Poll: Pending Removal of H2/O2 generators in A7.6

Discussion in 'Experimental Features Discussion' started by Brimstone, Jan 27, 2018.

?

How do you feel about the H2/O2 resource change?

Poll closed Feb 6, 2018.
  1. I want to only craft H2/O2 from water in my constructor

    15 vote(s)
    19.0%
  2. I want to be able to craft in constructor or use the deployables, let me choose my play style

    50 vote(s)
    63.3%
  3. Make the change, but let me be able to put the deployables back in via config file if I want

    3 vote(s)
    3.8%
  4. I only want to use the deployable generators- I have enough to craft as it is

    11 vote(s)
    13.9%
  1. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    The process now will be to place an H2O generator, move the water into a constructor, select either H2 or O2, and craft it. The reaction to the change so far has been negative, but I know a lot of players might not read the alpha threads... so I thought I'd give a poll a whirl to see what the general thought is on the change. Don't know if it will change anything other than satisfy my curiosity, but here goes...

    Full disclosure: my vote will be "I want to be able to craft in constructor or use the deployables, let me choose my play style" because I think it's always best to let the player have options. My personal objection isn't to being able to craft H2/O2 from water, it's about losing the deployables in the first place.
     
    #1
    Kronoss likes this.
  2. Scoob

    Scoob Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    5,378
    I've said "both", however I've just started a new Survival Game to see how this impacts gameplay. However, to play "properly" it will take some time before I unlock (and have the materials to build) the Advanced Constructor, which is needed to craft H2 Bottles. Basically, I'll not be sitting on my usual Stock-pile by this point in the game.

    Scoob.
     
    #2
  3. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    After ranting in the other tjread due to shock, here is a more objective statement of mine...

    I voted let me choose because I do see situations i might want to use or even have to.

    For RP/realism i'd actualy prefer to have the deployable generators require some steel plates as well...
    However, for that to not be a killer feature... ha ha... iron has to be available more often (at all, but only chance for 1-2 ore tops) in those very small pure default stones that are spawned automagicly without any doing when creatimg an empty playfield planet.
    But since its emergency, it would take/consume a steel plate like the fuel and 'deploy' it over some of these small bottles.

    Anyway, i prefer the approach of the deploaybles...
    And I find it very convenient the way it is now, as i really have usualy, at the very least, 4 ACs running almost 24/7, on multiplayer, on a CV.
    That is while i start to belive that those 4 furnaces in my space 'base' are not enough...
    Talking about convience, which this already isnt, adding more to the constructor queue, sure is not!
    I cant imagine how terrible slow it would be/is in SP...

    But maybe give those deploable generators a t2 version, at level 25, that at that time can be connected to a nearby base with whatever method we will have then.

    Edit: Beeing able to use the symetric removal of blocks, at the same cost - total loss, for regular players in mp, would help to remove the requirement to switch from mp to creative, kind of destroying the fun of mp, for me.
    Because neither can i go watch their progress, nor their mine.. and the server seems 'empty' while TS3 is aktive..
    Since the symteric build is available in mp and sp, the symetric delete would be nice too.
     
    #3
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2018
  4. Jᴧgᴧ

    Jᴧgᴧ Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2017
    Messages:
    1,115
    Likes Received:
    2,111
    You forgot an "I don't care" option. Survival is rarely convenient. I'd rather bigger decisions and larger features have more effort and time spent on them than decisions that make us use one or another device. This is the kind of thing that can be tossed around for months before being settled on, and ultimately doesn't significantly change gameplay.
     
    #4
    zztong and Syncretos like this.
  5. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    I'd also like to see time spent on other things... which is partly why I object to the time being spent to remove them that could have been spent on bigger issues...
     
    #5
  6. MidasGunhazard

    MidasGunhazard Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    709
    I'm indifferent. If they wanted to make it so that you could also extract hydrogen from it, that would be something, but H2 and O2 are the two easiest resources to get, and the difference of having, say 2 of each generator producing resources vs 4 that can produce either is completely irrelevant to me.

    If anything, I'm for the change, because it will make storage and repurposing of the resources more streamlined. It will mean that any time you find water as a random drop, you can convert it into oxygen if that's more needed, rather than retaining supplies of both.
     
    #6
    Syncretos and Kassonnade like this.
  7. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    I would be less against it if you did get both from the water simultaneously- but players have been asking for multiple item outputs in 7DtD for years now, and those devs say it isn't possible. Whether that's their code that's an issue, or core Unity, I have no idea- but since everything in Empyrion is also single-output, I'm thinking it's a hard limitation

    True, storing O2 as water would use half space- but storing H2 as water would take 10x as much space. But I wasn't even thinking of that with my initial objection. That's more to do with imposing limits on choice. Like I said, I have no problem with turning water into H2O2 in the constructor. I only object to taking out the generators- I'm always going to argue in favor of more choice for players to run with than less.
     
    #7
  8. MidasGunhazard

    MidasGunhazard Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    709
    I don't see how it makes any difference. If you have an H2 O2 farm with 3 H2 generators and 3 O2 generators, what is honestly the difference if it becomes 6 H2O generators that can be used for either?
     
    #8
    Kassonnade and rainyday like this.
  9. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    Because with 3 of each, I get 3 of each, and I'm done. Place it, power it, harvest it. I don't have to fit anything into my crafting queue or build another constructor to manage it. More of an early-game problem, but still.

    Let me ask back- if it doesn't make any difference, then why not choose the "both" option, and let the player decide for themselves how they want to play the game? That's what my own vote was.
     
    #9
    Kronoss likes this.
  10. MidasGunhazard

    MidasGunhazard Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    709
    There's a point where 'let the player decide' for everything will start to water down the game. I actually don't mind this in concept for one of the two should be a default feature, and of the 2 the new one makes more sense, and makes the old method look redundant.

    In the new system you'd make any number of any generators you like, and turn them into either resource. This is better for early game because if you can't afford the prometheum to power a whole farm, you could go with just a single generator and use its output for whatever you need most. You don't have to sustain any specific balance of one resource or another, and you don't have to worry about one generator becoming redundant (water always ends up useless after a certain point for me).

    edit: In my experience, Oxygen is something essential you need all the time, but not necessarily in the quantities you can easily farm it at. Water you generally DON'T need except when crafting specific things. It would be easier if this was all one resource that you mainly use for air and occationally siphon off when you need water for crafting.
     
    #10
  11. Dandere

    Dandere Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2017
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    157
    I like this change a lot, I just don't like oxygen bottles requiring steel plates. Not when they're thrown away after use.
     
    #11
    zztong likes this.
  12. Track Driver

    Track Driver Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    445
    Likes Received:
    815
    I don't know about watering down the game. I water down my Snapple Ice Tea after 20:00 and like it.

    I do think a return to a H/O2 generator is the way to go. I also think the same generator should(or at least could) provide the water jugs. In as much as the extraction of O2 from water leaves H, it seems logical to extrct both. it also seems logical that in collecting the water for the electrolytic process, water for other uses, or consumption, would also be collected. If possible, it would be great if there could be a BA water generator, in addition to the deployable generator, that could be accessed by the CP to select H, [email protected] or water jug output.

    Maybe the game system isn't able to do this, I don't know. just another thought.
     
    #12
  13. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    So, by that logic, I no longer need a minigun because I can build a minigun turret. The deployables are very beneficial early game, or if you're doing a nomad style. The BA-oriented thing would make sense as a mid-to-late game goal, and of course that should be more powerful, just as a turret is more than a hand weapon

    Yeah, it would be, but recipes can only output one item type. That's what makes this less convenient. You make either-or, not both from the water
     
    #13
    Kronoss likes this.
  14. Pyston

    Pyston Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    I prefer the old method of Oxygen and Hydrogen generation where the generator made both. I know people had a huge surplus of oxygen (raise stack limit?!?!?) but I liked having my Oxygen and Hydrogen farm.
     
    #14
    ldog, rucky and Jᴧgᴧ like this.
  15. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    Did it do that? I just started playing A6, so I've only known the separate H2 and O2 generators. The original way would make a lot more sense, then...
     
    #15
    Pyston likes this.
  16. Jᴧgᴧ

    Jᴧgᴧ Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2017
    Messages:
    1,115
    Likes Received:
    2,111
    It makes complete sense, since you're basically splitting H2O into it's constituents. Output could be one, or the other, or both for the same machine.
     
    #16
    rucky and Pyston like this.
  17. Pyston

    Pyston Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    Ya, we had a green generator that had to be placed in the water. You put fuel in it and it produced Oxygen and Hydrogen. I personally REALLY miss hydrogen fuel. I powered everything with hydrogen. It only had like 15 fuel units but it really forced you to make efficient vehicles. IMO, the old design of the game was much superior than it is today. Now, we can just make stuff pretty much anyway we want it. You had to manually access fuel and o2 tanks to refil, same with ammo. It made ship design much more interesting and challenging (fun). Now its meh.
     
    #17
    rucky, Sparrowhawk65 and Brimstone like this.
  18. Pyston

    Pyston Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    A lot of old ideas made more sense. Frankly the more they change game mechanics, the less I like this game. I love the addition of props, textures, logic etc but the old game play was much more satisfying to me, but I don't dare give my opinons anymore in official thread else I get dogpiled.
     
    #18
    rucky likes this.
  19. Brimstone

    Brimstone Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    2,760
    I think one of the things that's really missing is a sense of progression... I pick a few crops, I bump a level and a half. Raid a drone base, three levels. Then... it suddenly just stops, and there's nothing more. There would be a sense of accomplishment if you were moving from a cheap deployable H2/O2 generator to something more powerful integral to a base. You start with crappy rocket thrusters, build them up in power, then eventually graduate to a reactionless drive at high level. Being able to upgrade weapons and systems like you do your suit now. These are the kinds of things I would much rather them spending time on than removing stuff that works just fine as is
     
    #19
  20. Pyston

    Pyston Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    Agreed 100%

    This is why I say stop speeding the game up, they should be working to slow it down. I don't care if some people don't like farming, or having to manually fill their fuel tanks or dislike moving things from one container to another. That is part of the game, that is part of the fun, part of the immersion. Some will like it, some wont but it slows the content down and makes each step that much more rewarding. Frankly, blueprints should not even exist. I know its Eleons way of getting free assets into their game, but I have always hated the idea of spawning a ship, regardless that I farmed the materials. I think if I had to make a giant hangar or ship yard to spawn it in, I would feel different but its just another example of a mechanic that speeds the game up.

    I would rather see servers hold more people, more MMO like and have people visit a ship retailer to purchase a design if they need that instant ship (blueprint). Heck, how about an instanced part of space that holds x amount of people where the planet exist with the ship retailers on it. Make it a whole planet of ship retailers, I dont know...just brainstorming with out thought right now. All I know is that there is not enough content for people to be consuming it as fast as they do.
     
    #20
    Sephrajin, rucky and Jᴧgᴧ like this.

Share This Page