Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

RIP Gravity Drives, and hello unneeded Atmospheric Thrusters...

Discussion in 'General' started by Kephyr, Oct 23, 2015.

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

    Messages:
    193
    In honor of Gravity Drives.....
    Space Engineers has a little less engineering now.

    I'll actually miss Gravity Drives. Even though they didn't make sense from the point of view of physics, they were a very interesting aspect of gameplay, and a very unique propulsion mechanic. I mean it could propel the ship while being inside of it...

    What was so great about Gravity Drives, is that you actually had to put thought into the placement of mass blocks and gravity generators, thinking about how to make the gravity fields of the generators most efficient, and tune all generators individually. It especially got interesting when you tried to implement the Gravity Drive to work in all six directions, hooked up to the WASD controls through rotating wheels and some clever coding. You really had to engineer them, if you will ;).

    It was a whole field of engineering in the game, and I am pretty sad to see it go.

    I like the addition of hydrogen thrusters because you have to put thought into wiring them up to the conveyor system, but the atmospheric thrusters seem redundant, and having to use them instead of the other thrusters is more of an annoyance than a challenge.

    I understand that it's a new way to move around in a new environment and should (in theory) force us to make different designs appropriate for different environments, i.e. Space vs Planet surface, so that you can't build "the ultimate contraption that is great at everything", but we already had a way to navigate around planets - wheels. Why would I want to use wheels now, if I can fly around the planet, ignoring all the terrain using the atmospheric thrusters? They mentioned on the stream that these thrusters will be cheap and we'll be using them a lot on the planet surface...

    Writing this makes me dislike the atmospheric thrusters a lot more. Yep, they don't add anything new to the game, and they make using wheels as a mean of transportation inefficient.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. StormField Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    192
    Bye trolldrives - you will not be missed.
     
    • Like Like x 22
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  3. Zemaus Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    432
    Ummmmm soo gravity drives are not gone? Just cancelled near a planet... And atmospheric thrusters are needed because ION drives cant work in gravity situations and hydrogen thrusters need tons of fuel.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  4. BlackUmbrellas Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,818
    • User was warned for this post!
    Boohoo, gravity drives don't work on planets and you'll need to build ships with atmospheric flight in mind if that's what they're for! Woe is me!
     
    • Like Like x 13
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  5. StormField Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    192
    You know jump drives don't work in the gravitational influence of a planet, right?
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. Ash87 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,977
    Obviously takes more thought to put the parts of a gravity drive in place, than it does to post on the forums...

    You know..

    Considering gravity drives will still work in the vastness of space...

    Which there is still 6 AUs of...

    Yeah... totally worthless...
     
    • Like Like x 5
  7. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    @BlackUmbrellas, seems like you didn't pay attention to my reasoning. Please be a sport in a discussion, there is no need to be snobby.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. fourthquantum Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,286
    Gravity drives make sense if we have a gravity generator because gravity bends space time.

    I also like the fact gravity drives don't work near planets. It makes sense as the gravity from a planet would effect the gravity produced from a gravity generator as they are the same thing.
     
  9. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    @Ash87 from the stream, as well as different discussions I got the impression that GDs and gravity guns are being heavily nerfed. Why would I designate a lot of space for the drives, if it's not worth it?
     
  10. fourthquantum Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,286
    Don't worry it's how they act, just take them with a pinch of salt.
     
  11. Dreokor Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,606
    So, if gravity drives dont work in planets they become useless.

    I think I'm missing the point.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. fourthquantum Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,286
    It depends on how much they are nerfed. I do think they were a bit over powered.
     
  13. BlackUmbrellas Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,818
    I responded perfectly to your complaints about the "death of gravity drives".

    Re: atmospheric thrusters, that's eh. They're useful for flying around. People can use wheels if they want. Hell, given the comments on how difficult mining will be, wheeled vehicles might be fantastic for digging tunnels and such.
     
  14. Ash87 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,977
    All I got from the stream, was that artificial gravity would decrease the closer you got to planets, until you were at 0.5 real gravity, at which point artificial gravity would quit working.

    ...That's it.

    Was there something I missed?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. carbonCore Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    I love gravity drives. Mr. Troll looks very happy on his Trolldrive, and he'd be very sad if they took it away from him. That said, I kind of wish gravity generators did work in the planet's gravity well -- for gravity elevators, if nothing else.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    @Dreokor:
    I think it's not necessary to have them disabled near planets (unless there's a programming issue, which is probably the case), because natural gravity will just make GDs very tricky to use and probably impractical on it's own.

