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.

Why space engineers needs atmosphere

Discussion in 'Survival' started by Kylar_Reed, Apr 9, 2014.

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

    Messages:
    34
    Yeah, constructing pressurized stations and ships naturally puts so many constaints on design and use that should it be implemented, I'd really like it to give some unique and interesting benefit, rather than "Oh hey, now your avatar's resource/energy use dropped by 5%, congrats!"

    It just doesn't seem like the tradeoff is worth it
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2014
  2. Oddbare Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    2
    This is such a terrible idea. Also I wonder how many of these brand new accounts spewing how good of an idea this is are just troll accounts made by the same guy. SE is fun because it's resource management system is not based around trivial things like food, water, and air. The addition of these resources would only make Survial Mode tedious in a negative way.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2014
  3. doulos05 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    That's the core issue. If the only thing you get is more failure points and a minor resource consumption boost, it's kinda... meh. If you could add something interesting, like a second tier of items that require atmosphere to produce (perhaps even some requiring gravity and some requiring atmosphere), that could be interesting.
     
  4. Nilat Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    290
    Something that could allow me to Alt-tab anywhere in my base without worrying of dying in the following 5min is not "meh"
    Though indeed a mere 5% energy consumption drop would be "meh" since the end result would be the same: AFK / Alt-tab = death.

    I don't think limiting access to items in the presence of atmosphere or gravity is a good idea since atmosphere (or gravity, for that matter) should never be unavoidable / almost necessary in order to build unrelated things
     
  5. PeZook Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    34
    Does the reward system really have to center around resource production?
    It could be a unique capability of some sort, like my previous suggestion about giving you NPC crews to help with day to day chores of managing the station/ship.
    The benefit of that is that you actually get a DECREASE in grind in exchange for being a clever engineer, just like when you design and implement a good conveyor system to shift junk around or welder array to help you with tedious welding, etc.
    A bonus will be helping with immersion even more than just having atmospheres for their own sake.
     
  6. Xakthos Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    220
    Atmosphere would be moderately interesting but I'm not entirely sure I care if it exists or not. I'm rather glad not to have to deal with a hunger/thirst/sleep/take dump cycle as it takes enough time as is just building projects that would employ several thousand people in life with one lone astronaut. I could see some fun with gas mechanics being in the game in general though. The effects of explosive decompression would be interesting to combat.
     
  7. xXxSirDidymusxXx Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    106
    Atmospheric pressurized rooms would be a nice touch, and definitely would create a surreal experience in "realistic mode". There is no better reminder, [SIZE= 13.3333339691162px]of how isolated you truly are.. [/SIZE]then deep space. Your engineer would need oxygen recycling via a ventilation system.
    Now the perspective downs/up of such a feature, #1: Oxygen resources, #2 Depressurization of cabin/leaks... #3 Are the developers of this game receiving, over a million dollars from this community, (sold one million copies recently) of our hard earned money no less(,) < comma, are we not inconvenienced enough with our own lives to trade time for money? #4 Are the developers open to suggestions for the game? #5 Can you not hire someone else to do your work for you via something called currency wait... alternatively it's called money. [Oh, Snap Dragon!] It's kind of like you know what everyone is doing called work. Work for money stay focused here people.
    Why argue with this posters suggestion, by all means everyone is entitled to their opinion, and Keen Software House is a company. What do companies do? They hire people, hell they'll hire you if you can program . Just save your idiocy >(Non-supportive commentary via this subject matter, make that all subject matter) for someone who cares. You know why? kiddies, this community is building space engineers! Were building this game, period.
    I support you, buddy xoxoxo :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 22, 2014
  8. doulos05 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    Yeah, I liked your idea and said that in an earlier post, sorry for not attributing it. I just didn't mention it here for brevity.
     
  9. jcalis1994 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    169
    I'd love it if larger asteroids had their own atmosphere, from calm to devastating, where we'd have to engineer a way to adapt to them.

    Engineering is such a vast application that covers so many areas, that I really don't mind having more challenges/problems that we have to engineer a solution to. It gives depth, thought and consequences instead of just building to the engine's limit. Granted I don't want things that limit what we can create, but I do want more challenges to overcome via the tools we have in the game.

    Also, it would add to the exploration factor, which Keen seems to be starting to think about. They want exploration to have some meaning and depth.
     
  10. MSI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    636
    Unfortunately jcallis1994 Asteroids don't have enough gravity (even the big ones) to sustain an atmosphere.



    However! I vote YES on pressurized rooms, even without Oxygen or food requirements (which can be modded in). Removing the suit would be great for immersion, it will add significantly to realism, and with pressurization it will add massive interest and dynamics into gameplay.

