Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Thruster Damage change's

Discussion in 'Suggestions and Feedback' started by Captain Broadstairs, Oct 26, 2017.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    EDIT - Update 1.184.7 - Beta Improvements, has altered these mechanics in such as a way as to make the majority of this post redundant.

    Recent changes to the thruster damage volume have somewhat limited the use of previously viable aesthetic designs of embedded large thruster's that were placed behind narrow ports in armor. This used to provide better protection for thrusters while looking great.
    [​IMG]
    Where this had been damage free, the larger volume now destroys the slopes.

    Now I understand things change in game design for various reasons and this isn't a complete product, we have no right to expect things to stay as they are in early access gaming, but it is my opinion that this change is a negative one, and I would be curious to see what other player's opinion is.

    I don't know how many other players are like me, appreciating thruster damage for its prevention of cheating physics, but also trying to create as small as possible an exhaust port for their thrusters. I may be in a minority of affected players here, but thats my take on this alteration to the game.
    This isn't a rant or rave about the game itself, I'll alter my designs to accommodate the larger damage volume if I have too in order to keep using thruster damage, just not particularly happy about this one aspect of what is otherwise great progress you are making with the game.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 7
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  2. Forcedminer Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,207
    my designs are always block and ugly but suited to the task.
    although i knew this would effect alot of SE players who are awesome at making fancy ships and stations. :(
    .
    hopefully sometimes like a ghost projectile when placing it down shows the AOE it'll effect.
    this could be a decent way of adding different types of thrusters like a narrow exhaust thruster or wide thruster. both with pros and cons.
    or even a way of giving a thruster X% of power so they it won't burn further away blocks or ones around around it due to a narrower exhaust
    so they can still function and get a ship moving...if at a slight acceleration offset.
    .
    i mean its not like we all makes ships built for speed and combat right?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Noy Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    112
    Also I don't understand how it's a performance boost. I would think a cylinder/capsule collision should be just as easy to calculate as a rotate-able cube; due to the cube having more surface component to test against. That being said circle (including cylinders and capsules) tend to have easier collision calculation than rotate-able squares; so I'm curios about what they did that improved the performance.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Forjo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Personally, I'm NOT happy that I have to redesign some of my ships -- especially my internal thruster design that I spent a lot of time making sure wouldn't burn itself.

    -Forjo
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    Considering this is going to push me even further towards using Gravity propulsion by scripting, I wager the impact on performance with regards to my ship is going to go up not down, I already had some prototype gravity drives set up, I guess ripping the thruster ports out for Gravity drives is tonight's project.

    Here is a little gem I found on the workshop http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=715668821
     
  6. w0lf3y Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    152
    I don't mind the Ion nozzle sticking out of my hull. But I'm sad about the Lg Hydrogen damage cone.
    The base of the ions is square and can be placed flush with armor, it doesn't look bad, but the hydrogen base is a cross with angled corners, there is no embedding that flush without unsightly gaps, and now we can't cover the nozzle either. I usually use slope tips and and their corner counterparts to hid the Lg hydro base and the outside of the nozzle. Now that a iron slag fest. :?:baby::(:mad::words: because honestly, I dislike the lg hydro block so much I even hide it when i play survival.....

    They say it's a performance boost. I haven't seen a boost but OK. So now that you've boosted performance how about making the damage effect match the graphic.
     
  7. DrEarlInsanity Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    14
    ive been using this in all of my ships so IF this alteration stays I'm probs going to permanently put se away rather than redo all the things that have used this tech for 3+ years.
     
  8. suicideneil Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    227
  9. Vrmithrax Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,017
    Well, the entire construction engine is based on cube profiles, so that may have something to do with it... But things like this are often about the math. With a cube, all dimensions and volumetric calculations can be done with integer math (no decimal places), which is much faster internally. Cylindrical shapes are not so lucky, they are almost always some decimal value that has to be calculated then rounded or truncated to get back to integers. You wouldn't think it's much of a difference, but it can add up and surprise you - this basic math efficiency behavior is one of the reasons that we use integer math whenever possible in the industrial process control systems I program, to keep the scan rate of the program as fast as possible. Not sure if that calculation efficiency is part of the real reasoning behind the change, but it's a possible explanation.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Bullet_Force Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    281
    I think the whole whinging about these valid changes are part of larger problem with this games player base.

    Sadly it seems a lot of people that play this game aren't PVP players nor are they into engineering. The majority of players seems to be of the role player/PVE persuasion who are into some kind of strange "ship fashion" where the aim is to make the most impractical, nonfunctional and useless ship that looks 'beautiful'.

    I go to the Steam Workship once a week to see what is on offer and its always the same thing. Giant massive and expensive so called "battle ships" that are poorly armed for their large size (most have very few turrets) that have either been cloned from some Sci Fi series/movie or were built simply to look 'bad ass' but aren't actually. None of them are practical, you certainly would not want to use them on a PVP where they would die in under a minute.

