|
|
Post by SevenOfCarina on Apr 28, 2017 17:24:22 GMT
Whelp. Extending radiators just went from a sign of surrender to a call for battle. Yeah now that you can set them to be negative mass, you can practically shield your entire ship with anti-mass radiators. They don't break and they increase delta-v! Anti-Mass Radiators ® : Better than Boron ® |
|
|
|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Apr 28, 2017 17:25:04 GMT
Welcome back, there's been a lot of changes since then.  Is there a quick way to sum it up? -.- (please tell me it got more realistic lol) Capacitors for rails and coils. Lasers can now die when hit by other lasers, cuz mirrors. Fixed mount lasers. Recently, internal mount guns, and electric engines for turrets for those stupidly big guns. Extruded turrets (so 90+ degree arcs of fire). Lots more, but those off the top of my head. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 17:29:57 GMT
Welcome back, there's been a lot of changes since then. Is there a quick way to sum it up? -.- (please tell me it got more realistic lol) If you mean kinetic weapons no longer having 999999% efficiency, yes they no longer break laws of thermodynamics and their barrels can even overheat now. Big reworks to kinetic weapons, railguns are pretty much the same, but coilguns no longer are able to shoot large payloads. Capacitors are now also a thing and practically required. So in essence everything fires at lower rates and velocities, and coilguns have problems with overheating. Weapon algorithms now compensate for target acceleration not just velocity. High Molecular Weight just got a realism nerf, with the original high strength material now porous and the new UHMWPE now weaker. Lasers actually looks like lasers now, not ambiguous balls of light. This comes with the added benefit/drawback of being able to break the mirrors. Can taper radiators now, not really anything to do with realism but it's pretty neato. Tracers also got a realism change, now they're pyrotechnic instead of whatever qswitch had before. This means a lot more blue, purple, and green tracers. Plus lots of other little things, so if you left the game in october, you might want to read patch notes from 1.0.8 and up. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 17:35:15 GMT
Yeah now that you can set them to be negative mass, you can practically shield your entire ship with anti-mass radiators. They don't break and they increase delta-v! Anti-Mass Radiators ® : Better than Boron ®Radiate-co TM now with Anti-Boron ® Radiators. Break the laws of physics and become mass negative today. Terms and conditions may apply. If you or a loved one has disappeared into the next dimension because of negative mass, please consult your nearest general practitioner. Radiate-coTM is not responsible for any physical anomalies generated by negative mass, including but not limited to: black holes, white holes, gray holes, big bangs, big crunches, entropy, enthalpy, sufficient data for a meaningful answer, headaches, and nausea |
|
|
|
Post by SevenOfCarina on Apr 28, 2017 18:00:25 GMT
Hail Anti-Boron®
|
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Apr 28, 2017 18:44:10 GMT
the new UHMWPE now weaker. I'm quite dissatisfied with this change. There are Spectra/Dyneema formulations with strength even higher than original. I hate to say it, but this feels like another kneejerk response from Sempai~. He was too quick to a bow down to mouthbreathing retards this time. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 28, 2017 19:27:26 GMT
Boron is now the only propellant tank material that matters
|
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 19:43:20 GMT
Boron is now the only propellant tank material that matters Looks like UHMWPE still kind of works for crew modules. But I suspect when reactivity rolls around, all our boron tanks will be eaten from the inside or explode spontaneously. Hopefully we can have composite fuel tanks to allow for corrosive resistant liners in the tanks. |
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 28, 2017 20:40:20 GMT
In terms of distributed fire, my point defense ships will no longer be massive death lasers but cheap ships with millions of 1g railguns. How are you enjoying your .00001 FPS? |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 20:44:23 GMT
In terms of distributed fire, my point defense ships will no longer be massive death lasers but cheap ships with millions of 1g railguns. How are you enjoying your .00001 FPS? I'm overclocked so I get 0.0001 FPS thank you very much. On a serious note, distributed fire surprisingly doesn't lag too bad, probably due to the short proximity of missiles. Maybe 20-30 but I haven't been looking at the numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 28, 2017 20:49:35 GMT
How are you enjoying your .00001 FPS? I'm overclocked so I get 0.0001 FPS thank you very much. On a serious note, distributed fire surprisingly doesn't lag too bad, probably due to the short proximity of missiles. Maybe 20-30 but I haven't been looking at the numbers. I haven't found that distributed fire itself has changed much in terms of performance either. My standard kill-everything ship has 16 1g sandblasters though, and engaging anything outside of 100km with them (or doing a 1v1 between two of them at any range) will grind the game to a halt every time. With the rates of fire on some of those sub-gram guns, I don't even know if I'll bother trying, as fun as they look. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 20:52:45 GMT
I'm overclocked so I get 0.0001 FPS thank you very much. On a serious note, distributed fire surprisingly doesn't lag too bad, probably due to the short proximity of missiles. Maybe 20-30 but I haven't been looking at the numbers. I haven't found that distributed fire itself has changed much in terms of performance either. My standard kill-everything ship has 16 1g sandblasters though, and engaging anything outside of 100km with them (or doing a 1v1 between two of them at any range) will grind the game to a halt every time. With the rates of fire on some of those sub-gram guns, I don't even know if I'll bother trying, as fun as they look. 52 1g rails on my current point defense ship, and all shooting at missiles causes no lag, but if they all shot at a ship... oh boi we're watching a slide show today. |
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 28, 2017 20:57:07 GMT
I haven't found that distributed fire itself has changed much in terms of performance either. My standard kill-everything ship has 16 1g sandblasters though, and engaging anything outside of 100km with them (or doing a 1v1 between two of them at any range) will grind the game to a halt every time. With the rates of fire on some of those sub-gram guns, I don't even know if I'll bother trying, as fun as they look. 52 1g rails on my current point defense ship, and all shooting at missiles causes no lag, but if they all shot at a ship... oh boi we're watching a slide show today. Is that the case even if you engage the missiles at long range (ie spawn engagement with a long range laser)? I'm still not sure how the different factors- # of spawned projectiles, target composition/dodging/etc- contribute to the slowdown. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Apr 28, 2017 21:01:34 GMT
52 1g rails on my current point defense ship, and all shooting at missiles causes no lag, but if they all shot at a ship... oh boi we're watching a slide show today. Is that the case even if you engage the missiles at long range (ie spawn engagement with a long range laser)? I'm still not sure how the different factors- # of spawned projectiles, target composition/dodging/etc- contribute to the slowdown. I'm pretty sure it's the system keeping track of each particular particle as they zoom towards the target, since range is usually a key factor in the lag. The longer the distance, the more bullets can fill it, and the more the system bogs. |
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 28, 2017 21:12:43 GMT
Is that the case even if you engage the missiles at long range (ie spawn engagement with a long range laser)? I'm still not sure how the different factors- # of spawned projectiles, target composition/dodging/etc- contribute to the slowdown. I'm pretty sure it's the system keeping track of each particular particle as they zoom towards the target, since range is usually a key factor in the lag. The longer the distance, the more bullets can fill it, and the more the system bogs. I think you're right that range is the main issue, but the difference between a short range sandblaster engagement vs a non-sandblaster target (usually runs fine, 60+ FPS) and a 1v1 sandblaster on sandblaster engagement at the same range (bogs down to 1 frame per 30s or so) is so extreme, and the number of rounds out still not that great compared to long-range magdump, that I think there's something else going on. I've also noticed that in long-range engagements FPS tends not to come back until the great majority of the rounds are cleared from the engagement space. It's weird stuff. |
|
