CPU & YOU --> What does it mean?

Discussion in 'Experimental Features Discussion' started by Our Grid, Jan 8, 2019.

?

CPU Should Be...

  1. Fixed Amount by class HV/SV/CV/BA.

  2. Expandable but Expensive to do.

  3. Buried Alive, never to see the light of day!

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Our Grid

    Our Grid Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    292
    Hello,

    Looks like the new volume (and eventually CPU) implementation have severely (understatement) divided this otherwise pretty cohesive family. I'm hoping with a little time Eleon will make it all gel in a way that works. This does bring us to the next potential hurdle somewhere over the horizon; CPU.

    It would be great if we could get an updated official comment on what the drawing board ideology is on this feature (hint). But with this absent, I have been looking at some of my builds and seeing how it might affect them. There are a couple theories I had on how this could be a plus, but I would invite you to offer your thoughts and suggestions too, What do you think?

    If the plan is to stop a builder from just pasting 900 turrets, constructors, or mining lasers on a ship for example, I suppose that makes sense from an immersion sense (since we can't say realism right? they don't exist yet?). Does this mean we could toggle some equipment on/off as needed to stay under the max load at once? I'd be alright with that. If it means you can't even place equipment over the max, I don't care for it. Working in an industrial environment we have spare and backup equipment and also cannot run all.

    In the case that you are allowed to expand the max CPU, that could be a challenging mechanic to work with. Such as, to expand the Max CPU, you need to install a Mainframe, which uses a LOT of power. Now you have to add more power generation, fueling, and deal with the added mass of all that infrastructure to make it work. This would seem to have the effect of automatically limiting ships; if they were big enough to run all that with big DPS, they would be rather sluggish, while a lighter, leaner ship had less DPS but could easily outmaneuver the larger ship. Something along those lines seems to be a workable system.

    Hopefully there will be alternate forms of power and some power storage options at some point too, this would allow you to run your Mainframe and extra weapons/shield generator/equipment for a short period, while battery banks provided the additional current needed, without all that fuel cell and extra generator mass, again a trade off but added workable angle and option for a builder. Anyhoo, was kicking this around and wanted to share it with the family.

    What do you think?

    Cheers.
     
    #1
    Andreykl likes this.
  2. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,969
    Likes Received:
    6,829
    As the CPU system seems to be similar to a proposal I made a while ago, I expect there to be devices that add additional CPU at the cost of mass, volume, and power, with the overall idea being to encourage tradeoffs between ship subsystems (like thrusters vs weapons (vs shields, eventually/hopefully)):

    https://empyriononline.com/threads/computational-units-resource-proposal.35756/

    I do wish the devs had hidden CPU values until the system was closer to being released, as displaying a fixed limit with arbitrarily-chosen values for devices has caused a lot of avoidable mental anguish on the part of many players.
     
    #2
  3. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    733
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    I was thinking myself that a coprocessor should be available.
    Maybe at the cost of all the power produced by a T2 generator.
    In turn, one has another 7500, maybe just 3500, CPU to spend on thrusters, RCS, fuel tanks, weapons.

    Either way, Fuel tanks should be cheaper, specialy in MP for nomads.
    Some people can just play once a week, they rely on a base, but for nomads that is a CV.

    So, how about those solar panels for CV's while thrusters are off?
    I wish for slightly cheaper T3 tanks - cpu wise only of course.

    I mean…
    It is possible to build a 'size clas 12' CV with 7500/7500
    With a standby of 72h.. thrusters & weapons off, and 'everything else' it offers is similar limited, specialy in regards that i'd prefer a standbytime of 240-300h.

    Granted, this is well enough for SP. (standbytime)
    Now imagine a parent who's playing EGS, Children have School Holidays.. and you would like to go on Holidays with them…
    You might want to go for 1 or 2 weeks.
    7x24 = 168 * 2 = 336 hrs

    This is not possible with your nomadic CV base which has a standby time of 72 hrs only (in MP).