    Players that care about the engineering/PVP aspect of this game are quite happy with these because any improvement to performance is a good thing, regardless if it makes one's ship slightly less 'beautiful'.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 8
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. FoolishOwl Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    505
    If that aesthetic detail is so important to you, maybe it would be better to just switch off thruster damage.
    Seems like a perfectly valid approach to Space Engineers to me. It's a sandbox, which can accommodate a lot of different styles of play.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Disagree Disagree x 4
  12. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    On the contrary, this is ABOUT THE ENGINEERING.

    Players such as myself have found a way to minimize the exposed area of our thrusters with armor in such a way that conforms to the physics of the game. We have engineered a solution to protect our vital systems. If all we cared about was aesthetics we'd have switched Thruster damage off and not been bothered by the changes.

    Also don't speak up about the opinions of other people stick to your opinion, I am a player who cares about the engineering, I trained to be an engineer, do you know what one of the things they teach you besides applied mathematics? Design, aesthetics and how to work form and function together. Something I am doing in this game, so are other people who have chimed in on this topic.

    Having the parameters of the games physics altered after a perfectly viable engineered solution was found, without warning, is poor form.

    Further more the changes aren't in my opinion "valid" in any sense of noticeable performance increase to justify them. There's no positive impact and only negative impact to be seen here. If you can find any evidence of noticeable positive impact, do share because i'm not seeing it in my games and I've yet to see anybody demonstrate that they have.
    I am not opposed to changes to early access games, but to upset the status quo on game mechanics in such a way as to cause player upset? They need to have a damn good reason and this time they frankly don't.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  13. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    I disagree here...
    A few blocks is not an "engineered" solution..

    Cool and all to be alerted, annoyed and angry about it, but don't be dishonest. This has NOTHING to do with engineering.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 7
  14. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    engineer
    ɛndʒɪˈnɪə/
    verb
    past tense: engineered; past participle: engineered
    1. 1.
      design and build (a machine or structure).

      A structure was designed and built, it was engineered. Take you high horse and mosey on.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
  15. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    @Captain Broadstairs
    I guess Minecraft is an Engineering game then.

    So is a six year old drawing a house on a piece of paper. Completely forgot about that.

    Let's use a decent term so loosely it applies to placing down a single landing gear, until it becomes completely meaningless <3

    Putting up a playground house... You are not just a carpenter... You are an ENGINEER!

    Putting up that art sculpture, you are not just an artist... You are an ENGINEER...

    God damn it, me putting together my Ikea table makes me an ENGINEER!

    GUYS GUYS!!! EVERYONE!!!
    I ENGINEERED A TABLE!!! OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG!!! I AM AN ACTUAL REAL LIFE ENGINEER... (Disclaimer: Only according to @FoolishOwl @Captain Broadstairs, @Keten Kennek and @suicideneil)

    (See what I mean by a term being able to lose its meaning if you apply it to loosely with zero standards applied)

    And before you say those things are not a structure.

    structure
    ˈstrʌktʃə/
    noun
    1. 1.
      the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex.
      "the two sentences have equivalent structures"
      synonyms: construction, form, formation, shape, composition, fabric, anatomy, make-up, constitution; More
    2. 2.
      a building or other object constructed from several parts.
      "the station is a magnificent structure and should not be demolished"
      synonyms: building, edifice, construction, erection, pile, complex, assembly
      "a vast Gothic structure with strange ornamental spirelets"
    verb
    1. 1.
      construct or arrange according to a plan; give a pattern or organization to.
      "services must be structured so as to avoid pitfalls"
      synonyms: arrange, organize, order, design, shape, give structure to, assemble, construct, build, put together
      "the programme is structured around periods of residential study"
    So... Take your "high horse" and mosey on...

    EDIT:
    Oh and before saying I am not an Engineer according to these lose terms... Check this definition as well... a 2 year old could go by the definition of Engineer if we have no standards...

    engineer
    ɛndʒɪˈnɪə/
    noun
    1. 1.
      a person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
      synonyms: designer, planner, builder, architect, producer, fabricator, developer, creator; More
    2. 2.
      a person who controls an engine, especially on an aircraft or ship.
      synonyms: engineering officer, controller, handler, driver; More
    verb
    1. 1.
      design and build (a machine or structure).
      "the men who engineered the tunnel"
    2. 2.
      skilfully arrange for (something) to occur.
      "she engineered another meeting with him"
      synonyms: bring about, cause, arrange, pull off, bring off, fix, set up, plot, scheme, contrive, plan, put together, devise, manoeuvre, manipulate, negotiate, organize, orchestrate, choreograph, mobilize, mount, stage, put on, mastermind, originate, manage, stage-manage, coordinate, control, superintend, direct, conduct, handle, concoct; More
    So if we go by loose terminology, I am an actual real life engineer.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2017
    • Disagree Disagree x 6
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. FoolishOwl Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    505
    Frankly, yes. Engineering is a universal human activity. So are a lot of other things that are used as titles for professions. Professional certifications and licenses are another matter, and are of value, but as far as downloading a game and designing and building things in it, none of us has a professional certification.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  17. DragonShadow Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    397
    One point I have to agree with critics on is the performance boost. Will these changes improve calculations for thruster damage? Yes (that is not debatable, because geometry). Are these improvements noticeable? Not that I can tell, because I've never had any kind of slow down or other issues because of thruster damage.
     
