AOE heat for thrusters, cargo, weapons, etc.

[Frankiebgg123]

This is an idea to combat the fact that any deviation from a box/tube shape feels like you are intentionally weakening your ship.
Any offset sections of the ship feel like a waste of thruster efficiency (since they are not in-line with center of mass) and make it harder to pilot through asteroids.

Quite simply, ship components would produce AOE heat (similar to generator units), in order to encourage you to space them out some how. It doesn't have to be damage based. It could be more like a "power inefficiency" that causes them to require more electricity from the generators or something - so that people's current builds are not totally ruined.

This would make ships looks a lot more interesting and varied, I think.

 

[anton_stezhkin]

The boxes will just turn into boxes, covered with radiators.

 

[Frankiebgg123]

The boxes will just turn into boxes, covered with radiators.

Just keep radiators generator only, like they are now.

 

[Womble]

Just keep radiators generator only, like they are now.

I would rather the heat system be more coherent. It's wonky that you can't cool your guns using the built-in coolant system in the first place.

Forcing thrusters to be spaced out would just slow people down, because of the thrust-drag model: you won't be able to fit as much thruster power to the same rear-pointing cross section.

 

[FrostyFrost]

Forcing people to spread out thrusters would just cause them to build bigger boxes. The real problem is that the game requires more beams/plates that could be used to create different shapes and angles without destroying the warp class. There will always be people that are going to slap a seat to a thruster and call it a ship so instead of trying to discourage that and making it difficult on everyone rather encourage the designers creative side by giving them better tools for their tasks.

 

[Frankiebgg123]

I would rather the heat system be more coherent. It's wonky that you can't cool your guns using the built-in coolant system in the first place.

Sure, just call it Electrical Interference or something instead. My suggestion isn't really about "making things hot", so much as it is about giving players a functional reason to not build their ship in a straight line.

Forcing thrusters to be spaced out would just slow people down, because of the thrust-drag model: you won't be able to fit as much thruster power to the same rear-pointing cross section.

Right, this is the exact reason I suggest this change in the OP. As it is now, anything that isn't a straight line is intentionally making your ship slower for no reward, because of the center-of-thrust and center-of-mass mechanics. There will currently never be a reason to build a ship in any sort of interesting shape.

Forcing people to spread out thrusters would just cause them to build bigger boxes. The real problem is that the game requires more beams/plates that could be used to create different shapes and angles without destroying the warp class. There will always be people that are going to slap a seat to a thruster and call it a ship so instead of trying to discourage that and making it difficult on everyone rather encourage the designers creative side by giving them better tools for their tasks.

On your point about "making it difficult on everyone" - let's try a different flavor with the same nutrients:
Instead of reducing power efficiency for closely stacked components, let's increase power efficiency for components which are spread apart. Current box ships will not change in any way, but ships with spread out components will require less fuel / power to run those components than if they were all on top of each other.

 

[Womble]

Sure, just call it Electrical Interference or something instead. My suggestion isn't really about "making things hot", so much as it is about giving players a functional reason to not build their ship in a straight line.

Unfortunately, your suggestion doesn't do anything of the kind. If they have to space things out, they will still need a "flat back end" because thrusters corrode stuff. Forcing things to be spread out will mean that even if your thrusters only occupy 50% of your rear-facing aspect, you'll have to have them evenly spread, rather than having options like installing them as two big clumps. And still nothing changes with everything forward of the main thruster exhaust plane.

Right, this is the exact reason I suggest this change in the OP. As it is now, anything that isn't a straight line is intentionally making your ship slower for no reward, because of the center-of-thrust and center-of-mass mechanics. There will currently never be a reason to build a ship in any sort of interesting shape.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The CoT&M physics is as it is because of physics. It's a design constraint that has nothing to do with "straight lines" and everything to do with symmetry. Making your ship wider than its main thruster plane is sub-optimal because of asteroid collisions, and, to a lesser extent, target cross section, not CoT&M.

On your point about "making it difficult on everyone" - let's try a different flavor with the same nutrients:
Instead of reducing power efficiency for closely stacked components, let's increase power efficiency for components which are spread apart. Current box ships will not change in any way, but ships with spread out components will require less fuel / power to run those components than if they were all on top of each other.

Deckchair-rearranging, I'm afraid. It'll just obsolete all the current designs anyway, since efficiency is important. Now, that might be as simple to fix as "delete every second thruster from the array", and you'll have changed a bunch of stuff for no real reason.

 

[Frankiebgg123]

Unfortunately, your suggestion doesn't do anything of the kind. If they have to space things out, they will still need a "flat back end" because thrusters corrode stuff. Forcing things to be spread out will mean that even if your thrusters only occupy 50% of your rear-facing aspect, you'll have to have them evenly spread, rather than having options like installing them as two big clumps. And still nothing changes with everything forward of the main thruster exhaust plane.

You could still install them in two big clumps - or one big clump. It would just be a balance of efficiency, size, speed, etc. All of these are currently accomplished simultaneously by making a straight-line box/tube ship as opposed to being a system of trade-offs.

The devs already implemented this exact system of design challenges for generators. But right now, in practice, the numbers just don't make generator heat an issue, imo.

In your example of spreading everything out, you're imagining you need to maximize power efficiency completely. This would lead to a VERY large thruster array - which sounds kinda cool. Like if you had a very long-distance hauler it could be supported by a huge back-end, instead of a compact one. If you did something like that right now, it would just be foolish.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The CoT&M physics is as it is because of physics. It's a design constraint that has nothing to do with "straight lines" and everything to do with symmetry. Making your ship wider than its main thruster plane is sub-optimal because of asteroid collisions, and, to a lesser extent, target cross section, not CoT&M.

I think you understand. What you say here is exactly the reasons I have mentioned in the OP for why a straight box ship is such a dominant design.

Deckchair-rearranging, I'm afraid. It'll just obsolete all the current designs anyway, since efficiency is important. Now, that might be as simple to fix as "delete every second thruster from the array", and you'll have changed a bunch of stuff for no real reason.

Kinda mentioned above, but my intention is specifically to not obsolete box designs. The box will still be superior for the same reasons it is now, and you can pay in fuel or whatever for that advantage. I certainly don't expect FB to implement my 5 sentence idea as is. But the basic idea they use with generator heat is a good one, and I think could be refined and applied to other components to create a balancing act between the desirable features of a ship.