    Also I know that people on the internet aren't always friendly, but I think (or hope) that we are all old enough here to support a nice, constructive discussion ad opposed to deafly bashing each other's ideas :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. waterlimon Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,499
    Constraints drive creativity when it comes to engineering

    Before, you build a fast ship (say with a gravdrive), and youre done.

    Now, you need:
    -Space ship (possibly with a gravdrive)
    -Orbit-surface transfer ship
    -Atmospheric surface ship
    -Nonatmospheric surface ship

    And permutations of those (such as combined orbital-atmospheric ship)

    Tell me that reduces engineering!
     
    • Like Like x 15
  18. Dreokor Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,606
    Um, It was actually a legitimate question. If they still work in space what's the problem then?

    I saw the whole stream and I did not get your impression on that matter, only that they would not work on planets.
     
  19. fourthquantum Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,286
    They can still be used (as long as the direction of travel is parallel to the gravity vector) to circumvent hydrogen thrusters when taking off from a planet. I agree it would probably be very complicated to navigate though.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. BlackUmbrellas Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,818
    These changes discourages and deny "wonderships" that can do everything at once, and that's a good thing.
     
    • Like Like x 9
  21. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    What you've listed are inherent new ship roles that come with planets, which isn't exactly what I'm talking about. On the point of now having to make different ships for flying in space and flying on planets - that hardly adds anything to the engineering, as the design principles for an efficient ship in space apply on planets as well. Just take the design you had for flying in space and strap on atmospheric thrusters.

    My main problem with ATs, however, is that they make wheel vehicles inefficient in terms of time consumption.

    Sure, @BlackUmbrellas, I can build vehicles if I want to, but why would I if I can be more efficient hovering around the terrain? Even when digging holes, hovering in caves would be much convenient than doing that with vehicles. Mining with a wheeled vehicle is very awkward. I tried. (and I was excited to have to do that, but now I don't have to do that....)
     
  22. Sarekh Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,177
    Meh, I don't know if it can qualify as a good thing. I mean, come on, it's a sandbox game after all - if some folks want to play wondership-engineers, I say let them - I am with you on the design side, I really am and I like those changes. But I kinda wish for a huge checkbox-list in Beta so one can really set their own parameters. Makes everyone on our realism-front happy with default settings and appeases everyone else, what do you think?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    On the contrary, ATs make "hovering", or "flying" ship designs good both in space and on planets. Also I don't think it would be that difficult to build ships with all three propulsion systems.

    If ATs weren't there, hovering designs would indeed be worse, as they would consume more energy than wheeled designs, and thus be inefficient.
     
  24. Vrmithrax Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,017
    Well said. So now you have to build ships and structures that are specific to particular goals or uses. Welcome to a little more realism being inserted into the game, and requiring the right tool be built for the right job. ;)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  25. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    The equivalent of that would be "why we want cars when we have jet planes?" :D
    They're not mutually exclusive, it's just different means, and different purposes.

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 4
  26. Dwarf-Lord Pangolin Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,597
    The only change I saw was that gravity guns and gravity launch systems won't work on planets. Might work on moons though. Not really a huge problem.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  27. BlackUmbrellas Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,818
    Ah, but they specifically brought this up in the stream: as you mine, your ship will get heavier and be pulled off-course by gravity more. Wheeled vehicles wouldn't have that problem.

    Sandbox doesn't mean "play with no restrictions". There isn't a solid, single definition of "sandbox", even. Keen has every right to consolidate and focus gameplay so as to lock out or make very difficult certain approaches.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  28. Kephyr Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    193
    Don't tell me you wouldn't trade your car for a hovering jet if jets were as efficient and as cheap, as they are in SE, from what we've seen during the stream :)
     
  29. Sarekh Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,177
    Of course they do, no discussion here! But if they want to checkbox everything, they also can do so, right? I don't see any actual problem here if either happens, that's what I'm trying to say :)
     
  30. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    Actually, I don't think I would. Don't get me wrong, jets are cool and all, but they're overwhelmingly powerful (and fast) for the use I'd give them. I can't even pay the gasoline for my car or fix the many scratches it has, I can't imagine how it'd be any different for a jet. And besides, I feel much safer and relaxed in a car (more or less) than a jet. :D

    Cheers
     
  31. KissSh0t Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,534
    Unneeded Atmospheric Thrusters?

    Seriously?

    Before there was only 1 type of thruster... now there is more... more engineering... more fan to be had.

    Crippling gravity drives within natural gravity makes sense from a gameplay perspective, it will lead to you learning new ways of doing things.
     
    • Like Like x 3
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.