2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Details about updates to Shores of Hazeron

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Haxus » Mon May 14, 2018 3:31 pm

Any suggestion for how much to reduce the material requirement by? 50%?

Using the current build time calculation...
Macross, one of the largest ships in the database right now, is estimated at 17 days 10 hours.
Atlantis is estimated at 2 days, 15 hours.
Ba-xtho'-ga MK0 is estimated at 11 hours, 15 minutes.
Dulcinée is estimated at 1 hours, 24 minutes.

Is a change required at all? Those ships that took 40 days to build are no longer a factor.
User avatar
Haxus
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Deantwo » Mon May 14, 2018 4:18 pm

Haxus wrote:
what about allowing us to include low-detail models in the design ourselves?

For whatever reasons, some people would make their low poly models bear no resemblance to the high poly models.

Easiest way to do it would be if the designer just did it automatically during finalizing.
Make a second model of the building, remove all parts smaller than a specific size, remove all interiors, and so on. It would cause most designs to double in size though, so likely wouldn't be worth it from a server memory point of view.
AnrDaemon is the solution to the [s]Fermi Paradox[/s] Hazeron suggestion flood problem, the great suggestion filter.
User avatar
Deantwo
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:38 am
Location: Rævehale

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Deantwo » Mon May 14, 2018 4:21 pm

Haxus wrote:Any suggestion for how much to reduce the material requirement by? 50%?

You could make the hull materials stop being linear with overall size. This would also make bigger ships not have as much health, while leaving small ships how they are.

A ship isn't just a huge box of metal, it will likely start being hollow in many places as you build really big. Unless you build it with a lot of armor I guess, but that already cost volume so it is likely ok.

Just something along the likes of making a large ship cost less metal for the hull.
AnrDaemon is the solution to the [s]Fermi Paradox[/s] Hazeron suggestion flood problem, the great suggestion filter.
User avatar
Deantwo
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:38 am
Location: Rævehale

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby AnrDaemon » Mon May 14, 2018 4:53 pm

Make resource requirements so that it does not require a million of one resource and a single numbers of everything else.
That would be a better improvement.
Yak. Yak never changes.
AnrDaemon
 
Posts: 7572
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Ikkir Isth » Mon May 14, 2018 5:01 pm

Another option could be to remove the 'build the modules too' part of ship construction and just build the frame of the ship, and have to build a sufficient number/size of modules to slot in as well.
Making things with OpenGL: Image
Working on- an exploration game.
@Ikkir_Isth
User avatar
Ikkir Isth
 
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Deantwo » Mon May 14, 2018 5:08 pm

Ikkir Isth wrote:Another option could be to remove the 'build the modules too' part of ship construction and just build the frame of the ship, and have to build a sufficient number/size of modules to slot in as well.

I do like the idea of "Sensor Parts", "Reactor Parts", "Armor Parts" and so on. A bit generic and a lot of new item parts, but it would mean ships aren't made up of so many basic components.
AnrDaemon is the solution to the [s]Fermi Paradox[/s] Hazeron suggestion flood problem, the great suggestion filter.
User avatar
Deantwo
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:38 am
Location: Rævehale

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Haxus » Mon May 14, 2018 5:22 pm

That does make sense, to require modules instead of individual parts.
  • The number of each kind of module needed to build a system would be based on the size of the system, similar to individual parts.
  • Spacecraft damage would be measured in whole modules and repaired using whole modules. A small amount of damage to a few systems might be very costly to repair.
  • Instead of replacing a burned out dilithium crystal...er...lumenite, you would need the appropriate FTL drive module. This eliminates the possibility of acquiring the parts from the environment or from a low tech civilization.
  • Players would manufacture modules early on, instead of only when they wanted to upgrade a system.
  • Modules would have more use than just upgrading systems.
  • Module patents would no longer be a requirement to build spacecraft, just the modules. You could get a load of modules from someone else, without them having to give up the technology to make them.
  • Manual remove and replace would work in whole modules, not individual parts.
I am in favor of the idea, pending an opportunity for others to comment.
User avatar
Haxus
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Ikkir Isth » Mon May 14, 2018 5:36 pm

It would certainly remove the "build moon sized metal ship, upgrade to vulcium hull using single tiny module" loophole
Making things with OpenGL: Image
Working on- an exploration game.
@Ikkir_Isth
User avatar
Ikkir Isth
 
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Haxus » Mon May 14, 2018 5:37 pm

Yes. :oops: That loophole was on my hit list. This would provide a convenient and logical solution.
User avatar
Haxus
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: 2018-05-11 Blueprint Validation Changes

Postby Minty » Mon May 14, 2018 6:39 pm

Speaking of low-poly, and optimizations, and all that - have you looked into modern low-poly games, Haxus? I'm not sure how much you play these days, but there are some beautiful, stylized games that are very low-fi and still look great.

Grow Up:
https://static.gamespot.com/uploads/screen_kubrick/1566/15663463/3108400-gameplay_growup_08122016_site.jpg
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2016/08/grow-up-review/grow6-1920x1080.jpg

Astroneer:
https://www.gamingonlinux.com/uploads/articles/tagline_images/1220819515id6090gol.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/gh_Ucfcz5KM/maxresdefault.jpg

I know that these are a little cartoonier and brighter than you may be going for, but you should really see these games in action - they very much demonstrate the power of good lighting and great art direction. They don't really even use textures.

I absolutely don't mean this as 'your game is ugly, look at these better ones! Copy them!' or anything. I know you're focused on the tech side of things - and that's great! You've done a lot this week, it's really awesome! I just thought it'd be good to show off some of this stuff, for you and everyone else to consider. Just as an example, while Hazeronn uses textures for a lot of plants and things, Astroneer actually uses 3d models, but keeps things super duper simple, which is a very interesting way of doing it.

More Astroneer examples:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/99/f5/c7/99f5c7374a98961290b8b975a8ce1391.png

https://content.invisioncic.com/r273157/monthly_2017_10/20171016135315_1.jpg.8f6119c9ed14443eaec9969b999b6d11.jpg

https://content.invisioncic.com/r273157/monthly_2017_12/5a39ac5cc2ca4_bugastrooner.png.22fcfcb6fb274ea0926ba5853e5ab650.png

http://blog.astroneer.space/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/pasted_image_at_2016_09_26_01_39_pm.png

http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2017/01/astroneer-preview/astroneer3-1920x1080.jpg

(Note the way a lot of plants are just bunches of single faces! Genius!)
Image
Minty
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Updates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron