Cornflakes
-
Posts
384 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cornflakes
-
-
The problem is they don't get it the polite way. You have to give them sarcasm to realise how dumb some of their requests are. What's the point of LUA scripts if people are going to force the Devs to making it a dumbed-down process of upgrading "tech trees" ? None. What's the point of adding physics? None. As I said, if it comes to that, make it a point and click adventure like EVE.
theres still no need to abandon politeness for that, that is what makes forums toxic and unbearable to read
-
Caaaalm down.
no need to get toxic.
All is fine.
We are all on the aame team here.
-
That would work for design of physical constructs and the LUA coding, but I think OP is referring to the Elements used for constructs, ie FTL drives or stargates. Devices like those aren't something that you can "Git Gud" at. Elements like these need to be made available in a package element, like the cockpit in the video. Otherwise there would need to be some new nonsensical physics system where placements of individual voxels of certain materials causes FTL movement, which would be really weird.
and would be really fun because you could play around with it instead of just slapping it on your ship and thats it
ideal would be something along the lines of "easy to get something going, but hard to push it to high efficiencies"
with ships and stargates evolving in shape and size to match the latest "most efficient" drive designs.
-
im not saying anything against storage thats made safe by player construction/action.
im just against storage containers which are safe by the word the devs and are able to be placed in arbitary locations / on arbitary constructs
-
what is "your house"? the player can place more than one construct.
why make it complicated, anything in an arkified area is safe, everything outside is fair game
-
Do we have any definite words on voxel based damage? I cant remember anything cobfirming that
-
When i can build a safe storage container /anywhere/ i build my transport ships cargo hold out of those, rendering any kind of attack moot.
-
Are you suggesting that everyone can set up secure storage compartments, which cant be cracked open or hacked, in arbitary locations?
Seems like you dont want shipping lines to be raidable at all, because when i can build secure containers everywhere, what keeps me from using them for shipping my goods and thus keeping them perfectly safe even in the most dangerous environments.
Perfect security should have very harsh restrictions as to where its possible and what you can do with it.
For example a normal, bog standard container would be a save storage in an arkified area.
enabling save storage of goods without being instantly a pita for pvp balance and design (at least no more than arkified areas are already)
-
Hopefully, you won't be able to de-orbit planets. Otherwise we all know what the greatest project in the game will be.
Operation : Majora's Mask.
i wonder what would take longer, deorbiting or building that giant face first.
-
social darwinism at work
-
airtight ships, oxygen sources, ect...
well, i hope your spaceship already has those things
-
well, there could be different variations of high powered disco lights.
some with "bullet" speed = light speed and slower ones.
with proper lasers behaving like in E:D, with arriving instantly
and technobabble particle/plasma cannons behaving like star wars laser shots
-
hey, it would help to distinguish pure spaceships from transatmospheric craft.
ships that arent designed for reentry heating/shock wont fare well when coming down
but the shuttles designed to bring stuff in/out of atmospheres do it without being hugely bothered.
so you'd have to design landing boats for your transport / invasion and cant just land with the largest ship you have.
-
hm... im not sure if a railgun would be of any use for a continous particle/plasma weapon.
there are pulsed plasma thrower railguns, which replace a solid slug with a blob of gas/plasma and accelerate that.
but i think a full coilgun or similar approach would work better.
it would also avoid having to have parts of its assembly touching the plasma, plasma tends to do bad things over time.
and i already see the "ISKS FARK THE WORLD" destroying planets
-
The way I understand them coilguns, they are essentially rail-guns (two tracks) that go in spiral to give the rotary motion to the projectile and torque (which would require a certain bullet architecture come to think of it). In any case, as I stated, a spirral magnetic field could be more effective as a mass-driving and ejection system. But since we talk about the vacuum of space, any given mass-driver would work as fine.
coilguns function fundamentally different from railguns.
railguns have the projectile being part of the electrical circuit.
you have one rail as conductor "forwards", the projectile connecting them, and then the other rail transporting current back
with the whole assembly producing a magnetic field that expells the bullet from the assembly.
the projectile is locked to the rails and has to follow any form the rails have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun (german wikipedia has a better work principle graph on the top)
a coilgun works differently.
a coilgun is basically a series of individually switched electromagnets that pull along a (ferro-)magnetic projectile.
the projectile does never touch the wires and isnt directly part of the electrical circuit
it can rotate more or less freely inside the barrel assembly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun
what you are describing would be a helically wound railgun, with the rails twisting around the lenght of the barrel working as rifling.
and railguns cant work in continous mode, because any conducting element in front of your projectile produces a magnetic field against your movement, removing all forward acceleration.
coilguns on the other hand would make better particle beam cannons as you could use them as high powered and focused MHD/MPD-like "engines" which expell the highly accelerated material in very rapid pulses.
-
i spent seven years learning electrical engineering, i know how solenoids look
and memory metal? expanding when under current?
i dont know what kind of wiring you use, but my copper wires never deform when i put current through them.
yes, coils have a tendency to expand under high currents, but thats not from memory metal effects but because the magnetic fields push the wires apart.
and torque whichs rotational axis is parallel with the direction of flight never provides any linear momentum
also, if coil guns had any significant rifling effect on their own peope wouldnt design coilguns with rifling-like effects especially designed in.
