Space Engineers - Say goodbye to Starmade and Blockade runner. - Games

[QUOTE=Joazzz;43598215]loving that hangar door design[/QUOTE] Ditto, neat doors. Too bad you can't copy and paste any functional rotor designs.

We need key binding for motors and what not.

here's a ship called the ugly sparrow. it's an unarmed utility ship, for freight, mining and towing [t]http://puu.sh/6r99R.png[/t][t]http://puu.sh/6r9w4.png[/t] [t]http://puu.sh/6r9ze.png[/t][t]http://puu.sh/6r9Cv.png[/t] [vid]http://zippy.gfycat.com/GrippingOddCuscus.webm[/vid]

I see people are getting creative with the rotors now.

Rotors outside of practical uses don't seem that fun to put on a ship I feel like you lose the handling of the ship at higher speeds once you have things attached to the rotors.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43600007]Rotors outside of practical uses don't seem that fun to put on a ship I feel like you lose the handling of the ship at higher speeds once you have things attached to the rotors.[/QUOTE] Can't deny that X-Wing that was posted though.

[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;43600119]Can't deny that X-Wing that was posted though.[/QUOTE] it looks cool but it flies like total shit you can fix it a bit by taking some storage containers out and replacing those and some of the free space in it with more reactors and it flies better. It's an aesthetic piece, not a good ship though. thing doesn't even fly in a straight line at all after 70 m/s.

weird things that don't seem like they should work: putting a gravity generator on the end of a rotating piece will give you a rotating gravity field and you can stand on the rotating piece completely fine. It's very confusing to be on

[QUOTE=Shogoll;43600415]weird things that don't seem like they should work: putting a gravity generator on the end of a rotating piece will give you a rotating gravity field and you can stand on the rotating piece completely fine. It's very confusing to be on[/QUOTE] ...what's confusing or wrong about that?

[QUOTE=Shogoll;43600415]weird things that don't seem like they should work: putting a gravity generator on the end of a rotating piece will give you a rotating gravity field and you can stand on the rotating piece completely fine. It's very confusing to be on[/QUOTE] What's a lot of fun to do is make a space station on an asteroid, build out a long tower off of it, and stick a rotor on the end of it, then make a long line of gravity generators on that rotor. turn it on at maximum turning velocity and then jump in the rotating gravity field. if you do it right you'll get stuck until you turn on the jetpack.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;43600435]...what's confusing or wrong about that?[/QUOTE] with the set up I was doing you get this wildly spinning stick on the end of a huge block of gyroscopes and thrusters struggling to stay still in space, and it gave it this crazy oscillating mobius strip motion that gave me borderline motion sickness to stand on [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap7FyU3bKdU[/media]

So what's the aim of this? Do you just build ships and fly and fight?

I really pity whoever bought Miner Wars. They really got the short end of the stick on this one.

[QUOTE=Mr. Agree;43600853]So what's the aim of this? Do you just build ships and fly and fight?[/QUOTE] yeah at the moment that's it, it's going to have a survival mode eventually though where you have to mine resources and construct things

[QUOTE=Mr. Agree;43600853]So what's the aim of this? Do you just build ships and fly and fight?[/QUOTE] multiplayer implementation is kind of a shitfest atm so the fighting part is a bit of a stretch though building huge ships and crashing them into each other in single player is really satisfying somehow though

[QUOTE=Mr. Agree;43600853]So what's the aim of this? Do you just build ships and fly and fight?[/QUOTE] It sounds deceptively simple, but it's really fun.

[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;43601956]It sounds deceptively simple, but it's really fun.[/QUOTE] It was either this or Rust, I already have DayZ so this is different

[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6035324/2014-01-20_00002.jpg[/img] terminal speed collisions are so much fun for no real reason

A friend of mine (Spor) is being anal (like, this game is shit and developers are dumb) how in this game you don't have to place thrusters depending on the center of mass, do you guys think it's that important in a game where you construct completely unrealistic starwars-esque ships which fire missiles at eachother? And given that it's an alpha, if enough people mention this on the forums, it'll probably get added. If it's not already planned, that is.

I think it's important because we're not talking about realism of the game, we're talking about the most basic logic you learn from the day you first touch something with your hands. If there's a wide ship, and you place a thruster as far from it's center as you can, no suspension of disbelief will save you from noticing that the ship will move perfectly forward instead of spinning in place. Excuses such as "Well just build them around center anyway" is like saying "Well, re-enter using a correct trajectory in KSP anyway, even there's no re-entry heat penalties" or "Well, if a car in a car game will drive on it's roof by magic, when you flip over, just re-start the race and pretend it couldn't". I only mentioned that strange physics 'feature' to him, just to be met with the strongest case of "Wow how did you dare criticize a game in alpha". Isn't that's the point of alphas? To talk about things you'd like to see changed? My friend doesn't own shares of the company to defend them with such strong force. We all have, or will pay for their product, and we can peacefully vocalize what we want from the game at any time. And correct thruster physics is not so terrible to ask from a space game. They may not add them now, but he literally condemned me from asking at any time, because apparently no one cares at all except me :v: Also coming to the thread to seek approval in what was a personal steam chat argument says a lot.

i for one see no problem in keeping the thruster system the way it is; realism is great especially in a game like this, but only to a certain extent: it shouldn't make building too tedious and limit the player's imagination IMO maybe i'm just too much of a casual player but this is how i see it

[QUOTE=Joazzz;43603697]i for one see no problem in keeping the thruster system the way it is; realism is great especially in a game like this, but only to a certain extent: it shouldn't make building too tedious and limit the player's imagination IMO maybe i'm just too much of a casual player but this is how i see it[/QUOTE] Yeah, despite the game being all about solving problems, I draw the line at calculating where to put thrusters.

