Survey about thruster mechanics in Empyrion

Discussion in 'News & Announcements' started by EleonGameStudios, Mar 4, 2015.

?

Which thruster mechanics would you like to see in Empyrion?

  1. Arcade-style thruster placement

    22 vote(s)
    11.3%
  2. Simulation-style thruster placement

    172 vote(s)
    88.7%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EleonGameStudios

    EleonGameStudios Developer
    Staff Member

    • Developer
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    10,378
    Hello everyone,
    Today we would like to ask for your opinion about the thruster mechanics in Empyrion. Basically, there are 2 different approaches and we would like to know which approach you would prefer:
    1. Arcade-style thruster placement: you would place your thrusters always pointing backwards but you can configure in a thruster-control module how much thruster force is applied to each direction.
    2. Simulation-style thruster placement: you would need to physically place (non-intrusive) directional thrusters on each side to which you want to apply thruster force.
    Your answer would help us to determine the approach that the community prefers.
    Thanks in advance
    Eleon Game Studios
     
    #1
    123ethan likes this.
  2. TomDavies

    TomDavies Ensign

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    Arcade, simply because I don't want to worry too much in a game to a point where I lose interest. make it an option. Do not delete features from a sandbox game, simply make them Optional.
     
    #2
  3. TinyKoala

    TinyKoala Ensign

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    I like very much the idea to have the choice!! Personally I would prefer the simulation-style but would there be a reward ( performance enhance for example ) for those who put effort into building in simulation mode?
     
    #3
  4. risingtide

    risingtide Ensign

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    7
    the simulation Style Thruster seem Logical and realistic.
     
    #4
  5. Chief 117

    Chief 117 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2014
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    27
    I like physics and the three laws of motion, so i prefer the simulation style thrusters. Lol
     
    #5
  6. spartanshalo

    spartanshalo Ensign

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    8
    I seriously don't understand why this is even being asked. The game features dynamic airflow and structural integrity. The shape and size of your ship affects its handling and capability. Yet you ask if thrust should be arcade or simulation? Not trying to sound any particular way, but from the list of features on the website, the game is clearly leaning on simulation, not arcade. I would find a happy middle ground between arcade and simulation. Simulation thrust allows for damage to a ship to actually mess up its ability to respond while arcade would be like starmade and have no real effect on the ship as less thrusters means slower ship in general. That is terrible, and makes damage almost pointless in my opinion.
     
    #6
    Fruitbat, FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  7. piddlefoot

    piddlefoot Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    4,283
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Without question directional thrusters are far better for the game experience.
     
    #7
    Fruitbat and VoicesDark like this.
  8. Graysfang

    Graysfang Ensign

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    5
    I signed up to the forums for this vote lol.

    I honestly think both ish would work? I love space engineers but I truly hate their approach to thrusters and the need to have 1000000000 in all direction to make the ship go... and the unsightly fire from all of them(shudder). I understand they (SE) are aiming for a realistic semi near future but they went a bit to far. In the end if we, the Empyrion people, do need at least 1 in every direction it should be noninvasive/easily blended/hidden with the rest of the ship and not an eyesore like space engineers.

    Yes I know I've mentioned SE a ton but its the closest comparison I could think of.

    Also I am BEYOND excited over this game and I already preordered 3 copies for myself and 2 family members.

    Keep up the awesome work.
     
    #8
    Fruitbat, VoicesDark and XERO9 like this.
  9. ZephGrey

    ZephGrey Ensign

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    6
    I favor simulation, but it could be balanced a little with arcade style. I've played games where I had to set up directional thrusters to turn before. It was possible, but could be a bit of a pain. But setting them up for directional control is simple enough and requires players to merge form and function. It adds another level of problem to solve in game.
     
    #9
    VoicesDark likes this.
  10. AgentOrange232

    AgentOrange232 Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    31
    Many of us Space Engineers players are already used to having a simulation thrust and I feel very inclined to use simulation also for a more "in-depth" feeling to the game.
     
    #10
    FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  11. AgentOrange232

    AgentOrange232 Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    31
    I would, however, like to add this request of an RCS (reaction control system) block(s), like straight and sloped blocks, to the game to add a better alternative to reverser engines to help you slow your ship down. Please take this into consideration.

    Thank you,
    Agent Orange
     
    #11
    VoicesDark likes this.
  12. AgentOrange232

    AgentOrange232 Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    31
    Can't Wait For This Game!!!!! I have preordered the Double Pack and plan on gifting one of the keys to my brother so that we can play together.
     
    #12
    VoicesDark likes this.
  13. XERO9

    XERO9 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    16
    +1,000,000
    I AGREE WITH THESE POINTS SO MUCH!!!!!!!!! VERY WELL PUT SIR!
     
    #13
  14. XERO9

    XERO9 Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    16
    I am not placing a vote. I like both and know that having Options will ultimately make Empyrion successful. Thanks again to @EleonGameStudios !!!

    Plus, having to put thrusters all over different sides makes it very difficult to create smaller/aesthetic ships.

    Options per ship please! Using thrusters on different sides of larger ships to help with maneuvering would be useful.


    Perhaps an option at the initial spawning of the first ship block of each ship.

    Or...

    Maybe both options be available somehow throughtout the building of a ship. Example... Two different types of thrusters...

    type 1 is normal and thrusts which ever direction it is pointed and
    type 2 could be an overall configurable thruster with adjustments for each direction (type 2 obviously costing more)

    This would give "fancy" ships (lacking many eyesore thrusters) a higher cost and greater fullfillment when achieved!
     
    #14
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2015
  15. TrollolPenguin

    TrollolPenguin Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2014
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    19
    Simulator, so it will be more realistic. SE is also use simulator as well as inertia
     
    #15
    FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  16. Xentor

    Xentor Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2015
    Messages:
    659
    Likes Received:
    467
    Defenitely Option 2.
    Because I see the game not as simple arcade game, and we see at Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen, the people (who like those gameS) love the physics stuff.
    (We see too at Space Engeneers).

    And even it sounds now easier to make it Arcade like....
    I know StarMade.
    There it is "Option 1". And it is terrible.
    You are delivered to a fake physic calculation that is especial at Worlds with (the too buggy) collision mode total terrible.
    (You can not break realistic fast or turn the ship realistic....)
    So who wanna try out Option1, look into StarMade with a big ship, and try to fly it without bumbing into things.
     
    #16
    FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  17. Brokenshakles

    Brokenshakles Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,451
    Likes Received:
    652
    Simulation style, please. Also, release a game client already, I want to play around with all this stuff your showing us.
     
    #17
    FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  18. VoicesDark

    VoicesDark Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    87
    Not trying to sway the voting one way or another but just wanted to point out two things:

    1) In having the simulation style maneuvering thrusters that doesn't necessarily mean you'll have to spam all sides of your ship with tons of thrusters ala Space Engineers.

    2) In conceptualizing up some different styles of maneuvering thrusters we definitely have taken into consideration aesthetic impact and have come up with some very low impact styles, some of which are much like what were on the actual space shuttle. (See example from the actual space shuttle below)

    [​IMG]
     
    #18
  19. HolyAvengerOne

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2014
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    10
    Simulation all the way :)
     
    #19
    FHG Steve and VoicesDark like this.
  20. VoicesDark

    VoicesDark Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    87
    Just want to say it's amazing how many new people have registered/commented for their first time on this thread. To all you new people I'd just like to say hi, welcome to the community, and to everyone, thanks for getting involved.
     
    #20
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page