-
Uhm, a coil goes in spirals sir. The spiral shape of the magnet provides torque. The railgun is linear only O.o
erm... only because its a coil doesnt mean that any effective torque goes in spirals in the coil.
there is some winding in the field because a coils wires arent in a perfect 90° angle towards the axis, but in general the angle is negligible.
the windings of a coil gun dont provide any notable rotational force in the projectile.
and as i cant find anything on field helicicisity inside a solenoid im not sure if theres maybe an effect that cancels the helical elements of the field inside.
the projectile doesnt follow the windings of the coils.
there are some hybrid rail/coil guns which are rifled, at least as far as i know.
edit: considering that they have to use external fields to twist the magnetic containment in tokamaks (which are mechanically very similar to a "coilgun" twisted into a circle) i doubt that the edge effects of the angle of the coiling has any effect
-
Uhm, sir, the coilgun provides torque, thus stability, like rifling provides torque.
errrrrrrr..... nope?
a basic coil gun just provides linear acceleration.
maybe some torque from edge effects around the coils, but nothing thats a distinct feature
-
@cornflakes
How big of an item you wanna build? Five square feet or something? Cause I got the impression you aimin' for lower than that, which will need more voxels on the grid.
im aiming for something sensible.
but from what i have seen in the video the grid size seems to be on about the same scale as from the depths cubes, and there it works reasoably fine for designing stuff
-
Not to be a nerd, but you have confused railguns with coilguns
To put it bluntly in a way Second Amendment lovers could understand.
Railgun = Slingshot
Coilgun = Rifle (see Rifling on a barrel for more info).
So yeah, coilguns = armor penetration.
Railguns = Ye... well, it flings things.
coilguns have no rifling.
at least they dont need one, and from what i know the preferred variation of a coil gun is a contactless variant to eliminate friction and decrease wear that way.
and rifling also has nothing to do with armor penetration
-
the result storage would be tinytinytiny compared to all the other stuff they already have to store.
and the blueprints themself could be stored on the client of the respective player, if theres an external editor to do so, before the player does anything with them in-game.
but then it'd be annoying to have your creations bound to your computer instead of your account in a MMO.
and as many many blueprints will already be traded on the market which have to be stored server side to be made available to other players, im not sure it would give so much relief.
-
@Cornflakes
When you create something in a voxel grid space, you replace the colouring essentially of a voxel to make a whole set of them.
If you make smaller voxels, not by virtually shrinking them but actually raising the number of them by making them smaller, the game will literally take a proportionally amount of hinderance. Let's say the game is an image. An image has pixels. Let's say your image is 2048x2048 pixels. Each of these pixels is a color square. Same applies for Voxels. Now think of amplifying the resolution to 4096x4096. Sure, you got a more detailed picture but an also heavier picture memory-wise. If they figure out a way to make virtual voxel shrinking, then cool, it will change the aesthetic of the game, but amping voxel count in the grid to make "cool multi-voxel construcs" is, in my humble opinion, a pointless endeavor. Perhaps in depth of time, when everyone will have GTX 1080 like me, we could have an amplification of voxel-count in the grid, but for now, let the Devs figure out how to pack more players in an area and just wait to see if the voxel building system they have in mind can satisfy you.
Peace.
thank you captain obvious, but where did i say to increase voxel density?
the density they showed in the announcement video on that fighter is more than enough to do some multiblock equipment design.
Your statement is true. It would be less stressful if you ran it that way. Up to a point. It merely delays when those calculations are made. When those "certain conditions" are met all of a sudden it becomes a MASSIVE drain on system resources as it now it has to calculate all the values for the affected voxel parts at once. This factor could be compounded even further if multiple ships are being damaged in the same area simultaneously.
Not saying the idea doesn't have merit just that it would require something else along with it to make it work. For instance, I thought a possible solution would be calculating that information before hand and it could be part of the blueprint. Especially if you limited it to voxel and mesh based "elements". All the calculations would be done already and on the client side. But this has the disadvantages of taking up an extreme amount of room on a players computer. (You would need all blueprint information, even for blueprints you don't have.) It would need micro updates occurring every time someone makes a blueprint, and it would be highly abusable by cheaters. So, more ideas? Possible solutions? Information from the devs that will address this entire thread?
why would you do those calc on the client side?
and why would you have to update them when anyone in the universe updates a blueprint?
the client does nothing of importance, never, and only gets the data that he needs and not the whole game database.
when a ship gets built, calculate the equipment effectivity on the server (and on clients who are near enough to it to check the data, for lag hiding) and store it on the server to be transmitted to relevant clients when the ship loads in.
and most clients dont even need most of the data of a piece of equipment anyway, because its the servers job to keep clients in their capability bounds.
-
The point is for the game to be able to function. If a feature is hindering the game's smoothness on your scree, then said feature should not be implemented. Perhaps something easier, like the ability to shrink voxels, sure, but something more eleborate than "connect A to B" is quite the challenge on the technical aspects of the game.
when you do it properly a multiblock device wouldnt need more resources than the same amount of simple steel blocks plus one functional component.
the individual voxel parts wouldnt need to be called and analysed all the time, only when certain conditions are met they'd have to be handled as something not a simple block. for example when the ship gets damaged you check if any multiblocks got damaged and then recalculate the stats of the relevant device.
you dont poll their functions all the time, you calculate the effectivity of the complete device once and then only use the stats from that calculation until you have to recalculate for changes in the local objects grid.
-
well, its likely to go hand in hand.
as the ship isnt fundamentally different from the vending machine's container.
its a cargo pod in a player built object.
Tech Research
in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
Posted
What would be gained by hard limiting new players to follow some predefined progression path?
If the player is good in building what he wants, let him build it.
If he finds a way to bootstrap himself to advanced tech, let him do it.
Why limit players in that regard?