    Of Course, a small fighter CV should not have such a long standby time, which is not possible, due to the lack of space for the t3 tanks.
    But any CV with a decent Hangar is 'instantly' over size 6, having enough space for T3 tanks, and most likely is more of a base than a ship.
    So it should be able to get a decent standby time itself.

    Oh yes and Cargo... - Extensions!

    As the bottomline, I have had to refine my perception of CPU usage for CV's:
    All the changes i'd hope for would be: (the amount of +/- represent the wished Change ; 1=15, 3=50)
    * CC : ++/+++ cpu usage (increase 30-50)
    * CE: --/--- cpu usage (decrease 30-50) (+ giving Slots so they're usable with both: enabled and disabled volume games)
    * T3 tanks: -/-- cpu usage (decrease 15-30)
    * RCS T1: set 75
    * RCS T2: set 90

    This is my impression/perception as of public 2099.
    my 2 cents
     
    #3
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2019
  4. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,969
    Likes Received:
    6,829
    Really, CPU usage should be handled like power is for thrusters, with active and idle values. Devices like CCs and CEs shouldn't be consuming CPU (or power) when they aren't actively transferring items.
     
    #4
  5. ravien_ff

    ravien_ff Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2017
    Messages:
    1,535
    Likes Received:
    2,557
    I don't think people can properly answer this poll until we have more details about what it is. All the current values are total placeholders and can't be enabled in any way whatsoever, so literally all we know is that there will be some kind of CPU system sometime in an alpha 9.x update.
     
    #5
    Furious Hellfire likes this.
  6. TmikeS3

    TmikeS3 Commander

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    61
    Also a co possessor would give us a way to add command a control Redundancy to my wore ships. When you build war ships in the real world you have at least 50% more command and control systems then you need for the ship. And 50% more fire control then you need to hand all the ships weapon systems. There are a few exceptions to those rule The USN's Cleavended class light curser, Acutally had more weapons counting AA then its fire control could manage. And because of that well she was other wise a vary effective ship she was not as effective as she could be
     
    #6
    geostar1024 likes this.
  7. BigSnoopy

    BigSnoopy Commander

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    203
    Kann mir irgendwer mal auf deutsch verstandlich dieses CPU-System erklären bitte? Ich steig da nicht mehr durch
    Und ist das wirklich so, dass, egal wieviel Volumen man für einen Frachtcontroller freischaufelt, nur diese 64 oder so Fächer zu Verfügung stehen? Man braucht dann mehrere Controller?
     
    #7
  8. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    733
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Ne die CC (Cargo Controller) Liefern (derzeit die 64 Slots), die CE (Cargo Extensions) erhöhen lediglich das Volumen (sofern aktiv).
    CC's kannst du nicht aneinander koppeln, daher auch mein diesbezüglicher Vorschlag via CE's Slots hinzu zu fügen, damit die CC+CE Kombination auch für die Spieler spielbar bleibt welche das volume disabled haben und einfach nur 'slots' für ihre 'block's haben wollen.

    hth
     
    #8
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2019
  9. Our Grid

    Our Grid Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    292
    Yes good stuff there! And exactly what I was thinking too - the tradeoffs for different builds etc. Yes having a value now has raised some eyebrows.
     
    #9
  10. Our Grid

    Our Grid Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    292
    I love this! Solar can't run a ship, but it could sure cover what we call the "hotel load" while the ship is idle - lights and fridges on for example. Wish we had those!

    That makes sense. Eleon has been pretty good about hearing the community and I hope the dialogue here provides some useful ideas and opinion of the community, plus, you can always change your vote ;-)
     
    #10
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
    ravien_ff likes this.
  11. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    1,229
    Missing option IMO: Thermodynamic limitations. I haven't fully considered the effects (compared to CPU), but heat management would quite naturally give diminishing returns on power generation as your structures get larger and larger with lower surface:volume ratios!

    As a bonus, it creates time-averaging for even more balancing options, so you can run even more thrusters but not for much time, etc.
     
