Comments to RAMs update on development

This is where you can suggest new features and discuss upcoming features.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

732

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby RAM » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:05 am

Wulf wrote:we had a hauler before and it was not well received.


Not sure which ship you are talking about. The Bowhead is the other freighter I know of and it was well received.

The class 16 and 17 would be freighters for hauling gas to and fro from worlds as we terraform.

I like the idea presented that we skip the 16, which should be a carrier, and just go with the 17 right now. Few would use the 16 if we have the 17 for gas hauling. Jam was also considering some way to carry over the cargo load of gas. Maybe compress it or some such thing. These freighters would be geared specifically for hauling atmo. They could be used to haul other cargo, but their purpose is for atmo movement.

If this idea of skipping the 16 for now and going to the 17 freighter sounds good, I will present it to Jam this weekend, or whenever he comes up for air.

Wulf wrote:Any word if the non-subscription players will continue to impose penalties especially to mining?


This will not change until Black Sky is released.
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1629

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby Mooncrest » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:40 am

Wulf wrote:
Wulf wrote:would like to see more 'complete' ships, ones with MB and RS (salvage beam if it becomes a thing) could be class appropriate and not eat up the space, it's was kinda neat to have 'custom' designs but true is it's more a hassle and not fun to swap parts out. would be just nice to build and be done.

if all the class 17 is is a hauler then maybe skip it and ask for better npc controls,

pity the class 16 is a carrier, not much need for carriers.

anyhow disappointing if it can't turn. to be useful.

thx for the update.


guess the class 16 parts i made will not be to useful ;p,
Any word if the non-subscription players will continue to impose penalties especially to mining? I would consider dropping in, chatting and mining a bit but i can't do a subscription.
just a note: we had a hauler before and it was not well received. the way the scaling works and cargo space (mats and MB) for mining just makes even the worst, biggest ship the one you have to use. mining nio and tin is still the only economy so....

The beauty of the system of shipbuilding we have now is that you can design the ship you need from the parts available. While the "Ready-to-Fly" variant that Mooncrest Industries makes as 'Standard' is a Freighter. I can make Higher Class Mining Beams and Ram Scoops for Asteroid Mining and Gas Scooping Variants. All you have to do is ask for the specification you want.

Basically, you make the 'complete' ship you wnat to. Than it is just a matter of swapping ships, as you would if sip designs were not flexible.

Regarding the Class 16 being a Carrier. A Carrier capable f carrying Class 5 to 8 ships, which is the logical next level of carrier. I'f like it to be Class 5 to 10, though. Could be useful for hauling Yetis around the Galaxy.

Regarding a Class 17 ship or higher ship; I an convinced that the material content will have to change. At the present level of Asteroid Mining a production ine of Class 17+ ships is just not going to be possible. I am having difficulty maintaining a production line foe class 15 as it is.

I, too, have invested heavily in making Class 16 modules in readiness for the release of the Class 16 Hull BP. If this does not occur, then I will be making a forceful plea for some sort of recycling so that I can recover, at least, some of my investment.
no avatar
User

Wulf

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

720

Joined

Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:33 am

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby Wulf » Wed Feb 28, 2018 1:28 pm

the class 12? before the bow was a hauler with no turn (extremely bad turn) and the complaints lead to the removal of some of the imposted physics so that grav anchor off it would turn fast.
If its just a gas hauler from planets with domes making gas to planets without gas or for domed planets venting into atmosphere with a 'ship' in between then why not 'ship the ships' and ask for npc controls (nice ones that anyone can use not crappy codes u have to type in)
and ask for colony controls that would allow domes to vent, we are making all the gasses in domes now, whats the big deal about going to skim?

no need to respond I have must have missed something lol.

the complete ship thing is to avoid having to use the semi unfinished shipyards to flip parts back and forth. its conveniences and i think would make the game smoother. it's not like we can pull into the shipyard and hit the 'custom' config to mining/hauling/scooping/ whatever. yes I flip the crappy ship parts around all the time, i mean i lose the crappy oversized MB all the time, it's just silly ;p

anyhow it looks like I am again on the outside of the discussion, does anyone really feel scooping for gas to haul to terraform is going to be fun? hats off to u, I guess I will continue playing something else, best off luck and hope it all works out well.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

732

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby RAM » Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:02 pm

Wulf wrote:does anyone really feel scooping for gas to haul to terraform is going to be fun?


