1. This forum is obsolete and read-only. Feel free to contact us at support.keenswh.com

Would a fire mechanic fit into the game?

Discussion in 'General' started by SirConnery, Jan 22, 2020.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. SirConnery

    SirConnery Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    305
    This is another brainstorming thread.

    I am not talking about a heat mechanic per se. More like blocks lighting on fire due to damage sustained. This shouldn't be as heavy on calculation increases as an actual heat mechanic.

    Some benefits:

    - Need to build emergency fire extuingishers on key components of ship which increases immersion and more things to build your design around
    - Possible handheld fire extuingisher tool which could be nice

    Some downsides
    - Increased cpu calculations (but probably not much)
    - May not fit already cramped ship designs
    - Making pressurized areas actually worse in case of fires
    - Takes design time away from more meaningful improvements
     
  2. Spaceman Spiff

    Spaceman Spiff Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,030
    Not to come across negative, but...no.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Stardriver907

    Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,368
    Would it fit into the game? Yes. Wouldn't be surprised if there was a mod for it.

    Should it be in the game as standard? In many instances I consider the welder plays the role of fire extinguisher. Problem is there is no incentive to extinguish a fire, and fires tend to last way longer than you would expect the fuel to last. I suggest that a fire mechanic exists, and the missing part is the fire causing further damage. As it is now a fire is just a signal that something needs to be repaired. If a burning hydrogen engine meant the attached tank and/or conveyor system might explode and damage adjacent blocks, there might be an incentive to put fires out and perhaps make a fire extinguisher hand tool something to have on board. If stuff like that could be added to the code without a noticeable performance hit, then why not?

    My guess is that doing so would kill performance and that's why we don't have it.


    Speaking of performance, did anyone else catch in Marik's last blog that they are investigating game engine alternatives? I don't think they're talking about VRage, so are they thinking of firing Havok?
     
  4. SirConnery

    SirConnery Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    305
    I guess that's mostly true. Maybe when trying to repair something that's on fire you'd first get a small extinguisher animation before starting the welding. Would be somewhat funny and maybe if done well, immersive too.
    Yeah, I guess the main point of the mechanic would be to add some more ongoing damage that would need to be fixed sooner rather than later. I'm not sure if even I like the mechanic, but I think if done properly it could add to the game. Like many mechanics.
    I'm not so sure, to me it sounded like they were looking for an alternate game engine. My guess is it would be simpler to change the physics engine that VRage uses than completely change game engines. Sounds like a huge project nonetheless. Maybe it's for Space Engineers 2?
     
  5. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,782
    I always kinda thought "melting" metal armor blocks would be interesting, with blocks having little bits of metal come off damaged blocks when damaged in various ways and for those little pieces to be... well molten metal, and they could damage the player or other components then when the cooled down they disappear like they have with the little bits of loose ore.

    One thing I remember doing ages ago was using that mod thruster.... what was it called again.. titan? titan something? it was super huge... and I turned it in them put a small ship behind it and was like this would be so cool if the ship actually looked like it was melting.

    I like the idea of a fire extinguisher, it would be kind of funny if you held it and used it in zero-G if it would push the player character in the opposite direction if run out of suit thruster / energy :woot:
     
  6. Kattla

    Kattla Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    41
    Fire in space? I think, but cannot claim to know, that there is a lack of oxygen concentrated enough to keep a fire burning in space.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,782
    A fire would obviously need fuel....

    [​IMG]
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Malware

    Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,867
    @Stardriver907 @SirConnery I guarantee you that they're not considering changing the engine for any existing game. That's not gonna happen. The amount of problems that would cause is just...

    No I don't really want to think about it :p

    If I were a betting man I'd be betting big money on them simply considering a new engine for any new game they might be contemplating.

    Also; keep in mind that Havok isn't a game engine, it's a physics engine. VRage is the game engine - and they're talking about full game engines. So this isn't just about Havok.

    Havok is getting a lot of unfair flak too. I actually don't believe for a second that any other physics engine would do much better. Most likely, they would improve in some areas, sure - but worsen in others. SE is a kind of game that would push any physics engine to their limits and beyond simply by it's nature. It has too much freedom.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. Lord Grey

    Lord Grey Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    426
    To extinguish fire in space, please open the window... Or at least that's what we learned in Space travell 101. As long as the thrust system is not involved, getting the oxygen out of the play does the trick.
    Problematic is the oxydizer, specially fuel that has it's own oxydizer or that's instable and decombose under heat, but none of those details are regarded in SE.

    At the moment, burning animations just show damaged parts, and are usefull for special effects like exhaust pipes.
     
  10. Morloc

    Morloc Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    264
    Something along the same lines which would add some flavor to damage would be for certain components to have a chance to explode once they've received enough damage. A hydrogen tank at 7% integrity might be pretty unstable. Reactors could also be an issue. If the components explode, then damage similar to a warhead (smaller or larger depending on the device) would occur within your ship.

    For extra fun, a reactor at 15% might just be destroyed and inert....but it might also be in a "critical" state where a check would be made every few minutes to see if it detonates (unless repaired).

    I ~think~ this stuff would be easier to code than fire (calculating percentages to spread, etc.) too.


