Author Topic: Coolant Systems need addressing  (Read 3844 times)

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Coolant Systems need addressing
« on: April 02, 2011, 11:05:51 AM »
I think the current implementation of the coolant system is making game balance much less interesting, as it forces fewer, larger weapons on ships.


at the moment, a 0.25 coolant system gives somthing in the region of a 1.88x fire rate multiplier at minimal cost.

making it larger changes this very little, so the optimal size is 0.25.

weapons without a coolant system are much weaker, so players tend to place a 0.25 coolant on all of their weapons (unless rack mounted). this places this bias towards single large weapons over multiple small ones (since less space is wasted on coolant systeming each weapon if you only have 1-2 weapons)

it also means weapons that are not affected by the coolant system are at a huge disadvantage (missile rack).


I suggest a reform:

1) linear benefit of fire-rate increase with size. eg. 25% increase per 0.25 coolant system.

2) exponential energy & control costs, so tiny ones are cheap to run while large (4x-5x fire-rate) are very expensive. This prevents abuse using a single large weapon (4-5x a 5.0 scale weapon = madness) and makes using lots of smaller weapons slightly less of a penalty (because small coolant systems are cheap to run).

3) weapons that cannot be fitted with a coolant system should not be penalised too steeply.

I implemented this ingame to test it and the results look very pleasing!
the basis of the formula I used is
Quote
vDelayFactor: 1 + (Scale / Object.Scale))

in other words, a 0.25 coolant gives a 25% increase in fire-rate;
a scale 4 rack gives a coolant 400% increase in fire rate.

to balance this out:
       
Quote
Consumes:
      To Run:
         Power[(Size * 10) * (Scale / Object.Scale)]
   
   Requires:
      To Run: Control[Size * 5 * (Scale / Object.Scale)]

the effect of this is that a scale 4 coolant system requires 64x more energy than a scale 0.25... that is a significant energy cost.

the result is that depending on how much space you want to dedicate to power and fuel, either tiny coolants and multiple weapons or a single large weapon with a large coolant are potentially legitimate options- no more 'slap down a 4.0 weapon, put on a 0.25 coolant system job done', now there are decisions to make :)

I have attatched the modified files to this post in a zip file if you want to try them out;
 
Star Ruler\Game Data\Sub Systems\weapons.txt and
Star Ruler\Game Data\scripts\server\subSysAlterations.as

any thoughts?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2011, 12:14:20 PM by Superking »
I Make the Bread

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2011, 11:10:55 AM »
also, I had an idea (pending) that rack mounts should instead be used to increase alpha (increase the reload time of weapons) at a small loss of DPS (5% per 0.25 step?) so that the two components are more distinct that largely fits with this, but I havnt figured out the .as files enough to implement it yet  :)
« Last Edit: April 03, 2011, 05:48:48 AM by Superking »
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2011, 11:20:25 AM »
That is very interesting. To be honest, the way coolant systems work has been bothering me for a long time now. I will experiment with the formulas you suggested when I get the chance.

Foraven

  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1591
  • Karma: +102/-6
  • Fear the gauss weapons!
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2011, 11:28:14 AM »
Yeah, second that. The coolant system need reworking and Superking idea seem way better. Though the 4x version may makes very OP weapons...
Maker of FRB mod.

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2011, 12:10:09 PM »
Yeah, second that. The coolant system need reworking and Superking idea seem way better. Though the 4x version may makes very OP weapons...

you would need a good sized antimatter gen to run it though, the upper end energy costs are brutalitity
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2011, 12:57:29 PM »
the effect of this is that a scale 4 coolant system requires 64x more energy than a scale 0.25... that is a significant energy cost.

Just noticed... Isn't it 16x the power consumption of scale 0.25? I suck at math, but I'm pretty sure 0.25 * 16 = 4.

T-Bone Biggins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2011, 09:44:59 PM »
Coolant systems are useless in anything larger than .25 size, very true. This bugs me. I think it's needs a much larger bonus per scale of size the coolant system goes up, and make the initial bonus a bit less. Think, a giant coolant can make a railgun fire a little over twice as fast but takes up as much space as a 2nd gun itself would. This is compensated by extra energy usage, so when used proper the ship would have higher DPS if you got excess energy in the current design.

What also bugs me is rack mounts. Their formula is just weird, sometimes you go to a scale 1 rack mount on a .25 scale gun and it's say 150dps, but then go to 1.75 and you got like 500dps. I think a rack mount needs to change but can't say how.

My idea would be to split the rackmount into 2 sub-groups, multi-barrel modification or racks. Racks would simply be taking the gun and putting a few of them on a rack like the quad-AA cannons in real life. The Multi-barrel mod would simply be making the weapon use energy to spin multiple barrels at a high cyclic rate but needs smaller ammunition. So, a Rackmount would give more damage per shot and less ammo consumption in comparison to barrel mod which would do much higher DPS in less space but needs much more ammunition to maintain. Can't make formulas for this in my head yet, I'm too tired but does anyone get the idea?