I am getting mixed signals here, didn't the devs want to take a realistic approach or have they suddenly changed their minds?

I think they've realised the inability of the majority of the playerbase to deal with center of mass. Or the fact that having highly destructible ships, coupled with calculating center of mass for thrust, is just going to be impossible to deal with. 'Oh a took a missile to the side, looks like I'm mission-killed forever as I spiral into the nearest asteroid'

[QUOTE=DeEz;43603766]I am getting mixed signals here, didn't the devs want to take a realistic approach or have they suddenly changed their minds?[/QUOTE] They may have meant realistic as in "no shields or aliums or space magicks" rather than actual hard-science-levels of realism. But then, we'd have to get veger on that one. [QUOTE=NoDachi;43603786] 'Oh a took a missile to the side, looks like I'm mission-killed forever as I spiral into the nearest asteroid'[/QUOTE] I kinda wanna pull a Costa Concordia now and see if people come along with little tugboats to help.

[QUOTE=Pilotguy97;43603713]Yeah, despite the game being all about solving problems, I draw the line at calculating where to put thrusters.[/QUOTE] They could just add a center of mass indicator. Plus, the more limited you are, the more creative you are. Ask any writer/musician/artist, or even remember an example from your own life. My example would be the addition of Career mode to KSP (Where you start with the most basic parts and have to unlock new ones by completing objectives). The inability to access 90% of the parts for the first dozen of flights, made my ships a lot more creative than if I had all the parts I needed. Think about it this way: I can place my thrusters anywhere = whatever, just plop them, call it a day. I need to place my thrusters to balance out at the centerline = Oh Man, I need to enable my creativity and not just plop them anywhere... I will build a *thing* on this side of the ship to make it centered! Or maybe I will... *commence 30 minutes of fun problem solving and brain exercise* [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Pilotguy97;43603810]They may have meant realistic as in "no shields or aliums or space magicks" rather than actual hard-science-levels of realism. But then, we'd have to get veger on that one. I kinda wanna pull a Costa Concordia now and see if people come along with little tugboats to help.[/QUOTE] Pushing an object on the side and excepting it to spin in place is not hard science. :smile: Hard science would be something like Orbiter sim. This is an arcade, but the most basic stuff should still be there.

[QUOTE=Spor;43603827]They could just add a center of mass indicator. Plus, the more limited you are, the more creative you are. Ask any writer/musician/artist, or even remember an example from your own life. My example would be the addition of Career mode to KSP (Where you start with the most basic parts and have to unlock new ones by completing objectives). The inability to access 90% of the parts for the first dozen of flights, made my ships a lot more creative than if I had all the parts I needed. Think about it this way: I can place my thrusters anywhere = whatever, just plop them, call it a day. I need to place my thrusters to balance out at the centerline = Oh Man, I need to enable my creativity and not just plop them anywhere... I will build a *thing* on this side of the ship to make it centered! Or maybe I will... *commence 30 minutes of fun problem solving and brain exercise*[/QUOTE] Yeah, I can understand that (I have fond memories of using little tricks in Sketchup to make my models not shit), but once again, it lies on whether or not the devs are aiming for that kind of creativity or if they're aiming for what they have now with all the bullshit megaprojects and whatnot. Ultimately I think the best compromise would be adding differential thrust, like what thrusters do when they try to stop your ship from moving diagonally. That way, people can more or less plonk thrusters anywhere (except the truly bullshit places, obviously), but some thinking over where thrusters should go is still necessary. People can go for "rule of cool" and sacrifice functionality, or they can think a little more and get a better ship out of it.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43603786] 'Oh a took a missile to the side, looks like I'm mission-killed forever as I spiral into the nearest asteroid'[/QUOTE] That would be awesome, honestly. But you'd have to destroy a pretty huge chunk of the ship. Otherwise engine vectoring will handle a few holes. Another solution to center of mass thrust is to give it a 'deadzone'. Your ship will auto-balance with magic if you put the engines roughly in the right places, but still will spin out of control if you build something retarded. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Pilotguy97;43603851]Yeah, I can understand that (I have fond memories of using little tricks in Sketchup to make my models not shit), but once again, it lies on whether or not the devs are aiming for that kind of creativity or if they're aiming for what they have now with all the bullshit megaprojects and whatnot.[/QUOTE] Then I will just wait and see. I almost bought it a few days ago, before I learned about the trust thingy. Right now the game is balancing in and out of me being it's target audience, but I'm hopeful.

solution to COM destroying creativity and making ships easily destroyed: Gimbals.

[QUOTE=Pigbear;43603903]solution to COM destroying creativity and making ships easily destroyed: Gimbals.[/QUOTE] We just went from "Build the ship in such a way as to optimize functionality" to "Design the systems to automatically compensate" to "Make 'em move a bit" Engineering.