All the gas we will need will be in other planet atmospheres. Basically, it will be moving good stuff in that was stored and sold at a SM to an NPC to another SM that buys it. Once bought, we just vent it. Maybe we will get a new place that will receive the gas and it vents it automatically. I will ask about this step. It may need some thought.

I, like Mooncest, use different ships for different functions. I seldom swap modules, but often swap ships.

I wish the required modules were just part of the ship itself, but it is what it is. I just ignore the required modules.
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

davh62

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1376

Joined

Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:40 pm

Location

UK

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby davh62 » Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:53 pm

RAM wrote:
Wulf wrote:does anyone really feel scooping for gas to haul to terraform is going to be fun?


All the gas we will need will be in other planet atmospheres. Basically, it will be moving good stuff in that was stored and sold at a SM to an NPC to another SM that buys it. Once bought, we just vent it. Maybe we will get a new place that will receive the gas and it vents it automatically. I will ask about this step. It may need some thought.

I, like Mooncest, use different ships for different functions. I seldom swap modules, but often swap ships.

I wish the required modules were just part of the ship itself, but it is what it is. I just ignore the required modules.



Well it won't be fun. But it shouldn't be easy either.
My biggest concern with TF is that the margins of what is possible to do are very narrow.
Example- over 1.5G forget it, Over 1.5 read forget it, you wont be able to do it unless a big group of players colonize the same world.

Suitable systems where it's possible are extremely rare & unrealistically far away to be gated. Thoughs please?

** sorry for the digression from ship discussion
FG Fighters Guild Founder
Senator of Ferrite-Senator of Prime-Senator of Barons Rest- Hater of rams speaking date stamp
no avatar
User

darkwhistle

Rank

2nd Lieutenant

2nd Lieutenant
Posts

40

Joined

Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby darkwhistle » Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:54 pm

I'm curious: If you scoop for planet gas, or use domes to store gas, for hauling to another planet, is the game going to keep track of the gas deleted from the source world? (if so, how will we keep people from spoiling the "terraformed" worlds that are already colonized; if not, its just another freebie.) If you scoop for planet gas are you going to get whatever mixture is present at the source? (Please don't make that as time consuming as gas giant scooping.) Can domes vent useful gasses into the planetary atmosphere? What about all that gaseous carbon that people now are just dumping out of their domes because it has no other use and cant be stored?

What about scooping up oceans? I'd like my terraformed world to have beachfront property. Also, I've discovered pure nitrogen oceans, which would come in handy when grabbing 80% inert gas... can we submerge our shiny new class 17 hauler and open the cargo hatch? Will liquid n2 expand into a greater volume of gaseous n2 when vented?

If we had a discussion about how this might work (with Jam paying attention) to work out the mechanics, it might assist coding later.
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1629

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby Mooncrest » Fri Mar 02, 2018 11:34 am

Dark,
Mu first thught on this is:

  1. We can use domes on the Planet to be TFed to split the gasses already present in the atmosphere as we do to fill the domes.
    This gas can then be vented from the dome back into the atmosphere
  2. We can use the domes on the TFed Planet to remove (ie store) the gasses we do not need in the atmosphere for collection by NPCs who can transfer it to a non-TFed planet for venting into the atmosphere there.
  3. We can use domes on other planets to split that planet's gasses and store them to be collected by NPCs; who will transfer the gas to the target planet; domes where it can be vented in to the atmosphere.
I think Oceans are going to be an entirely different project. Given that the panet will be 'earthlike', then our only option will be ;iquid water oceans. This is ging to require the transfer of water from other planets; either by creating water in domes on the planet or immersing our ships in the water ocean and opening the hold hatches. Either way it will be a huge effort.

I think for play-ability purposes, we can assume that the atmosphere or oceans on existing planets will tend to regenerate; we are after all removing a very small percentage of either. I also think that the same can be assumed for the newly terraformed planet; once temperature and gravity are under control, the algae should be able to compensate.