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2011, 10:36:15 PM »
Just noticed... Isn't it 16x the power consumption of scale 0.25? I suck at math, but I'm pretty sure 0.25 * 16 = 4.

16x the power consumption of 0.25 * (Scale / Object.Scale)] = 64x @ 4.0 scale
« Last Edit: April 02, 2011, 10:38:36 PM by Superking »
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #8 on: April 03, 2011, 04:19:02 AM »
16x the power consumption of 0.25 * (Scale / Object.Scale)] = 64x @ 4.0 scale

Ah, you're right. Sorry, I totally forgot to factor in the increase in Size as well. :)

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2011, 05:35:00 AM »
yeah baby, that simple math took me about 2 hours  ;D/ :(
I Make the Bread

Drone

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #10 on: April 03, 2011, 08:35:00 AM »
It needs to have some function of level in it (I think coolant uses particle physics or is it energy sciences? Can't remember) Or they'll pretty much be working at max effectiveness all game.

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2011, 08:36:41 AM »
yeah, I think the best thing to do would be use tech advancement to decrease the energy cost (rather than increase the fire-rate even more), I'll upload a fix later
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2011, 04:37:59 AM »
yeah, I think the best thing to do would be use tech advancement to decrease the energy cost (rather than increase the fire-rate even more), I'll upload a fix later

Did a bit of number crunching today. How about this:

Code: [Select]
Consumes:
To Run:
Power[Size * 10 * (Scale / Object.Scale) * (0.5 + decay(pow(LEVEL_GAIN_CURVE,Level), 10))]
   
Requires:
To Run: Control[Size * 5 * (Scale / Object.Scale) * (0.5 + decay(pow(LEVEL_GAIN_CURVE,Level), 10))]

Haven't actually tried it yet, but I'll report back once I know if it works as intended.

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2011, 05:54:51 AM »
I'll try yours out when I get home

I upped the powercost to 20 and kept the exponential nature of my first forumla in my recent developments  ;D so long as the linear benefit/scale remains it needs to become prohibitively costly to run coolant systems after they hit 1-2 scale, at least, until you have more powerful reactors - at scale 2 a coolant is increasing reload speed by 300%, and that shouldnt come cheap! I removed the exponential control cost also, and reduced benefit to 20%/step instead of 25%

result:

Quote
System: CoolantSys
   Name: #SS_COOLANT_NAME
   Description: #SS_COOLANT_DESC
   Appearance: CoolantSystem   

   Tags: Link
   Tied To: EnergyPhysics 1
   
   Available: Techs.EnergyPhysics.Level > 0
   Level: Techs.EnergyPhysics.Level
   Size: Scale
   HPLevel: Techs.Materials.Level-1 As Level
   Durability: 30 * Size * pow(HEALTH_CURVE,HPLevel) * HEALTH_MULT
   Mass: 50 * Size
   
   Costs: Metals[150 * Size], Electronics[5 * Size], AdvParts[25 * Size], Labr[5 * Size]
   Complexity: 0.5
   
   vDelayFactor: 1 + (0.8 * (Scale / Object.Scale))
   Alters: subSysAlterations::alterFiringDelay[vDelayFactor]

   Consumes:
      To Run:
         Power[(Size * 20) * (Scale / Object.Scale) / (1 + decay(pow(LEVEL_GAIN_CURVE,Level), 25))]
   
   Requires:
      To Run: Control[Size * 5]
   
   Hints: Local/FireSpeedUp[vDelayFactor]

interestingly, while the ability to increase the DPS of a weapon by 2x or more might seem overpowered, the energy costs are crippling and the advanced parts cost of coolant systems is already so high that it is really not that viable

edit: * (0.5 + decay(pow(LEVEL_GAIN_CURVE,Level), 10))

wait, am I missing somthing or does that increase energy cost with tech?

« Last Edit: April 05, 2011, 06:12:47 AM by Superking »
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2011, 06:32:28 AM »
edit: * (0.5 + decay(pow(LEVEL_GAIN_CURVE,Level), 10))

wait, am I missing somthing or does that increase energy cost with tech?

No, it does decrease the cost because decay decreases from 1 to almost 0 as LGC^Level increases. Once it hits the half point (which is 10 here) it's already down to 0.5, giving a 1.0 multiplier to the base cost (0.5 + 0.5).

More importantly, I finally got around to testing your firing rate increase formula, and it actually DECREASED the firing rate (not just in the blueprint window; the bigger the coolant system, the slower the firing rate). I'm using this now and it works:

Code: [Select]
vDelayFactor: 1 / (1 + (Scale / Object.Scale))
This is because the delay is multiplied by vDelayFactor; thus, a higher value means longer delay.

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2011, 08:45:32 AM »
is that using the Star Ruler\Game Data\scripts\server\subSysAlterations.as I provided?

I changed the relationship from / into * as it made a linear relationship easier to implement
I Make the Bread

eRe4s3r

  • Contributor
  • Distracted
  • *
  • Posts: 427
  • Karma: +76/-0
    • View Profile
    • My DA Gallery
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2011, 10:00:00 AM »
to be honest i always thought mods should do this to begin with. Its not just Coolant sys.

