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.

Theories on why ship collision is less epic?

Discussion in 'General' started by puttyEngineer, Nov 20, 2017.

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

    Messages:
    35
    Hi! Congratulation on the Major Physic Overhaul! I felt that this update is what everyone is really celebrating for, especially when Klang the destroyer of heavy machinery in Space Engineer is slayed.

    But I watched this video by Youtuber and unfortunately I sense a tiny bit ( 0.1% ) disappointment:


    He miss that the ship getting swallowed by the planet, but to be specific; he actually missed a large destruction when a large/huge ship collide with a planet (not ship sinking). But first of all, I am thankful that KSH fix ship sinking into the ground but apparently it might have become a "feature" for some, but to be clear is really not great in survival because of the cost, but its probably for "explosion" or effects like kids smashing things.

    My theory for why collision like that is soo mediocre & tiny is because the blocks doesn't know the mass of the entire ship when it collide, so when it crashes onto the ground it slowed the same amount as if it is in a small ship or a large ship. So, what do you think?
     
  2. Forcedminer Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,227
    for optimizations sake!....i guess. :(
    .
    oh well I'm happy enough that fresh game respawn ships don't get swallowed up by the ground if they have slightly rough landing...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Commander Rotal Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,975
    Well, the ship sinking isn't really gone so much as they have, apparently, fixed it for smaller grids, at least that's what i heard. It's still happening for big grids meaning the underlying problem is still a thing. Good news is one of the devs has chimed in to say that it's going to get fixed. Bad news is that's been a problem since Day One of Planets (both the sinking AND big grids taking very little damage from planetary crashes) so i'm not super hopeful that they'll fix it. But it's good to know they'll finally take a look at it!

    [​IMG]
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Forcedminer Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,227
    I remember seeing something of that the next major is to focus on voxels. Sounds exciting.
    as for ship collisions.......small grids like roads get vaporized if you hit a tree going more than 10 m/s. :p
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. puttyEngineer Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    35
    @Commander Rotal, hey I like that avatar, that's cute, the SG-1 character... Also, won't it be funny if collision damage ripples into your ship like waves? if you crash into something your control panels could explode like in Star Trek or something!
     
  6. Commander Rotal Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,975
    Yeah, that'd be awesome ^^ buuut probably won't happen. The game probably couldn't handle the calculations necessary. Same reason large grids don't get much damage either, i believe. I've always had this pet theory that the lack of damage is the engine trying to protect itself from a crash due to excess calculations. That or it streightup can't do them all in time for the crash.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  7. Forcedminer Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,227

    my only thought on that would be crashes could damage an entire grid slightly.
    .
    that would be a right pain in the ass to fix actually...
    .
    would be pretty cool though you know you take a stiff impact a lump of your ship breaks off then a light or something explodes dramatically and you can laugh because you're safely sealed inside your space suit. or die horribly because you're not wearing it or the suit doesn't protect well against explosions. :p
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. ViroMan Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,123
    I would not expect a space suit to protect against explosions if anything it probably would be VERY vulnerable to such a thing. Explosions tend to have fragments of stuff flying everywhere at high speed after all... Flak cannon to the suit.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Herpaderpa Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    27
    I like the facts that the ship armor can take a good amount of beating from collisions now.
    Space ships need to have very durable armor if they are to travel in space, as even something as small as a grain of sand can cause massive damage if going at the speed which is needed for space travel.
    I would love to see more voxel damage when crashing tho, escpecially for dirt/sand.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  10. UrbanLegend Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    224

    Durable armor adds a ton of mass unless it's made from some magic futuristic space-age compound.

    I think that's the problem with SE collisions. The armor of the ships is such that they are as durable as World War II battleships. In reality, space ships would be as thin-skinned and fragile as aircraft. A collision or single missile hit should blow them apart.

    Also, SE doesn't really model any sort of complex physics. Not really. At lest not the stresses on individual blocks. For example, I created a 30 story building on a planet and then blew it up with warheads. A single window is enough to hold up the 20 stories above it.

    I think what people want is their ships to blow apart like a bunch of Legos when they hit something. Unfortunately, I think that's way too resource intensive.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Herpaderpa Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    27
    The armor in world war 2 battleships are not durable at all by modern standards. Armor technology is something that is being constantly improved, just look at modern cars with their carbon steel, or modern tanks with depleted uranium armor.
    It's 2017 and we are already living in a world with magic futuristic space-age armor, and i see no reason why armor technology won't improve in the next 60 years. And as i mentioned before, having strong armor is anabsolute necessity if you plan on sending humans into a space traveling spacecraft, unless you where to use something like magical warp drives (which are already in the game).

    And as far as stressing, its a feature in Medival Engineers, so we might see it in space engineers in the future, but at the current state i think it's way to resource intensive
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. UrbanLegend Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    224
    Depends what you are talking about. Lb per lb, is old battleship steel armor as strong as modern composites? No. But by the same token, modern warships aren't armored. They are designed to survive by using their advanced radar, sonar and other sensors to detect the enemy first and then lob a cruise missile or call in an airstrike from a carrier.

    Kind of besides the point anyway. From a game-playing perspective, I think it's really more about striking a balance between Star Wars style battles between ships trading fire at visual range and cool destructive physics effects of ships shattering into a thousand pieces and the pieces ripping part other ships.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.