Author Topic: Engines Suggestions  (Read 18019 times)

Zerebo

  • Super Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 817
Engines Suggestions
« on: September 22, 2011, 07:01:31 pm »
Post your ideas on engines and controls here.
I will probably make a extra thread for interface ideas etc. so this is just for engines and control.

Here are some of my thoughts/ideas on the engines/controls.
Some ideas are already planned, like the distinction between different engine types.
Other are probably planned but here are my thoughts:


Engines:
Main engines:
Just know 2 directions, forward and backward, but are the most powerfull and efficient engines.
Backward is less efficient and powerfull. Same use of energy/fuel but less then half of thrust.


Control engines:
Domes that stick out a bit and are able to "fire" in nearly every direction (just not where they are fixed).
Much less thrust and not as efficient as main engines.

All in one engines (AIOE):
A combination of control engines and main engines. The solution for noobs and people who don't want to think about engine position.
One engine gives full 6dof control wherever it is placed.
Expensive and much less efficient then a main engine, control engine combination.

Impact on the game:
Placing engines and the decision which engines are used make a big difference.
Noobs just use the AIOE and can still have fun with their constructions but it will be slower, more expensive and less maneuverable then with the other systems.

More advanced players use main engines and control engines but have to place them right.
At least two control engine on opposite sides for all 6dof.
Placing the main engines as far as possible from the ships main axis results in faster turning of the ship around the other axis.
 

And if someone wants the edge with his ships he can use a bunch of main engines instead of control engines.
90° turned main engines become powerfull rotation or strafing engines.


Control:
Forward and backward should control the speed of the ship like in X.
This makes it possible to fly with other speeds then fullspeed. Also it better fits to realistic and inert ships.

Dampers control:
Dampers off should just turn off the dampers for the 3 movement axis but not for rotation around these axis.
I don't see any gameplay reason to have rotation with no dampers. It would probably just lead to problems and abusing.
Like rotating so fast that it is impossible to hit or even so fast that colision detection and hit detection for the weapons no longer works properly.

There should also be an option for reduced dampers. Making it possible to drift around but still slowing down the movement over time.

Switching between dampers off and on should stop the movement just as fast as the engines can stop it.

« Last Edit: September 29, 2011, 09:35:46 pm by Zerebo »

TarotDragoon

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 446
Re: Engines and Controls
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2011, 07:27:18 pm »
Just the obvious:

Impulse engines: powerful thrusters placed in a single direction, accelerate over time and give strong propulsion in the direction they are placed

manoeuvring thrusters: smaller thruster with full 6 side exhausts, not nearly as strong as impulse engines, used for rotating the ship around an axis.
Micah- Loving all the ships here Tarot!

PURPLE UNTO DEATH!!! (or maybe blue)

[ZanMgt]Gabriel

  • BR Developer
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
  • Lord Ruler, Gamer, Programmer, Spy
    • www.zanmgt.com
Re: Engines and Controls
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2011, 08:22:06 pm »
That's pretty much the plan, although there is a bit more to it.  ;)
"a programmer is an intermediary that converts sugar and caffeine into code"

Cy83r

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 1254
  • It's Shooowtime!
Re: Engines and Controls
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2011, 07:26:41 am »
So far as i can see, we have the six cardinal directions, forwards/back/port/starboard/fall/rise, and mouse-look based pitch and yaw, but will our fancy ships have the ability to roll?
Jibreel: Yeah but [Hufer] that's like [Axis] complaining that his Toyota Camry is stuck in the mud and you responding "Well my M1 Abrams doesn't seem to be having much trouble."

Zerebo

  • Super Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 817
Re: Engines and Controls
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2011, 07:28:20 am »
Yes roll is on e and q so full 6dof.

franx12

  • Spacer
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2011, 02:20:22 pm »
I've already said this in the IRC (Zerebo disagrees completely), but  Ithink that Spinning should also be affected by the Shift key. Not only for the ridiculous thing that could happen, but because it makes much more sense. I will eventually make some logical reasons up for the existance of the Turbo-spinning thing, but it'd be cool to have.  :P

EDIT: I meant all that outside spaceships; I know it works when piloting.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2011, 02:25:30 pm by franx12 »

CutterJohn

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2011, 08:37:58 am »
Engines:
Main engines:
Just know 2 directions, forward and backward, but are the most powerfull and efficient engines.
Backward is less efficient and powerfull. Same use of energy/fuel but less then half of thrust.


Control engines:
Domes that stick out a bit and are able to "fire" in nearly every direction (just not where they are fixed).
Much less thrust and not as efficient as main engines.

All in one engines (AIOE):
A combination of control engines and main engines. The solution for noobs and people who don't want to think about engine position.
One engine gives full 6dof control wherever it is placed.
Expensive and much less efficient then a main engine, control engine combination.

Imo engines should be placeable anywhere in any orientation. The best way to limit overuse of the powerful primary thrusters is mass.

Thus it becomes a tradeoff.


When I was serving on an aircraft carrier there were 4 main engines, each compromised of 2 turbines, one high pressure turbine, and one low pressure turbine. These 8 turbines spun the propeller to create forward thrust. They were very efficient, but also extremely massive, with something like 40 stages of blades. In contrast, the reversing turbines were simply 2 stages of blades housed on the end of the low pressure turbine. Very compact, and powerful, but pretty innefficient.

So far so good, your ideas are spot on with that logic.

My suggestion would be to not limit how these are placed. Just make several types of turbines of varying power, efficiency, and mass, and builders can place them as they will. Ask yourself.. Why did my ship go with the tiny reversing turbines instead of an additional 8 dedicated turbines that would have been more powerful and more efficient?

