|
|
|
 |
|

January 11th, 2007, 01:22 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
QNP mk 2
I was experimenting with SEV a bit today and found a rather useful little item: SEV allows negative values for Standard Movement.
So rather than using Engines Per Move in the vehicle sizes to define their weight and thus how much thrust they need, it can be done directly.
Say you decide that 10kt of weight requires 1 MP of thrust.
So a colony ship with a 200kt colony module, 10kt bridge, 40 kt CS/LS, and 60kt of cargo space would take 31 MP to move. Remove the cargo and it'd drop to 25 MP.
This allows a ship designer to weigh his choices in speed vs equipment more carefully, and gives an incentive not to just cram in anything that fits.
Unfortunately its also a bit bugged. Once a ship's movement drops below 0, the value wraps around and the ship speeds off at 65,000 km/s! Still trying to find a way to work around that one..
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

January 11th, 2007, 01:29 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 689
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
65,000 O_O That must look neat.
For a work-around, wouldn't it work with a requirement for the ships in Vehiclesizes, i.e. Get_Design_Ability_Total("Movement Standard") >= 0 ?
Great find, at any rate. Just wish Aaron would fix the acceleration/turning rates so that we could mod them as well.
|

January 11th, 2007, 01:39 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
Actually its kind of amusing. They're going so fast they can't slow down in time at the border and they just fly past it!
Get_design_ability would work, except it also happens if the ships take damage in combat. Getting thousands of times faster is NOT the ideal result of engine damage. 
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

January 11th, 2007, 02:04 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 689
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
Oooh, right. The abilities stop working when components are damaged. Has to be fixed by Aaron then, I guess. Hmm, does the Get_design_ability_total function work in components.txt?
|

January 11th, 2007, 02:15 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
It doesn't.
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

January 11th, 2007, 08:48 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
Workaround: using Movement Bonus prevents the speed from wrapping. Right now this is mostly useful for extra-massive components that should slow a ship down, since it doesn't stack.
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

January 12th, 2007, 02:00 AM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,323
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
Simple! Ask MM to change the movement code not to recognize negative numbers anymore! This will then work fine in the next patch, especially if you can require ships to have positive movement. 
|

January 12th, 2007, 02:04 AM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
You can do that, I think.
I just have this suspicion if I bring this up he'll patch it so negative numbers aren't recogonized at all and blow the whole concept. 
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

January 12th, 2007, 06:12 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
Such a system would result in something very unlike QNP...
You're doing subtraction by mass instead of division by mass.
__________________
Things you want:
|

January 12th, 2007, 02:26 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: QNP mk 2
The end result is the same, if you balance the subtraction correctly. Its just a little more flexible when it comes to not having the ship all the way full. (though it would always have the side effect of a badly damaged ship getting a little faster..)
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|