Diminishing returns for propulsion stacking

Discussion in 'Suggestions' started by RadElert_007, Jan 6, 2019.

  1. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    If the devs chose to implement this, it would likely be initially showcased in a development build for playingtesting to gather feedback.

    If after feedback the changes are still shitty, then as you said before, I believe server owners should be permitted to adjust the values to suit how they want their server to be or even opt out of it if they wish.

    The abuse of unbalanced mechanics around thruster stacking is not exclusive to PvP and if what you said earlier was true (how eventually AI controlled CVs will be fought by PvE players) then it will become even more important to ensure that CVs are balanced.

    Larger ships will have an advantage, they will be extremely durable.

    However if you give benefits to larger ships that outweight the benefits smaller ships have, then you create a balance issue.

    This suggestion is not a suggestion to make larger ships have no place in the meta, this is a suggestion that will allow those who wish to use big ships to continue to be able to use them but smaller ships will also be viable.

    Again, I agree that weapon ranges need a rework. However if we want to talk about weapon ranges and changes to combat mechanics, then one of us should make another suggestion thread specifically for these weapon suggestions rather then talking about it in a thread concerning thruster balance.
     
    #21
  2. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    You said yourself that your true motivation was the combat flow. Hacking thrusters might be a solution, but it's entirely possible there is another option that would make the gameplay even better--it's all connected...!
     
    #22
  3. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    Yes you might well be right that there is an alternative solution that has nothing to do with thrusters, however I think the ideas would be better visible to the developers (the people who actually have the ability to implement these changes) if they are suggested and discussed in their own thread.

    Discussing them in a thread about thruster changes wouldnt do them justice.
     
    #23
    IronCartographer likes this.
  4. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    I'd just like to reiterate that this is how physics works. Mucking about with an already-correct physics model to solve a balance issue is going to give bad results elsewhere. I'd argue your proposal is not the right way at all to handle the issue.
     
    #24
    Inappropriate and Kieve like this.
  5. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    Empyrion is not a simulator game, so balance should always be more important then realism.
     
    #25
  6. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Balance is easiest to get from self-consistency, and self-consistency is easiest to get from realism; the key is to pick the right level of abstraction.

    There are other ways to achieve the results you want besides effectively modifying Newton's second law (notably by simply changing thruster properties).

    EDIT: this is also something that the CPU system will help address.
     
    #26
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2019
  7. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    Balance by definition means that all reasonable choices on how to approach a situation in gameplay are viable, no one solution is superior to another.

    Consistency is what got us class 20 capital ships that zip around space with the same speed and manoeuvrability as a fighter.
     
    #27
  8. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    No, it's not. CV RCS and thruster performance is way overpowered relative to their power consumption, even compared to SVs.

    The devs tried to nerf them and people complained, so last hint is that they're going to add new power and shielding mechanics in combination with handling nerfs to make the player reception more positive (carrot & stick rather than just a thorough beating).

    The current additions of weight & volume were likely done now as necessary prerequisites for a single balance pass of handling rather than before and after.
     
    #28
    Kieve likes this.
  9. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    I think you misunderstood me.

    When I say consistency I meant how the speed characteristics of any ship were more or less identical regardless of size or shape thanks to propulsion stacking imbalance, the issue is just that. Dreadnaughts should not be able to move with the agility of a fighter.
     
    #29
  10. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Max speed is a server performance issue and should be the same for all ships in space; otherwise, weird things happen (like an SV that's physically larger than a CV being able to reach a higher speed, etc).

    Acceleration should indeed only depend on the mass of a ship and how much thrust the thrusters put out. If thrusters can't be buried and the thrust of a thruster scales as its cross-sectional area, then larger ships are increasingly at a disadvantage since their internal volume grows faster than their surface area.
     
    #30
  11. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    I need to show you the topological horrors that would result from buried thrusters being disabled. :D Interesting point though, I'd forgotten about the natural limitations on thrust from the exhaust-blocking mechanic.
     
    #31
  12. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    Which would not happen if this suggestion was to be implemented, the entire idea around it is heavier vessels requiring more propulsion would be slower due to diminishing returns.

    Please re-read and ensure you understand what I am suggesting before offering criticism.
     
    #32
  13. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    I'm pretty sure @geostar1024 understands, @RadElert_007, and the "larger SV might be faster than smaller CV" thing was an example of the sorts of consequences that arbitrary game logic can create because real physics offers the best consistency of mechanics, which is threatened once you start adding arbitrary game balancing tweaks. In other words: It wasn't a misunderstanding of what you were suggesting, but an example of the dangers of similar things.

    At the end of the day, if the devs want to add a "space friction" mechanic that uses ship size or mass to incur a speed penalty, I just hope it's customizable because (sub-warp, non-relativistic, classic kinetic) speed caps in a space game drive me insane--at least when there's arbitrary variation in them, not just the limits of the game engine.
     
    #33
  14. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    As I have said before, Empyrion is not a physics simulator game.

    Balance > Realism

    What @geostar1024 mentioned would simply not happen if this was to be implemented unless the SV he discussed in his example was somehow lighter weight while being larger in dimensions.
     
    #34
  15. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    In this, we agree...even if the exact balancing target is different. Configuration options required. :)
     
    #35
  16. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    As I already said to Neal, I believe that server owners should be able to customise block behaviour to suit their own preferences, this suggestion should be no exception
     
    #36
  17. TmikeS3

    TmikeS3 Commander

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    72
    the fact that ESG is not a Physics simulator is the reason why are acceleration and speed limit or so absurdly low, And eve SE which is a physics simulator, or more of one the ESG any way limits your speed to about 100m/s , Which only works for them because that's not even orbital speed. acceleration is a much more important number then speed, and of course the speed deference between you and an object your trying to intercept. If you reed some hard sci fi, like Honor Harrington, or was some of the few hard Sci fi tv shows.. B-5, the Remake of BSG, and the Expanse. you can see that and the tips of movers that should be posable, honestly I would rater see speed replaced by acceleration and acceleration defiance.... In Honor Harrington there drive system could in theory instantly accelerate a ship up to a respectable fraction of light speed there are to things that keep them for doing so. on is if a ship goes to fast the particle and ray shields, will not be able to deal with it, which is in part what gives Military grade ships higher top end speeds, and larger capitol vessels a higher top end speed then smaller ships. which depending on where you are in a system is usually about .60c smaller war ships is about 50c and civilian ships is about 40c. most of the time you will never reach that speed how ever.. now where smaller ships shin is because the are smaller with les mass the field caused by the Inertial compensator is smaller and more efficient ad cansling out the effects of acceleration smaller ships have a much higher acceleration then there larger fellows which will usually allow a Battle curser or a curser to avoid action with a Dreadnought or supper dreadnought. so maybe acceleration and an Inertial compensator would be the way to go, to make deferent size ships stand out
     
    #37
  18. RadElert_007

    RadElert_007 Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    48
    Umm, what are you trying to say here?
     
    #38
    IronCartographer likes this.
  19. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    I think @TmikeS3 was saying that you could actually allow larger ships to somehow have higher speed caps, as long as smaller ships can accelerate so rapidly that they can evade the large ones by dodging. Flipping the problem around in a way.
     
    #39
  20. TmikeS3

    TmikeS3 Commander

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    72
    in a nut shell. besides speed caps don't really matter you never get that fast any way before you use your warp drive any way. What matters is what your acceleration is, and what your speed is relative to another object.
     
    #40

Share This Page