    I personally will not be very happy if this feature is skipped over.
     
  11. Vermillion Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,131
    Oh?
    And what's the player going to look like without the suit?
    Someone has to do the work and that's a metric fucktonne of work for the dev team that has nothing whatsoever with gameplay and building. It won't add massive interest OR dynamics into gameplay without an oxygen requirement.
    Once a room is pressurized, what's the difference between a room full of air and one full of nothing? Answer: Nothing. Just you, knowing that it has air is the only difference.
     
  12. jcalis1994 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    169
    My bad, it was a wrong usage of words. I meant the planetoids (if added) that the devs spoke about in the last Q&A.

    I agree with Vermillion, just having pressurized rooms without even oxygen would not be worth it. If they were to decide to do it, I'd rather they do it fully.
     
  13. Ghostickles Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,077
    Correct you are Volfram, I was referring to red hot lead bullets causing iron hulls to spark. This should happen as small pieces of iron are separated by impact force. I think ammo is actually an NiFe alloy and not lead in SE, but the idea is they make sparks and sparks make FIRE!

    Want atmosphere? Then you want fire. Sluggish bubbling space fires. It would be cool.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2014
  14. Catastrophy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    23
    I want female engineers now!
     
  15. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    They could always give us a base model with a suit, the kind of bald guy from Star Citizen, put in the functionality to have certain parts of the model changeable (How a character creator might work) and then let modders do what they want for the most.
    For a the point of having atmosphere without seriously detrimenting non-atmosphere players, I refer back to my earlier post about having O2 as a thing, that goes down much slower than energy (Requiring a new tank every 20 minutes or so) that in part causes the drain on energy in EVA, and thus wouldn't be required in a pressurised area with oxygen.
    This means energy would not go down in atmosphere without the use of tools, so using tools in a pressurised interior would more efficient, but you run the risk of oxygen leaks/depressurisation/fire.
    Some benefit for some serious cons, but thus presenting some interesting challenges to overcome, and people who don't want pressurised interiors can go on their merry way.
     
  16. MSI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    636
    It has nothing to do with building in space? Actually it has everything to do with building in space. If it wasn't for atmospheric pressurization aboard craft we would not be able to go INTO space let alone sustain it. Just because you oppose something doesn't mean you're right. Adding pressurization would add massive amounts of dynamics to building and heaps of educational value to the software - Your tush is not a hat.
    Agreed - Female gamers are always left out in the cold and that bugs me.

    Well - I would too, but with pressurization being present in the vanilla code (if it's added), if it pushes past their schedule it (O2 requirements) could be modded in with the C# API.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2014
  17. doulos05 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    The operative word there is "we". "We" would not be able to go into space. But there's no indication that this rule applies to Space Engineers. They've existed without air for a really long time.
    Really, we're going there? But besides the point, those character models (even the "kind of bald guy" from Star Citizens) take hours of development time. They can't just be made in 10 minutes like the Sims avatars.

    Pressurization is not present in the vanilla code (I realize you added the parenthetical "if" at the end). Sealed rooms is present in the code, likely for lighting purposes, but pressurization is not. Pressurization also isn't trivial to add to the code. Consider the conditions, triggers, and functions required (NOT from the perspective of "whoa, awesome" but from the perspective of "dev time not spent elsewhere")

    1) New block creation
    2) Starter ship/NPC ship redesigns (not one of them is designed for atmosphere. Not one.)
    3) Handling airlocks (player made, real block, or both)
    4) Fire creation/detection
    5) Destructive depressurization (more on this in a second)
    6) Vented thrust (depressurization causes the ship to move)

    Number 5 is the most requested one, and you'd best believe it will be heavily scrutinized when it's put into play. So let's look at it in more detail. There's a lot (no really, a LOT) of calculations that go into calculating the damage from depressurization. You'd have to calculate the volume of air inside the room and the size of the hole (numbers which would change constantly), then calculate the force exerted on everything in the room and apply that as damage with damaged parts breaking off and being blown by the wind towards the hole (which is also suffering the same damage on the edges), which would then object impacts for damage. Get any of that wrong, and people will complain. Because even if the "real" reason you want pressurization is taking off the suit or growing food or creating a space hippie commune, you're going to try an explosive decompression at least once. And then the forum will be filled with "I depressurized my ship and the control panels were completely undamaged! In a real ship, the screens would have shattered and the station rendered useless!" or "I made a ship with small ship blocks large enough that I could stand inside, then built an atmosphere generator inside and grinded a hold in the hull. I got sucked out of the hole but there was no damage! That's impossible!"

