Space Engineers - Say goodbye to Starmade and Blockade runner.

[ElectricSquid]

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;44537140]Progress is slow but steady. Seizing vast quantities of iron ore means I don't need to grind down blocks for steel plates, which is nice; but at this rate i'm going to need to capture another mining shipment.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/rWqUTyF.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

For a second I didn't realize that was the moon and was going to ask how you got such a fucking huge asteroid in your world

[Civil]

[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;44537219]For a second I didn't realize that was the moon and was going to ask how you got such a fucking huge asteroid in your world[/QUOTE]

The biggest asteroid you could get into the game in its current state is this:

[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54374248/SpaceEngineers%202014-03-19%2021-14-07-83.png[/img]

[Kuiper]

I want halo engineers, how do?

[ElectricSquid]

[QUOTE=Civil;44537822]The biggest asteroid you could get into the game in its current state is this:

[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54374248/SpaceEngineers%202014-03-19%2021-14-07-83.png[/img][/QUOTE]

What the hell? Is that available on the workshop?

[No_0ne]

I made a ship that throws giant spinning shurikens that explode on impact as a proof of concept

[t]http://i.imgur.com/kiHj3k7.jpg[/t]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/YSY68I6.jpg[/t]

trial 1 results
[t]http://i.imgur.com/xNvRPUK.jpg[/t]

trial 2 results
[t]http://i.imgur.com/E6T94qW.jpg[/t]

trial 3 results, attacked from different angle, one missed due to target ship's gravity
[t]http://i.imgur.com/qsp3HE7.jpg[/t]

It works pretty damn well. The contact explosives are separated enough to not trigger each other so it rips into the ship with staggered explosions as it spins.
They're also mounted such that their forces cancel each other out and cause negligible effect on the ship carrying them.

also I just got the game yesterday and I've been playing the shit out of it

edit: just tested it on a wall of heavy blocks, did damage to about 3 layers in

[Grenadiac]

that's terrifying

[Ajaxial]

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;44540669]that's [b]awesome[/b][/QUOTE]

Fixed. :v:

[Squeegy Mackoy]

When I find a gap in this Uni work (I wont) and finish the video I'm currently doing, I want to make a gun not unlike [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgfnZfEctok]my other one[/url] but make it much faster firing with several times more, smaller, faster, explosive projectiles. And make the whole thing much more compact now that we can adjust gravity field sizes. If someone could beat me to the punch I'd be delighted.

[ElectricSquid]

I wish they'd update the GODDAMN SPEED LIMIT

[Wickerman123]

[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;44543757]I wish they'd update the GODDAMN SPEED LIMIT[/QUOTE]

There's not much point until they've finished sectors and procedural generation. If it was any higher you'd not only cross the asteroid field but hit the boundaries in no time.

[R E D L I N E]

[QUOTE=Wickerman123;44543940]There's not much point until they've finished sectors and procedural generation. If it was any higher you'd not only cross the asteroid field but hit the boundaries in no time.[/QUOTE]

I hope they're actually working on that, as big as the current map/world is, it's not big enough for a space game.
Can't really hide and build something in peace either

[vlad]

don't feel the game would benefit from sectors just yet considering multiplayer is in the state it currently is in. once multiplayer is more stable and dedicated tools are out, then sectors should be focused on imo

[woolio1]

I'm not sure you're understanding how game development works. This is an alpha, after all. While multiplayer may currently be buggy, it's workable, and it makes more sense for multiplayer fixes to come after development on most other features is complete.

Why would you neglect an integral portion of the game (sectors) for a smaller portion (multiplayer)? Why does multiplayer need to be finished before there's barely a game to play?

It would make more sense for them to keep multiplayer in a working state, and fix the bugs after all the content is implemented. That way, you don't run into new bugs every time you add content.

[vlad]

[QUOTE=woolio1;44544146]I'm not sure you're understanding how game development works. This is an alpha, after all. While multiplayer may currently be buggy, it's workable, and it makes more sense for multiplayer fixes to come after development on most other features is complete.

Why would you neglect an integral portion of the game (sectors) for a smaller portion (multiplayer)? Why does multiplayer need to be finished before there's barely a game to play?

It would make more sense for them to keep multiplayer in a working state, and fix the bugs after all the content is implemented. That way, you don't run into new bugs every time you add content.[/QUOTE]

not saying multiplayer needs to be 100% done before they should focus on sectors, saying that it should be more stable before sectors are focused on imo.

the way I see it, the game won't benefit from larger worlds (aka sectors) when it's only singleplayer as there's plenty of space to work with when you're alone. when there's multiplayer, you can utilize the sectors a lot more and make for some interesting scenarios.

[RayvenQ]

Damnit, I'm working on a viper launch tube kind of thing and trying to have a floor based gravity catapult, but the damn thing always goes a bit sideways and messed up the launch tube

[Magman77]

[QUOTE=Thunderbolt;44544035]I hope they're actually working on that, as big as the current map/world is, it's not big enough for a space game.
Can't really hide and build something in peace either[/QUOTE]

I can't say for sure that they are, but they did mention on the Reddit AMA how easy it really would be for them. As far as I can tell, that's pretty damn close to saying "yep we're doin' it". [url=http://www.reddit.com/r/spaceengineers/comments/21i9d5/summary_of_the_iama/]See here, Q12.[/url]

[Civil]

[QUOTE=Magman77;44545053]I can't say for sure that they are, but they did mention on the Reddit AMA how easy it really would be for them. As far as I can tell, that's pretty damn close to saying "yep we're doin' it". [url=http://www.reddit.com/r/spaceengineers/comments/21i9d5/summary_of_the_iama/]See here, Q12.[/url][/QUOTE]

Solar system scale so some peoples dreams of flying their ship into the sun might actually become true.