    #11
  12. Our Grid

    Our Grid Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    292
    Great point - they have made the heat emissives for the generators and such - it's Hot in my nacelles now, but needing heatsinks or coolers (which has mass/volume/etc) makes perfect sense. If you land on a planet with active volcanoes and such - that could get challenging quickly - limiting the load you can place on the ship trying to leave orbit, or until high enough to get into cooler atmo/space.
     
    #12
    geostar1024 and IronCartographer like this.
  13. cp6891

    cp6891 Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    205
    I hope to see it expandable, with multi tired CPU's.
     
    #13
  14. BigSnoopy

    BigSnoopy Commander

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    203
    Niemand?
     
    #14
  15. Hummel-o-War

    Hummel-o-War Administrator
    Staff Member Community Manager

    • Developer
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2015
    Messages:
    8,565
    Likes Received:
    12,433
    Aktuell einfach ignorieren bitte. Ist noch nicht voll implementiert, sondern existiert nur als Anzeige.

    Zudem: Jede Struktur hat eine gewisse Anzahl CPU Punkte. Die meisten Devices benötigen eine gewisse Anzahl CPU Punkten. Du kannst nur soviele Devices setzen wie du CPU Punkte hast.
     
    #15
  16. BigSnoopy

    BigSnoopy Commander

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    203
    Danke für die Antwort. Werd ich also erst mal ignorieren.
    Aber trotzdem noch eine Frage:
    Wie kann man die Anzahl der CPU-Punkte einer Struktur vergrössern? Ist das überhaupt vorgesehen?
     
    #16
  17. Liang

    Liang Commander

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2018
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    56
    It only makes sense to make them expandable. It gives players more to work towards and instantly adds more to do in the game. The issue would then be "space", and I hope the expansions wont screw up designs....there is the other issue we need to think about.

    Most want expansions, now we need to talk about what those expansion would look like. Do we really want to see an expansion take up a block space making all designs skewed just to be able to use, say, 4 drills? Or end up with our battle tanks 10 blocks larger (10 CPU expansions) so it can attack a base with a few rocket turrets and 6 laser turrets?

    The only thing I can come up with would be to make CPUs have expansion slots like Armor does :cool: each expansion slot will boost the CPUs power by X amount. If you fill the expansion slots and still need more power, then you add a second CPU!

    Discuss.
     
    #17
  18. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,969
    Likes Received:
    6,829
    Expansions should assuredly consume volume; I'd like to see 1x1x1 T1, 2x2x2 T2, etc. Further, in my CU proposal, I envisioned expansions adding in a sublinear fashion, so as to place a soft limit on CPU. With the advent of adjacency systems, one could also give a bonus to adjacent CPU blocks, perhaps negating some or all of the sublinear scaling; this would encourage large computer cores rather than scattering small computer cores throughout a ship.

    As I've mentioned previously, we also need devices to have active and idle states, and a prioritization system for CPU usage (and also one for power while we're at it). This would mean that ships would not always be running at their CPU limit, and could shut down various subsystems to free up CPU in an emergency. Excess/spare CPU could be devoted to extra processing of sensor data or faster research progress (at lower priority than other ship systems, of course).
     
    #18
  19. Liang

    Liang Commander

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2018
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    56
    As I already stated, the issue is also screwing up all previously created designs by a new need for far more space for CPU and expansions. By adding in slots onto CPUs like Armor has for expansions we solve the space issue while also dealing with CPU power limits and having a way to expand it.

    It deals with all 3 issues at the same time. With no need for taking a currently existing well designed 10x10x8 assault tank, and turning it into a 15x15x10 monster just for the power an assault tank requires.

    Its a one and done solution with no real new issues other than the materials to make them, which is a good thing.
     
    #19
  20. cp6891

    cp6891 Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    205
    Of course you're assuming that we'll need massive amounts of CPU blocks to power even modest sized vehicles, necessitating complete rebuilds of ships. I think it's just as likely that the devs will design the system so that your 10x10x8 (assuming those are blocks not meters, not an unreasonable sized vehicle) tank can be run with the addition of maybe just 1 CPU block.
     
    #20

Share This Page