    In exchange, what do you get? Now, I would submit that if you add something valuable to the gameplay experience, then the devs would do it. After all, pistons and rotors certainly had challenges and the devs worked/are working to overcome those. Why? Because it added an exciting capability that didn't exist before and that changed gameplay by enabling new engineering designs and constructions. What could atmosphere enable?

    - Taking off the suit: Nothing but a skin, no impact on gameplay.
    - Granting efficiency bonuses while working: It would have to be so fast as to be ridiculous (in a world where work is already ridiculously fast, I mean you can weld together ships larger than a football field alone in less than 24 hours of welding time). Also, that's not exciting. And look at what the devs have to add to get there. Also, probably not realistic because gravity probably poses a greater inhibition to work speed than atmosphere.
    - Increased machine efficiency: Same problem with buffing the engineer. That's not exciting
    - Tier 2 gear only manufacturable in atmosphere: Maybe, but what do you add that's exciting and new, not just interesting and iterative? If it's not exciting and new, they aren't going to do it.
    - NPCs with higher living standards than the engineer who add interactions like a marketplace or workers: That's new, and it's exciting. But it goes in a completely different direction than anything they've done so far and they would have to add AI to do it. They have indicated AI is on the list, so maybe this could happen. But they would have to add a lot to be new and exciting.

    I would love to see atmosphere. I think it would be interesting. I would likely spend at least an hour pressurizing rooms and then blowing a hole in them. And pretty much every ship of mine that could justify it would have a pressurized compartment. But the devs aren't gonna do that unless they see a gain that adds enough to justify the pain that pressurization would bring.
     
  18. MSI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    636
    Obviously with such emotional opposition, we're hitting a nerve on this subject. I'm not sure what the problem is but I do suggest being kind to your fellow man, you never know when you'll need their help to back up your idea, whether they agree with it or not.
     
  19. kristakis Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    607
    FWIW I didn't find his post that emotional and certainly contained a lot of logic. I don't want atmospheres either but couldn't have given you reasons as good as doulos05's.
     
  20. doulos05 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    You've not hit a nerve with me, I was just showing you the logical issues with adding pressurization. People seem to think that adding pressure is a trivial exercise for the devs, it isn't. I've done enough programming to know that this isn't the case. So, if the devs are going to invest in pressurization, there has to be a payoff. That's what I was analyzing. Maybe the devs are thinking differently. Maybe they feel one of the things I listed is a viable payoff for the work required. I hope they think differently, because I want pressurization.
     
  21. MSI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    636
    Here's my argument - it could be turned on or off in the menu as with everything else, I'm sure. I just am unsure why the argument becomes so personal with some (the guy before you had a hissy fit so I think I was just expecting the same given it's the internet) - while it might not seem meaningful to you it is to others. We can debate it all day long but that won't change minds and might run some folks off that seriously want to see this implemented even on a rudimentary level. I have use for the feature, and I can see how even without removing your suit it could be very useful in an educational way. Imagine Space Engineers in a High School Engineering class - you would kind of need pressurization to add to the dynamics and complexity - if you want students to think you NEED to challenge them - and some people like that challenge to continue. As for me it would be incredibly useful in the Educational Web Series I've been hacking away at for months now - showing uneducated individuals on the topic how pressure works would be phenomenal. Meanwhile it by itself would add tremendously to the complexity of gameplay for those who enable it.
     
  22. GT500 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    63
    We may very well all have female characters right now. Since you can not see your character, what make you so sure it is male?
     
  23. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    1. What about it?
    2. Well as long as you have gravity turned off, you're only problem is gonna be air resistance anyway.
    3. If both sides of the airlock are pressurised, nothing happens. If one side isn't and both doors opened, vent the atmosphere like you would for an appropriate breach.
    4. Yeah this is actually the hardest really. Assuming the atmosphere can't be changed dynamically except through venting then you have to let the fire behave naturally, which is difficult, unless you abstract it. Fire will spread where possible in a cascade/exponential fashion. Basically a slightly better looking version of MC's would be a good start there.
    5. I'm also getting to that.
    6. Negligible.
    This is why you abstract the problem. For example. Small breaches actually would have a negligible effect, whilst huge breaches would just be instant and all-encompassing. Suddenly, you've only got to count for the mid range breaches, where you abstract again. Don't try and on-the-fly calculate ever changing numbers, approximate to a good standard over an average and move on.
    I refer you back to my idea of subtle benefits that don't hugely change the gameplay for those who choose to go it without atmosphere i.e.
    • The inclusion of O2 and thus the ability to not passively use energy in a pressurised interior, allowing people to stand around (Potentially more useful in the future when working on programming and blueprints and the like) without dying
    • Allowing people to use their tools for slightly longer before having to recharge. You might think a small buff to this would be pointless, but considering how long people spend using tools already, I think you'll find the benefits, though slight, will still be felt.
    • Obvious benefits to the kinds of people who like their immersion and their RP. All well and good to turn around and say "This game isn't for them" or something to that effect about them not being all the audience but completely rubbish arguments all the same.
    • As always, less a benefit, more a challenge. Some of us, I'm sure most probably, love a good challenge... That's why we're engineers (Or at least, I hope a portion of the players are actually engineers) and players of this game... To take on a challenge and come up with creative new solutions... Look what has been done with broken gravity, look what people did before pistons and rotors and conveyors? Jesu if for nothing else I'd use atmosphere all the time for the challenge and the dynamic.
     
