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

[QUOTE=Civil;46780601]What spor said has nothing to do with SE and more about real life. Nobody said anything about orbits in SE.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Spor;46779123] To answer your question: You would not be able to travel anywhere with the speed of 105.5, you would just fall right on the body you are orbiting. [B]Space Engineers implies that you are already orbiting something[/B] - the sun, or whatever your custom skybox has closest. And the speeds are relative to some decided point in the orbit. But even then, in real life objects would slowly drift apart, since that one ship even a little bit further from the body it's orbiting would be orbiting slower than the one that's lower. So just be happy that you can build ships in a magic vacuum without worrying about all that shit. [/QUOTE] While yes, I concede that most of the post was in fact addressing real-life orbital mechanics, you are still objectively wrong.

[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;46780840]While yes, I concede that most of the post was in fact addressing real-life orbital mechanics, you are still objectively wrong.[/QUOTE] Im not, you are just understanding what hes saying in a wrong way. He clearly says that nothing fancy is going on in space engineers and the part about the orbiting stuff had to do with real life things. Everything already has a speed to keep its place in the orbit. Ok I worded my previous post a little wrong. Because I meant had nothing to do with stuff actually being simulated as a orbit in space engineers with stuff actually moving, which obviously doesn't happen.

Space Engineers definitely doesn't imply that you are already orbiting something; objects not on the same inclination and altitude would drift very, very noticeably.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;46781201]Space Engineers definitely doesn't imply that you are already orbiting something; objects not on the same inclination and altitude would drift very, very noticeably.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't the fact that the sun is in the sky box and the fact that we know the game is taking place in our solar system mean that we are defo orbiting the sun, just with simple physics for gameplay reasons?

So, I'm kind of confused by that image, because it's actually just [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt#mediaviewer/File:InnerSolarSystem-en.png"]this[/URL] illustration from Wikipedia with some distances marked. It's not actually a map of generated asteroids or anything.

[QUOTE=Xron;46781697]Wouldn't the fact that the sun is in the sky box and the fact that we know the game is taking place in our solar system mean that we are defo orbiting the sun, just with simple physics for gameplay reasons?[/QUOTE] no [editline]23rd December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Plint;46781932]So, I'm kind of confused by that image, because it's actually just [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt#mediaviewer/File:InnerSolarSystem-en.png"]this[/URL] illustration from Wikipedia with some distances marked. It's not actually a map of generated asteroids or anything.[/QUOTE] It's an image used to explain how large astronomical units are for the portion of the community that doesn't like space

[QUOTE=Plint;46781932]So, I'm kind of confused by that image, because it's actually just [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt#mediaviewer/File:InnerSolarSystem-en.png"]this[/URL] illustration from Wikipedia with some distances marked. It's not actually a map of generated asteroids or anything.[/QUOTE] Probably just used it to give the size of maps a sense of scale.

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;46775759]That'll do. I'm imagining something like auto-locking landing gear with attractive forces. I should point you to [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VZRHqXYTWU"]something[/URL] I've been working on.[/QUOTE] I haven't heard that song in fucking forever and it's nostalgic as hell to me

id be cool with like, planets being in the game, but you cant enter their atmosphere or whatever because "the ships arent equipped to enter atmospheres" or some other excuse. Just so theyd be there would be cool enough. like, i dont expect to go to earth or something, but i just want planets to exist in the game, like in Eve. they'd be pretty as hell and id love to orbit a planet. Maybe visiting moons would be a possibility, but im willing to compromise on visiting planets (not that i even have any power to do that anyways) im talking like, if you enter a planets atmosphere, your ship warns you that if you go any farther down you'll be burnt up in the atmosphere, and your ship destroyed. along with natural gravity, you'll be able to establish a planetary orbit that would let you make satellites and space stations and such. i mean, just imagine how fuckin rad it would be to have a space station orbiting earth or mars or whatever. these planets would give a much needed reference in-game, and could even be a source of a good deal of resources. like, maybe you can launch resource probes to the planets you're orbiting around that would bring back a good deal or resources? that would make planets strategically valuable as well. just give planets plz