    -Morloc
     
  11. Spaceman Spiff

    Spaceman Spiff Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,030
    Um-m-m-m...nuclear reactors don't really "explode," but rather they just end to melt down when they runaway (because of a LOCA...loss of coolant accident...or failure of the control rods mechanism). So, no, a reactor would just sort of turn to gooey rubble. I guess you can have a steam explosion, assuming it's a pressurized water or boiling water reactor. So I've now contradicted what I just said. Oh, never mind...
     
  12. Ronin1973

    Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,964
    I don't think it would add much to the game. I don't hate the idea it just wouldn't suit since most things aren't flammable.. though flames are symbolic of damage in the game. Though the player taking damage from heat sources might be an interesting spin. It would be interesting in terms of how living quarters and accessibility factor in.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Morloc

    Morloc Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    264
    Yepper. While nuclear reactors of the future might employ safer power generation techniques, it's also possible that they'd favor efficiency over safety and might employ completely different technology or science to generate power. For gaming purposes against a science-fiction backdrop, reactors going "critical" fits right in and could make for some entertaining scenarios.

    -Morloc
     
  14. Malware

    Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,867
    I have to agree on all accounts. A general heat mechanic though... pack turrets too close together, and they malfunction. Would stop the Turret Walls...
    --- Automerge ---
    I have a hard time disagreeing with you, but... well; if we're gonna try to stick to "realism" (yeah I quoted that quite deliberately :p ) - could also make the jump drive be the thing that could go critical... since that's complete fantasy tech anyway, who knows how explosion prone that might be. Besides, I can easily imagine the kind of power and/or forces required to rip open space/time...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Stardriver907

    Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,368
    Well, you're wrong. AND, you're right :D. At least according to the way I read it. In Marek's latest blog (you know, the one where he talked extensively about GoodAI, their new building, a bit about Space Engineers, and nothing about ME) in the Space Engineers section, bullet point number 3 says, "Perform an internal study on what game engine is best for the future of Space Engineers?" So, it seems to say they're talking about Space Engineers, just not this Space Engineers. Are they going to chuck their own engine and use someone else's? Are they going to write another one? What are they thinking?

    Yeah, Darth Biomech's Titan Engine. Best looking capital ship engine in the game as far as I'm concerned. You'd think you could broil a ship with one of those, or incinerate pesky weaponized protomatter/human hybrids as in The Expanse. All we get is "thruster damage" and most people turn that off.

    I hear ya, though.
     
  16. Malware

    Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,867
    Yeah, I read the blog. As a franchise, yes. This isn't the first time he has talked about the franchise Space Engineers this way - not this game, but a potential future installment.

    That's exactly what they want to evaluate.
    --- Automerge ---
    Citation? I can't say I've heard that before...
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2020
  17. odizzido

    odizzido Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    684
    Fire sounds cool but in a game already struggling to justify pressurisation we don’t need more reasons to not do it.
     
  18. Stardriver907

    Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,368
    What? That all we get is "thruster damage"? Or that most people turn it off?

    I'm not aware that "thruster damage" is anything more than armor deforms and eventually disappears when subjected to thrust. No flames. No molten metal. Was there something else?

    As to people turning it off, to be honest I've never turned it off and I'm not even certain it's a choice any more. Most people I've watched or talked to said they turned it off.

    There you go. Ironclad proof.



    Almost perfect ;)
     
  19. Malware

    Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,867
    @Stardriver907 Huh; I think I've maybe heard one or two saying they turned it off...
     
  20. SubtleSloth

    SubtleSloth Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    54

    No offense bud, but a “Critical” reactor literally means it is stable and producing power as designed. Sorry, the nuclear operator in me was twitching a little seeing someone say a critical reactor is a bad thing . When Hollywood says this crap, they have no clue what they are talking about.

    For real though, having the reactors melt down would be neat...radiation and all..I personally would also LOVE fires that need to be extinguished. If anyone has played Subnautica, they had the fire mechanic and it was a blast!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. mojomann71

    mojomann71 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,005
    @Stardriver907 In the video Marek did before his blog he squashed the idea of SE 2 anytime soon. So if he is talking about a new engine then I take it as a rewrite of the current game in whatever engine he decides to go with. I just do not see them doing that since the game is now out of Beta. It is a bit of a mixed message. :)

    But mixed messages are on par for Keen. :p
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. Malware

    Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,867
    @mojomann71 Yeah. Rewriting the current game with a new engine is equivalent to creating a new game. Even the assets would have to be redone, or at the very least rebuilt, the physics mesh refactored to whatever physics engine the new game engine uses - unless it happens to use Havok as well. It would effectively become SE2 regardless. And would probably take a year or two accomplish.

    So not worth it. Isn't happening.
     
  23. Morloc

    Morloc Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    264
    None taken...quotes around ""critical"" and all...also the "might employ completely different technology or science" part too. In 2077 a "reactor" might involve creating power directly from nuclear decay or some limited Total Conversion technology. Either way, it'd be FUN to have these components potentially go "critical", unstable, volatile, etc. and force you to fix it before it blew up.

    A neutron walks into a bar and asks "how much for a beer?" The bartender says, "for you? no charge."

    Maleware...the hyperdrive would clearly be another item which could go boom!...in fact, it'd sci-fi-potentially be the biggest boom on your ship! :)


    -Morloc
     
  24. Oskar1101

    Oskar1101 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    232
    Rocket fuel can't melt steel tubes!!!
     
  25. Morloc

    Morloc Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    264
    Heh....I see whatcha' did there! :eek:


    -Morloc
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.