tried and abandoned dozens of designs already so far in EXP since they are terrible to use now.
     
    #100
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page