  18. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    The point here is if engineering is just a blanket term, it is a meaningless term. Engineering as used is not used as a blanket term. You don't call what a carpenter is doing engineering. You don't call a random person laying a few bricks engineering, etc.
    Engineering and being an engineer has very specific connotations (which implies a certain level of complexity, which in this example there is none of) and using those expectations to bring more feeling into a point is in my opinion wrong.

    I wouldn't mind, and honestly encourage (if asked) people to do the same to my posts.

    And I actually agree with this change being a rather troublesome change, that doesn't mean I agree to the loaded language.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 5
  19. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    No the title of Chartered Engineer or Incorporated Engineer (Or other similar titles awarded in other nations) have very specific connotations implying specific levels of complexity. The action of engineering, is defined as laid out above and in any dictionary you pick up.

    You don't like it? Then go rant to a lexicographer about it. But please do so in your own time. We aren't here to discuss your personal disagreements with dictionary definitions.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2017
  20. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    @Captain Broadstairs if you want to say engineering then, it requires a structure, which is:
    structure
    ˈstrʌktʃə/
    noun
    1. 1.
      the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex.
      "the two sentences have equivalent structures"
      synonyms: construction, form, formation, shape, composition, fabric, anatomy, make-up, constitution; More
    2. 2.
      a building or other object constructed from several parts.
      "the station is a magnificent structure and should not be demolished"
      synonyms: building, edifice, construction, erection, pile, complex, assembly
      "a vast Gothic structure with strange ornamental spirelets"
    verb
    1. 1.
      construct or arrange according to a plan; give a pattern or organization to.
      "services must be structured so as to avoid pitfalls"
      synonyms: arrange, organize, order, design, shape, give structure to, assemble, construct, build, put together
      "the programme is structured around periods of residential study"
    As well...
     
  21. haibusa2005 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    38
    Provided you participate in forum that discusses a certain game, I don't understand why are you complaining about someone wasting your time. If you are indeed the busy person you hint to be, what are you doing here persuading someone that your opinion is more correct than his/hers?
     
  22. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    When did i claim to be busy? I'm just not interested in his fixation on word definitions, I'm here to discuss changes to thruster mechanics in Space engineers.
     
  23. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    Which you use words for.
     
  24. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    Do you actually have anything to say about the topic or are you just here to derail threads? I do wonder sometimes.

    I've told you, if you will insist on disagreeing with dictionaries, go bother the lexicographer who compiled them.
     
  25. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    @Captain Broadstairs To be fair, you actually started the dictionary discussion. I merely said it was not really engineering, and you started posting definitions and acted butthurt about it, so... Did you try to derail the thread?

    And I have several times stated I also agree that the thruster damage changes out of nowhere is quite annoying.
     
  26. Bumber Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,018
    Modern PC CPUs prioritize floating point instructions over integers. Square roots are slow, but proper algorithms use distance squared instead.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. Lt_Duckweed Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    417
    I have to say, me and the entire faction I am a part of (around 50 to 70 members atm) are extremely upset with the changes to thruster damage

    [​IMG]
    Red box is how it is now, blue circle is how it was, green box is much closer to how it should be.

    [​IMG]
    This is a small sample of some of the setups they broke.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  28. Captain Broadstairs Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    469
    I've never tried any of the door arrangements. But very frustrated that the three set ups over to the left end have been made unusable. Not so much for small thrusters, but for Large thrusters especially where the thruster has a 2x3 face exposed to damage for a thruster exhaust port that has a 2x1 area.

    Were I playing solo only I'd have switched entirely to the medium thruster mod I have which adds a large thruster whose entire 2x2 face is all exhaust instead of being needlessly wide/tall.
     
  29. Lt_Duckweed Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    417
    I only briefly fooled around with those, I am also most upset about the three (well really the 4) on the left. It broke every single reverse and left/right thruster on my ship.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  30. FoolishOwl Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    505
    I was just trying out Aragath's Cursor, which is prominently featured in many loading screens. As soon as you load it, chunks of armor are blown off by the hydrogen thrusters.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.