Because the ship only rarely used them. Why burden your ship with the addition cost, space requirement, and mass of these massive turbines when they are so rarely used? Its illogical.

So my suggestion would be to just give a choice of multiple engines, 4, maybe 5, with varying attributes from the tiny RCS thruster thats lightweight but innefficient as hell, to the massive star drives that weigh half your ship, and let the players decide how there ship would best benefit. Of course you can put massive main engines on all 6 axis. But this will slow down the acceleration of your ship by adding a ton of mass, and massively inflate the cost. But nothing should stop you from doing it if you really want to.



Also, I would suggest flywheels as a method of increasing turning speed. They are heavy, but quite handy since they need no reaction mass, so they would be incredibly efficient. Pretty much twice as efficient as any thruster, since you're not wasting half of the power accelerating reaction mass. Also they are cheap(but heavy!)

Zerebo

  • Super Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 817
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2011, 09:43:54 am »
Well you misunderstood my idea. Maybe it's my bad english.
But my idea is that main engines can be placed in any direction you want but they can just deliver force into the direction they face and the opposite one.
Control engines can deliver force into any direction but are less efficient.

CutterJohn

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2011, 09:58:08 am »
Ah, well that works then. :)


Though I personally would prefer having to place them in each direction. Heck, ideally I would love it if the ships center of mass was calculated, and I would have to place the thrusters appropriately to keep the ship from spinning when thrusting, and thruster position and force were calculated to determine how much torque they had..

Zerebo

  • Super Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 817
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2011, 12:34:13 pm »
Ah, well that works then. :)


Though I personally would prefer having to place them in each direction. Heck, ideally I would love it if the ships center of mass was calculated, and I would have to place the thrusters appropriately to keep the ship from spinning when thrusting, and thruster position and force were calculated to determine how much torque they had..
That happens when you have perfect balance off. Then all engines fire at full power and badly balanced ships start to fly where they want.
Even with the automatic balance a good balanced ship will be more maneuverable with the same amount of thrusters.

Jenvo

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Oh, don't mind me...
    • Steam Profile
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2011, 11:04:55 pm »
Zerebo, I'm liking the system you have in place for the engines. I'm not a huge fan on the all-in-one engine, but I'm not saying it doesn't make sense to add for newer players. Good balancing too.

I'm not sure if this suggestion is quite adding to these ideas, but I liked the idea of the microwarpdrive in EVE online. For those who aren't familiar with it, the microwarpdrive (or MWD) is a mid-power module that can be added to ships in EVE. When activated, this module would speed up a ship considerably to almost 500% of it's top speed (from what I remember). Obviously, it was very resource-draining and could not be sustained. This was used on ships that wanted a very high top speed for speed tanking, or sometimes on ships with a very slow top speed that need an extra boost.

The way I can see this being implemented is either a warp drive engine being operated at a low power, or a completely separate engine type of its own. I like your idea of the engine categories, so this would be added into the main engines category. Although, the functionality would be moreso a high-powered auxiliary boost engine.

Another idea I had instead was to just boost the regular thruster engines. This could maybe be considered an overdrive subsystem, which would control the excess amount of power and cooling the engine would need. Without an overdrive subsystem, you would not be able to boost an engine without damaging the engine.

These are just suggestions. Feel free to modify/add to them as you please.

Matz05

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 467
  • Diabolical Genius
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2011, 11:35:16 pm »
A "momentum booster module" or such with those effects could be interesting. "space compressor"? "velocity enhancer"?
Maybe it could disable inertial dampers and make the ship accelerate faster? basically the opposite of the ID (magnify motion rather than control it)?
Quote
Posted By Alaric on 28 Jun 2011 04:54 PM
...it doesn't matter, I making space ships!

RabidMonkey

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2011, 02:10:02 am »
Sorry if someone has already posted this...why not just make thrusters that fire in a single direction when activated (instead of forward and reverse), and then allow the user to change their orientation when placing the block? (Actually, being able to change the orientation of the weapons when placing the blocks would be sweet too.  Would allow for ships that fire broadsides, instead of straight ahead).  Then have an assortment of big or small thruster blocks.

Zerebo

  • Super Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 817
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2011, 09:54:45 am »
Hmm I think forward and reverse is good. Don't really want to have brake engines on every of my ships.
But having reverse being more efficient makes brake engines interesting in some cases.

Overdrive is a good idea. There should be a overdrive option/upgrade for every system.
It uses then exponential more energy and has the chance of disastrous failure when overdriving to much but could be a good option in some cases.
"Deactivate all weapons and life support and all energy to the shields and weapons. Bring us out of here!!!"

I'm not sure if this suggestion is quite adding to these ideas, but I liked the idea of the microwarpdrive in EVE online. For those who aren't familiar with it, the microwarpdrive (or MWD) is a mid-power module that can be added to ships in EVE. When activated, this module would speed up a ship considerably to almost 500% of it's top speed (from what I remember). Obviously, it was very resource-draining and could not be sustained. This was used on ships that wanted a very high top speed for speed tanking, or sometimes on ships with a very slow top speed that need an extra boost.
Sounds like a good idea when you are to close to use your jump drive but to far away to fly there normal.
Making it easy to scramble by enemies would be a good way to balance it.

TarotDragoon

  • Founder
  • *
  • Posts: 446
Re: Engines/Control Suggestions
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2011, 01:53:01 pm »
Hmm I think forward and reverse is good. Don't really want to have brake engines on every of my ships.
But having reverse being more efficient makes brake engines interesting in some cases.

that's the problem with space, every action needs an equal and opposite reaction, some engines should include their own 'reverse' option but only those all-in-one noob drives.
Micah- Loving all the ships here Tarot!

PURPLE UNTO DEATH!!! (or maybe blue)