[QUOTE=bob4life;46782923]id be cool with like, planets being in the game, but you cant enter their atmosphere or whatever because "the ships arent equipped to enter atmospheres" or some other excuse. Just so theyd be there would be cool enough. like, i dont expect to go to earth or something, but i just want planets to exist in the game, like in Eve. they'd be pretty as hell and id love to orbit a planet. Maybe visiting moons would be a possibility, but im willing to compromise on visiting planets (not that i even have any power to do that anyways) im talking like, if you enter a planets atmosphere, your ship warns you that if you go any farther down you'll be burnt up in the atmosphere, and your ship destroyed. along with natural gravity, you'll be able to establish a planetary orbit that would let you make satellites and space stations and such. i mean, just imagine how fuckin rad it would be to have a space station orbiting earth or mars or whatever. these planets would give a much needed reference in-game, and could even be a source of a good deal of resources. like, maybe you can launch resource probes to the planets you're orbiting around that would bring back a good deal or resources? that would make planets strategically valuable as well. just give planets plz[/QUOTE] I'd love to have several people ride a massive ship straight into the atmosphere of a planet and see who can survive the longest. First, the windows would blow out, followed by the antenna and weaponry melting into the hull. As the armor boils away and exposes the skeleton of the ship, the reactors and engines would overheat and detonate spectacularly, sending the derelict into a spin. Finally, the superstructure would break apart, scattering huge chunks of debris across the atmosphere before impacting on the surface below.

[QUOTE=GreenLeaf;46779588]@_@ I'll just stay here on earth and build hovercrafts then.[/QUOTE]Woo!

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;46783297]Woo![/QUOTE] I am so excited for your project - I'd give all my C# to it.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;46781201]Space Engineers definitely doesn't imply that you are already orbiting something; objects not on the same inclination and altitude would drift very, very noticeably.[/QUOTE] It's absolutely impossible not to orbit something (that includes sub-orbital trajectories). Even when you position yourself far away from every star, you would be still orbiting (or falling into) the nearest star/center of the galaxy (which ever has more force acting on you). Space engineers has a sun close to you, so it's obvious that you're orbiting it. Not in game mechanics terms, but in lore terms. You're ether orbiting it or falling onto it (which would also produce drift). There is no third option. Even if you were in a space where absolutely nothing exists except your ships, they would drift towards each other. Would take weeks to even notice it, but still. So take your pick: Keen didn't add orbital drift because it's completely unneded in an arcade ship building game based on real technology, or their universe has no objects - the stars and sun and asteroids are massless projections and ships magnetically repel each other with exact force to counteract their gravitational pull. I'm sorry if my original post was misunderstood, I was just thinking out loud how SE would be very different to what it is now if it had realistic grand-scale physics, while not saying that it should. [editline]dicksp[/editline] Game could also take place in a Lagrange point, which is still orbiting.

[QUOTE=Spor;46783530]It's absolutely impossible not to orbit something (that includes sub-orbital trajectories). Even when you position yourself far away from every star, you would be still orbiting (or falling into) the nearest star/center of the galaxy (which ever has more force acting on you). Space engineers has a sun close to you, so it's obvious that you're orbiting it. Not in game mechanics terms, but in lore terms. You're ether orbiting it or falling onto it (which would also produce drift). There is no third option. Even if you were in a space where absolutely nothing exists except your ships, they would drift towards each other. Would take weeks to even notice it, but still. So take your pick: Keen didn't add orbital drift because it's completely unneded in an arcade ship building game based on real technology, or their universe has no objects - the stars and sun and asteroids are massless projections and ships magnetically repel each other with exact force to counteract their gravitational pull. I'm sorry if my original post was misunderstood, I was just thinking out loud how SE would be very different to what it is now if it had realistic grand-scale physics, while not saying that it should. [editline]dicksp[/editline] Game could also take place in a Lagrange point, which is still orbiting.[/QUOTE] Thank you for finding a menial, technical way to shoot down another menial, technical idea. Yes, I would think that you would think that if I, as a poster, understand drift when synchronizing speeds at different orbits that I would also understand the concept of gravity, but I guess not. Either we didn't follow the same train of thought or, more likely, we did but you could not resist your normal, everpresent urge to prove to FP that you like space. [editline]23rd December 2014[/editline] To be clear: I think it's a good thing that orbits are not implemented in SE. Performance is bad enough and Keen undoubtedly wouldn't be able to write a UI for it.