Let us not forget that terraforming a planet should take several game months to complete. It is not a project that could or should be completeable by just a few players; it needs to be a total community project. With the size of the player-base as it is at this time, I think it should take upwards of a year with all players concentrating on one planet.
User avatar
User

davh62

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1376

Joined

Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:40 pm

Location

UK

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby davh62 » Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:41 pm

I thought one of the requirements for a system to be suitable was already having a h2o ocean? Ram can you confirm please?
FG Fighters Guild Founder
Senator of Ferrite-Senator of Prime-Senator of Barons Rest- Hater of rams speaking date stamp
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

732

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby RAM » Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:18 pm

davh62 wrote:I thought one of the requirements for a system to be suitable was already having a h2o ocean? Ram can you confirm please?


It all chains together.

First, we have to get the rad level right. This will bring the temp to a range that will settle all h2o in the atmosphere into liquid water. Once that is done, then algae can grow in the oceans that convert the atmosphere gasses like domes do for us now. The issue is the carbon and junk we vent now can not be vented but hauled out. So look at your dome commands. Any vent command shows what has to be hauled out of the atmosphere. Then we will have to figure out how much additional filler will be needed.

Filler gasses are h2o and n2 presently. Any h2o in the atmosphere should liquefy, so that leaves us with basically n2.

Some planets have a lot of n trapped in nh3, but I have SELDOM seen one with the levels needed to fill the atmosphere with 80% n2. This means a LOT of hauling in from some planets with very high levels of n2 in the atmo.

Terraforming this way will not take months, but year/s. DO NOT think this will be an easy thing.

Yes, planet selection will be key. The game was never designed to have massive amounts of planets terraformed. A terraformed planet is supposed to be the exception, not the rule.

Presently, rad emitters and shields are not affecting planet temperature yet. This has to be added yet. I reminded Jam of that a few weeks ago. I suspect it will go in with Algae.

I will be getting with Jam on all this. I will send him an email today about the process. I hope he is not too drained and can do some work on Ascent this weekend. One I hear from him, I will share what I find out.
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Lt Commander

Lt Commander
Posts

306

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Comments to RAMs update on development

Postby Loke » Thu May 17, 2018 10:27 am

Loke wrote:
RAM wrote:Crowdfund a Class 16 AND class 17 Freighter. These will really be needed for terraforming. These two will be the same design, but just different size hulls.

Bigger ships are needed, actually I have been thinking about what size would be adding most to the game, and I think we can skip the class 16, I dont see it useful if we get a 17. And we need a class 17, not just for terraforming but to have ship size that catches up with the increase in hauling, production, trading etc since the class 15 ship was released. No idea what terraforming brings though, might bring a need for class 18 or 19 :shock:


Ive changed my mind when it comes to ship sizes. A class 16 ship would actually be very useful for mining, as the Lev is just to small for tin mining. The 16 wouldnt be that much slower to turn than the Lev and would be fine for tin mining. Also several players already have the modules made for the class 16, would be such a waste of nio and tin if those never will be used.
Still think we can skip one class, since there is little use for a ship at every class. Its better the second ship is class 18 or 19 (whichever suits best the need for terraforming). I certainly would love to get a big jump in cargo space, Lev feels so tiny when 1 colony produces >100 Lev loads of carbon per day :lol:
Note: by ship class I only refer to cargo space (16=400k, 17=800k, 18=1600k and so on), if a freigther type ship with higher cargo space then normal for its class, that works just as well.


Terraforming and atmospehere.
Most efficient in game way of gathering the gas we need, as far as I know, is using domes to store what we want. Setting up lots of domes on a colony with lots of wharehouses should be able to output 100 million tons per day, which my npc fleet can move to the planet being terraformed. So to move all the gas needed for an atmosphere like we have on earth, that would take 140 million years to do. So I really hope algae brings another way of fixing the atmosphere than hauling it there :o
Callsign: Fraaggii or Loke
Senator Loke of Primo Spe, 8086, New Horizon, Skadi, Darkfield and Niu Heimar

Statistics for Nio and Tin prices: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3427
Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB ® | Style by KomiDesign | Modified by Chris Valleriani