  24. Kuu Lightwing Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,503
    I think the main problem with such environments is that to make it useful, you need to introduce lots of annoying things for the sole purpose to make it useful. Otherwise it's just "Meh, it's not worth bothering - I'm perfectly fine without them". But wrecking current gameplay for the sake of them? No, thanks

    Also, tools, really? Where in the hell you going to build your ships? Inside an enormous pressurized dock?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2014
  25. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    Except you don't Kuu, you add small things that don't get in the way, but have benefits to the people who use them... If your tools could be used for an extra minute each charge, and you don't lose charge in between, that would actually be highly useful.
    Er yes... Where do you build yours?
     
  26. Kuu Lightwing Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,503
    Ummm. In space, no?
    How in the hell would you make a dock for even a pretty small large ship?
    Why would I waste time and resources on that dock?
    And how would I operate my welder ship inside a dock?
    And why in the name of Princess, would I use handheld tools anyways when I can make a small welding ship?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2014
  27. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    I build in a dock because it's f*cking awesome to see this thing built up in this enclosed lit up area...
    My dock (Old) wasn't huge, but was good considering... Could build ships up to 30x30x30 within it. Larger ships were built in sections (Like in real life) and then taken out of the front door and merged together.
    My new dock is gonna be entirely within asteroids (Gonna paste a couple big ones together) and will be at least twice the dimensions.
    Why does anyone do anything in SE dude?
    It's a big dock, my welder ship is smaller than 2 large ship blocks.
    Erm how do you weld up your ship interiors? Seats, lights, doors, etc.
     
  28. doulos05 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    It's not that any one of those things is difficult/impossible. It's that the sum total of those things equals a given amount of work for the dev team. I don't know what that total would be, but it's non-trivial. There are ways to save time by abstracting the problem. You're right, I was intentionally complicating the matter to prove my point. I shouldn't have because the level of complication isn't actually relevant to my point.
    Also, to explain what I mean by point 2. My point wasn't about the lack of blocks, it was the lack of spaces which can be pressurized safely. There are existing examples that I can find of airlock designs in any of the starter worlds. Now, I haven't really gone after the merchants because I'm not big into the piracy side of the game, but what I've seen tells me there aren't any airlocks there either. This isn't a long, difficult process, but it would have to be done.
    The problem with subtle benefits is that they don't weigh heavily against the labor required. The equation looks like this:

    IF SUM(Work required) < SUM(gameplay advances) THEN pressurization will be implemented
    IF SUM(Work required) > SUM(gameplay advances) THEN no pressurization

    As long as we're talking incremental advances, you'll need a LOT of incremental advances to outweigh the work required. That's why I think we need a big step.
     
  29. Kuu Lightwing Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,503
    I have to accept "because it's awesome" as an argument, because this is the only reason for doing stuff in SE :)

    Well, I still don't see why dock needs to be pressurized... And it would use tons of air.

    For interiors, I haven't build any ship with awesome interiors in Survival. The ones I builde were made in Creative.
    And still you can weld your ship layer-by-layer, leaving only ligts and other minor stuff for which increased welding speed doesn't really matter.
     
  30. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    Ah see Kuu that's because we have different design/construction philosophies. I take things quite realistically, hence building ships in dry docks and then floating larger sections out to be pieced together in more space. Thus my ships are built with the hull constructed first and then the interior laid in by hand. It's good fun and gives me a hands on way of doing things (I name every single interior light for example, which gets messy when they're all pre-welded).
    And oh yeah it would use tonnes of air... I can imagine the size of the air-processing facility my base would need... Again I'm using the 'because it's awesome' argument but I wanna walk around that whilst it's working.
    Ah sorry my mistake, yeah they will need redesigning, but then they've been redesigned multiple times in the past. Just look at how different the current Mk. of red ship is to the original.
    Of course putting all these things in will take time, and I recognise that maybe my O2 idea is not enough of a benefit to justify implementation, but I'm trying to find benefits that we can include that don't require us to hamper what players are currently able to do without atmosphere.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.