Hah. Entry level ships and players having to attain orbit. The game wouldn't be Space Engineers, it'd be Space Junk and Craters.

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;46784186]Hah. Entry level ships and players having to attain orbit. The game wouldn't be Space Engineers, it'd be Space Junk and Craters.[/QUOTE] itd be a good idiot cull. granted id probably be one of those culled.

just don't say anything about the part where you burn up in the atmosphere except once in the update video. watch as people fill the gameplay help section of the forums with delicious anger and rage!

[QUOTE=GreenLeaf;46784467]just don't say anything about the part where you burn up in the atmosphere except once in the update video. watch as people fill the gameplay help section of the forums with delicious anger and rage![/QUOTE] LSG community reporting ship incinerating glitch.

I just got this game, and I started building stuff in survival mode (using lone survivor mode) I was stupid enough to turn on meteorites to high frequency and my main and only reactor got apparently blown up (what are the odds) and I had no uranium as backup so I was stuck and had to suicide and spawn in ship which I ripped apart to build new reactor and get uranium from it. However, permissions were messed up so I modified world and set to reset ownership to nobody of all blocks. Now all the cargo ships and military ships are green marked (non hostile) so I can easily board them without turrets shooting me which pisses me off, I want to have some battle with them. Question: How can I set all cargo/military ships to be hostile again?

[QUOTE=KinderBueno;46785432]I just got this game, and I started building stuff in survival mode (using lone survivor mode) I was stupid enough to turn on meteorites to high frequency and my main and only reactor got apparently blown up (what are the odds) and I had no uranium as backup so I was stuck and had to suicide and spawn in ship which I ripped apart to build new reactor and get uranium from it. However, permissions were messed up so I modified world and set to reset ownership to nobody of all blocks. Now all the cargo ships and military ships are green marked (non hostile) so I can easily board them without turrets shooting me which pisses me off, I want to have some battle with them. Question: How can I set all cargo/military ships to be hostile again?[/QUOTE] The existing ships will be friendly, but any new that will spawn should be hostile, so just wait a while

While orbital mechanics would be cool it would make multiplayer unplayable/unfeasible. The speeds at which ships travel in orbits would be insane. Plus going back milions of km because "You need 20x small steel tube" would happen a lot. I'm just glad we got no drag and proper physics.Although KSP/SE has kinda ruined other space games for me. Games like EVE and Freelancer no longer feel like they are space games anymore with drag.

[QUOTE=JDB;46787152]While orbital mechanics would be cool it would make multiplayer unplayable/unfeasible. The speeds at which ships travel in orbits would be insane. Plus going back milions of km because "You need 20x small steel tube" would happen a lot. I'm just glad we got no drag and proper physics.Although KSP/SE has kinda ruined other space games for me. Games like EVE and Freelancer no longer feel like they are space games anymore with drag.[/QUOTE] Pretend there's so much space dust and debris from all the explosions/mining going on that it acts like air and slows down your ship v:v:v

I find it easier to just imagine space games with friction are actually submarine games.

[QUOTE=Trekintosh;46787303]I find it easier to just imagine space games with friction are actually submarine games.[/QUOTE] That is exactly how I've described them in the past. And when you think of them that way they make more sense (especially EVE)

How far can you travel in Space Engineers in single player? Also in multiplayer: If I join server, am I getting instant PVP enabled or it needs to be enabled first? Also I am building ship in survival mode, does it really take that long to weld and build? or am I missing some hotkey or something?

