Rebalance - Second go

[bszlrd]

@Niankosensei: Vatakara/Nerodia price: Yes I miscalculated something there, thanks for spotting it. I need to make that automatic somehow. I think I can do that with blender drivers (I guess I'm starting to be the guy who goes to Blender if something needs to be solved... :D)

[robn]

@Niankosensei: Vatakara/Nerodia price: Yes I miscalculated something there, thanks for spotting it.

Please remember to ping me when you're finished so I know to merge the PR :)

I need to make that automatic somehow. I think I can do that with blender drivers (I guess I'm starting to be the guy who goes to Blender if something needs to be solved... :D)

You'd make a great sysadmin...

[bszlrd]

I've automated the price calculation. It's based on:

Code: Select all

 ([hull mass]+[capacity]+([full deltaV]/[fuel mass])+[main thrust])

All values have a multiplier so we can set importance to each part, and there's a multiplier for the outcome, so we can adjust the prices proportionally.
Xylophis is the cheapest, with 64k, Vatakara is the most expensive with 6 176k.
There's a nice progression with the smaller ships, but the gap widens at the higher end, which shows that we need quite a few medium ships in our repertoire.
FWD Thrusts are growing in a similar fashion, but that doesn't necessarily translate to higher accelerations.


Here's the mod file.
And the blend file I used to calculate. It needs the ship stats addon, but I think it should open without it, but you can't use it to calculate stuff that way. (note that I replaced the eV entry in the calculation (driver) with full deltaV, I just didn't renamed the variables.)

I've also tweaked the Natrix a bit, it seemed too weak, especially the up thrust.
Kanara came out a bit expensive, but it supposed to be a sophisticated fighter, so it seems good.
DSMiner feels a bit cheap for it's capacity, but it's quite low on deltaV and thrust, so it might be good. (I imagine it as a quite crappy Haber ship)
I didn't aimed my latest two ship to the top, It came out this way on it's own. :D

Also, I didn't really touched rotation speeds. I tested them, and they felt good, but that needs much more testing too.

@Fluffyfreak: About flying being a chore: I think autopilot+timeaccel already alleviates that one, and if somebody wants to fly by hand, then it could be more exciting and challenging with nerfed ships since you have to use your head a bit, instead of just brute-forcing your way. (This does assumes a bit more and more precise navigation data like dists displayed to more decimal places if they are in AU, or even an optional Mm formating or something. It's hard to calculate your brachistochrone if all you have is 8.1 AU which switches to several thousand kilometers when you are close enough.)


@robn: I learned to be a sysadmin quite a few years ago, I bet that's the cause. :D
I'd say let's merge it, as a common ground, and adjust it from here later. I'll try to add export (hopefully import too)capabilities to my calculator blender addon after I finished this semester, to make it easier to adjust.

I'll put a questionnaire on the community forum and here, so we can get actual (and hopefully a lot of) input from players, like how they play?, how a certain ship feels for certain trips?, are they using autopilot?, how much time they need to buy a new craft?, are they using autopilot?, etc.
Edit: like this form. - which is up on the Community forum already. Let's do some testing everybody!

[bszlrd]

So the survey is up.
And here's the spreadsheet with the results. Hopefully we get a lot of feedback.
I've updated the first post with the link to the survey topic and results.

[Nyankosensei]

Something Strange ?



Prices are not related to performance, probably pumpkinseed deltaV is a bit too hight

[bszlrd]

Might be strange, but not necessarily. Pumpkinseed is lighter and has better fuel economy (which might be a bit off though), and half the thrust then the Kanara (it has better acceleration because it's lower mass). Pumpkinseed is a courier, that's why it has better deltaV. Kanara isn't really designed for longer trips on it's own.
Let's wait a bit though to get some more data (from that 5 entry, no Pumpkinseed or Kanara pilot took the survey yet), before adjusting anything. These comparisons are good fuel of thought, I like it :)

And actually my story about the Pumpkinseed's good performance, is that it's severely overbuilt for acceleration and deltaV which makes it very unreliable if you skip maintenance. When ship and part reliability (lua equipment maybe?) comes to the game, then this ship will need quite a lot and frequent maintenance, if you want it at peak performance. The Kanara is the other side of the spectrum: a sturdy, firmly built and reliable and easy to maintain craft, intended for short range tasks.

[Nyankosensei]

This is a report of the Fuel Efficency


Edit

Report fuel/PT/hull is much better

[Nyankosensei]

I have redone all calculation with the total weight of the ship



By now is correct for gameplay of big ships but from those values big ships have fuel compsumation of 1/300 vs little ships

[bszlrd]

What's PT?

[Nyankosensei]

What's PT?

Forward Power Thrust