QNP mk 2

[Phoenix-D]

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..

[Raapys]

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.

[Phoenix-D]

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. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[Raapys]

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?

[Phoenix-D]

It doesn't.

[Phoenix-D]

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.

[President_Elect_Shang]

What line are you using to get the ship to calculate its own weight?

Edited: By line I mean the formula? Have you ever tried to use Get_Vehicle_Size_Tonnage() in the components? I couldn't get it to work for calculating the size or cost of a component.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Next question; what is the difference between:

#1) GETL("X") >= (2 + ([%Lvl%] - 1)
and
#2) GETL("X") >= (1 + ([%Lvl%] - 1)

Which one will make this component appear at X level 2?

[Suicide Junkie]

#1) GETL("X") >= (2 + ([%Lvl%] - 1)
is the same as
GETL("X") >= ([%Lvl%] + 1)
GETL("X") - 1 >= ([%Lvl%])
level 2 tech or better gives level 1

#2) GETL("X") >= (1 + ([%Lvl%] - 1)
is the same as
GETL("X") >= [%Lvl%]
Level 1 tech or better gives level 1

Why Aaron used overcomplicated formulae with spurrious "1 - 1" bits I have no idea.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Good than I don't need to go back and redo everything. I was working away and thought of you and the problem you found ("This game thinks "100 + 5 - 5 - 100 = 0" is False"); stopped, and said "Hay I better ask to make sure before I get to much further along".

[Phoenix-D]

I'm not calculating the tonnage at all. What I'm doing is throwing in Standard Move to every component. So every component has something like this:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Ability 2 Type := Movement Standard
Ability 2 Description := Generates [%Amount1%] standard movement.
Ability 2 Scope := Space Object
Ability 2 Range Formula := 0
Ability 2 Amount 1 Formula := -X
Ability 2 Amount 2 Formula := 0
</pre><hr />

Where X is the tonnage /10.

[President_Elect_Shang]

I take it you don't plan to use any anti-engine weapons? What does stock call them? Found it; Ionic type weapons.

[Baron Munchausen]

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. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Phoenix-D]

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. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

[Suicide Junkie]

Such a system would result in something very unlike QNP...
You're doing subtraction by mass instead of division by mass.

[Phoenix-D]

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..)

[President_Elect_Shang]

Going off topic for just one thought. If we had something like [%String#%] we could deliver variable messages in components like this:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Ability 1 Type := Description Only
Ability 1 Description := [%String1%]
Ability 1 Scope := Space Object
Ability 1 Range Formula := 0
Ability 1 Amount 1 Formula := iif(GETL("X") = 1, "You get this message", "Otherwise you get this")
Ability 1 Amount 2 Formula := 0
</pre><hr />
Now that would be cool! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif
I did try this using [%Amount1%] but it would only return a zero. Gee, what a surprise that was... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

[Raapys]

Aaron's still got alot of work to do to improve modding possibilities. There's shortages and inconsistencies everywhere, which is sort of annoying. Feels very unfinished.

[Suicide Junkie]

Subtraction is nothing like division, PD.
They rapidly diverge.

I'm not saying it can't be a useful mechanic, just that it isn't going to be QNPish.

[Phoenix-D]

That's what I get for doing the math wrong. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif I had the division step in there and it doesn't take effect in game for reasons that should have been obvious.