[Ramona Flowers]

Whenever i try to make a rotating turret, the damn thing [i][b]ALWAYS[/b] RATTLES ITSELF APART[/i], for no reason.

[Zenreon]

[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;44538071]What the hell? Is that available on the workshop?[/QUOTE]

I made one out of spacestation parts;

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqrOtgtkvxA&feature=share&list=UU9slwN2rMVkPfg8R7bpkipA[/media]

[Used Car Salesm]

I've built a rotating drum magazine for gravity gun torpedoes, but I can't come up with a good design that can hold more than 4. Being able to fire a relatively quick salvo of 4 missiles is cool, but has anyone come up with a magazine for more than 4?

[The Jack]

Can you do these kinda things with small ships?

It'd be good to be able to make intricate things with small ship blocks so that they can better fit large ships. So many creations here are marvelous but because of their size they're upsettingly impractical.

[Iced Tea]

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44546764]I've built a rotating drum magazine for gravity gun torpedoes, but I can't come up with a good design that can hold more than 4. Being able to fire a relatively quick salvo of 4 missiles is cool, but has anyone come up with a magazine for more than 4?[/QUOTE]

I'd forget the drum idea and go with a clip or magazine type of deal.

[RayvenQ]

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44546764]I've built a rotating drum magazine for gravity gun torpedoes, but I can't come up with a good design that can hold more than 4. Being able to fire a relatively quick salvo of 4 missiles is cool, but has anyone come up with a magazine for more than 4?[/QUOTE]

You could do a top feeding magazine thing, like this (around 4:53 in)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqhglTFw2Yo[/media]

[QUOTE=The Jack;44547195]Can you do these kinda things with small ships?

It'd be good to be able to make intricate things with small ship blocks so that they can better fit large ships. So many creations here are marvelous but because of their size they're upsettingly impractical.[/QUOTE]

You can easily make kinetic munitions with small ship blocks. Small ships as the launching vehicles, not so much, since 1 they aren't allowed gravity generators (although you can do hold and release torpedoes)

You could sort of do a top filled drum thing, where the bits where the rounds would go in are open on the outside, allowing rounds to be fed in from a hopper and then rotated into their final firing position. So only one "barrel" so to speak, but the drum spins round constantly feeding that barrel.

[woolio1]

We still can't do spiral loaders, can we?

[aznz888]

[QUOTE=woolio1;44547594]We still can't do spiral loaders, can we?[/QUOTE]

in a way you could with gravity and heavy armor, but the quality would deteriorate rapidly as it gets worn out really fast

[Used Car Salesm]

[QUOTE=aznz888;44547711]in a way you could with gravity and heavy armor, but the quality would deteriorate rapidly as it gets worn out really fast[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's why I went with a rotor and 4 landing gears instead of gravity feed or something more complex. I was looking for something that could be built inside a ship and tolerate flying around and maneuvering.

I thought about a strip clip-type system that would slide along and release torpedoes one by one. Unfortunately, we don't have rails or sliders yet, and it would get yanked out of alignment as soon as a torpedo entered the gravity gun's field before being released.

[No_0ne]

I made another thing, it's a ballista ship, it launches shit at about 45 m/s from standstill, with relative accuracy and reloading it is painless

[t]http://i.imgur.com/bvR8GqF.jpg[/t]

[url=http://i.imgur.com/d7L94CH.jpg]locked[/url], [url=http://i.imgur.com/RXsboZQ.jpg]loaded and ready for combat[/url]
[url=http://i.imgur.com/Fl8Mjy7.jpg]target sighted[/url]
[url=http://i.imgur.com/HbaMEjl.jpg]lining up the shot[/url]

[url=http://i.imgur.com/lB1vpcY.jpg]bombs[/url]
[url=http://i.imgur.com/uTfN7yG.jpg]away[/url]

[url=http://i.imgur.com/cZeO76d.jpg]direct impact[/url]
[url=http://i.imgur.com/bmJJ8Wl.jpg]aftermath[/url]

[Col. Buggernuts]

The wikis seem to be rather out of date, so not much use for checking whether it's more efficient to use small reactors for small ships rahter than large ones.

[krail]

efficient as in space or efficient as in materials?

[Col. Buggernuts]

[QUOTE=krail9;44549840]efficient as in space or efficient as in materials?[/QUOTE]Fuel consumption. Either i'm remembering wrong, or one is more efficient with fuel than the other.

[editline]15th April 2014[/editline]

Unrelated, here's a little looter i'm working on; for when I want to grab valuable resources from a passing ship and not haul the whole damn thing with me. I probably need to reduce forward thrust though; acceleration is almost too great for gentle landings.

[t]http://i.imgur.com/07ZZFYu.jpg[/t]

[editline]edit[/editline]

Finished the little bugger. Added a set of small forward thrusters, so I can turn the large ones off for when I want to land on a ship. Painted red because they go faster, the hole in the arse will get covered at some point. Going to use thumbnails since it's less annoying to scroll past.

[t]http://i.imgur.com/4qaOY3e.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/I1obpX0.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/utWtoZ0.jpg[/t]