[QUOTE=KinderBueno;46787507]How far can you travel in Space Engineers in single player? Also in multiplayer: If I join server, am I getting instant PVP enabled or it needs to be enabled first?[/QUOTE] The travel question is better answered in a little while. Because they are upping the world size to uniSNIP SO SORRY ABOUT THE BIGGEST MISTAKE THis year. Im getting tired. What I was trying to say is that they are increasing the world size to near our solar system in scale in a coming update.

[QUOTE=JDB;46787152]While orbital mechanics would be cool it would make multiplayer unplayable/unfeasible. The speeds at which ships travel in orbits would be insane. Plus going back milions of km because "You need 20x small steel tube" would happen a lot. I'm just glad we got no drag and proper physics.Although KSP/SE has kinda ruined other space games for me. Games like EVE and Freelancer no longer feel like they are space games anymore with drag.[/QUOTE] There's also a technical side to that (and the reason why speed is currently capped to 105). In layman terms, physics have frames, too. If you move your cursor really fast across the screen, you'll see many cursors in it's path, which are spread out more with more speed. So, with orbital speeds, your ship will "jump" kilometers at a time, not actually hitting most of the stuff in it's path. I tested SE physics with a friend by ramming each other while at max speed, head to head - 210m/s, and even at that speed, we already didn't have an adequate collision - one frame he was before me, and second frame he was already inside me, destroying me from the inside (rerr), completely ignoring the front shield.

[QUOTE=KinderBueno;46787507]Also I am building ship in survival mode, does it really take that long to weld and build? or am I missing some hotkey or something?[/QUOTE] Yes it does, though you can change your save's settings and pick a larger welding/grinding multiplier, and/or use ship welders which are also faster

[QUOTE=Spor;46787529]There's also a technical side to that (and the reason why speed is currently capped to 105). In layman terms, physics have frames, too. If you move your cursor really fast across the screen, you'll see many cursors in it's path, which are spread out more with more speed. So, with orbital speeds, your ship will "jump" kilometers at a time, not actually hitting most of the stuff in it's path. I tested SE physics with a friend by ramming each other while at max speed, head to head - 210m/s, and even at that speed, we already didn't have an adequate collision - one frame he was before me, and second frame he was already inside me, destroying me from the inside (rerr), completely ignoring the front shield.[/QUOTE] [img]http://meta.filesmelt.com/downloader.php?file=rrerr2.gif[/img] I imagine we won't get exploration this week, I imagine they'll release it next week. Seems like something for which some extra work might help [sp]I also believe by telling myself this I can be even happier if it comes tomorrow[/sp]

I think we, as a community, should accept the sacrifice of realism in-game for more enjoyable experiences. Like, i dont think the programmers included the whole "actually always in an orbit" technical spiel, or that orbits would have to- if intended to be placed in game- rely on ludicrously fast speeds. Not only are such things almost completely impossible to replicate in-game (speeds are capped to a extent in order to calculate collisions) but are so minute towards gameplay that the feature is either redundant, or in the worst case detractive to gameplay. Like, i can understand where you guys are coming from, but this game is by far no where near a simulator experience. To see all these arguments that are better suited to a NASA simulation kinda gives the idea that the focus is less on a more enjoyable experience and instead a personal flexing of someones space-knowledge muscles at the expense of potential enjoyment and improvement of a game intended to be a game. Video games physics are a hell of a lot more flexible than real world physics, guys. Im not gonna sit in a station in orbit, one that took a realistic 10 years to produce through intermittent resource supply, sent hopelessly in a death spiral towards Earth because the thermal exhaust from my station reactors managed to work as minute thruster that sent me off in an extremely small but still deadly vector and think "yes, this is fun, i am enjoying myself"