Small subsystem should have SUPER SMALL effect - higher scale should exponentially increase efficiency /and energy/crew req
.- Proud member of the Initiative for Bigger Weapons EV. - Bringer of Additive Blended Doom -.

halfabandaid

  • Sentient
  • **
  • Posts: 56
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2011, 10:18:05 AM »
What I would recommend is overhauling the heat system. I think the game would benefit greatly if you could fire a few shots, and then the guns overheat, so you have to wait a bit. However, if you do have a coolant system on a gun, it can fire more shots before overheating. However, when it over heats, it doesn't just stop, its firing rate halves or something of the nature.

Lot of work, but I think it would be cool.

eRe4s3r

  • Contributor
  • Distracted
  • *
  • Posts: 427
  • Karma: +76/-0
    • View Profile
    • My DA Gallery
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2011, 10:40:56 AM »
overheating could also give chance to start a fire on that subsystem that spreads on adjacent ones. If ammo stores or fuel stores catch fire - BOOM ;p ;D

That'd be awesome imo ;P
.- Proud member of the Initiative for Bigger Weapons EV. - Bringer of Additive Blended Doom -.

Totallyunderpowered

  • Sentient
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Karma: +15/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2011, 10:51:57 AM »
If ammo stores or fuel stores catch fire - BOOM ;p ;D

That'd be awesome imo ;P

Please please, there are no fires in space!

Superking

  • Distracted
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +27/-7
  • Ohhhh Jobi
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2011, 11:09:47 AM »
I need some help as I am finding my ability to understand the .as files insufficent.
I'm trying to change the rack mount so it increases the reload delay and increases the damage/shot by 25%, but I fail at making custom subsys stuff work ingame... if someone could hero on in and implement a subSysAlterations that has these two effects and attatch it to a post I would be filled with respect and awe :)

What I would recommend is overhauling the heat system. I think the game would benefit greatly if you could fire a few shots, and then the guns overheat, so you have to wait a bit. However, if you do have a coolant system on a gun, it can fire more shots before overheating. However, when it over heats, it doesn't just stop, its firing rate halves or something of the nature.

Lot of work, but I think it would be cool.

one for the mods
« Last Edit: April 05, 2011, 11:14:44 AM by Superking »
I Make the Bread

XTRMNTR2K

  • Modder Extraordinaire
  • Delusional
  • ****
  • Posts: 1564
  • Karma: +178/-2
  • I aim to misbehave.
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2011, 12:28:35 PM »
is that using the Star Ruler\Game Data\scripts\server\subSysAlterations.as I provided?

I changed the relationship from / into * as it made a linear relationship easier to implement

Oh, sorry about that; I was implementing it into the current GA Development Build, and we haven't changed the cooling system script as far as I know.

Anyhow, it does work just fine and makes a lot more sense than the original implementation of the cooling system. Great work! :)

TGS

  • Sentient
  • **
  • Posts: 107
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #22 on: April 06, 2011, 02:42:28 PM »
I think a system like that would generally make weapons more complicated than they need to be. Why have them overheat? Weapons fire at a certain rate then stop for a few seconds then resume would be no different to adding a certain additional delay between shots. Considering there are situations where ships die in seconds I wouldn't want to get a few shots off then have to wait for my guns to cool down.

What I would recommend is overhauling the heat system. I think the game would benefit greatly if you could fire a few shots, and then the guns overheat, so you have to wait a bit. However, if you do have a coolant system on a gun, it can fire more shots before overheating. However, when it over heats, it doesn't just stop, its firing rate halves or something of the nature.

Lot of work, but I think it would be cool.

eRe4s3r

  • Contributor
  • Distracted
  • *
  • Posts: 427
  • Karma: +76/-0
    • View Profile
    • My DA Gallery
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #23 on: April 06, 2011, 03:39:13 PM »
Obviously have them overheat so a COOLANT system has a reason of existence - and another system does what the coolant system does now - every subsystem should have a reason of existence so that not one is the "ultimate" system. Clearly coolant 0.25 is what every weapon benefits most in this game, as of now. There isn't even a a point to scale it up
.- Proud member of the Initiative for Bigger Weapons EV. - Bringer of Additive Blended Doom -.

Thy Reaper

  • BMS Lead Developer
  • BMS Administrator
  • Hopeless
  • *
  • Posts: 3237
  • Karma: +397/-8
    • View Profile
    • Blind Mind Studios
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #24 on: April 07, 2011, 06:13:48 PM »
Before we put out the next patch very soon, I'll rework the coolant system, and I'll probably take some of your original suggestions, Superking.

Slammer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2011, 12:49:54 PM »
Has this been modified because i don't see it on the change logs

elwood612

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Coolant Systems need addressing
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2011, 12:59:08 PM »
Quote
[Balance] Reworked Coolant System to cause more significant increases in weapon firing rates, but also dramatically increase running costs for the connected weapon.

That's from Patch 1.0.7.2 changelog.
The statement below is false.

The statement above is true.