Page 1 of 2

On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 6:46 am
by firecage
Do we really need round ending engines like the Tesla and Singularity, engines which can easily be released within minutes of the start of the round? And once released, has a high chance of either killing everyone, destroying everyone, or most often a combination of both(And don't even get me started on the fucking singularity beacon)

Wouldn't it be better to move towards less destructive engines, like the TEG from Goon, or the Supermatter engine like on Birdboat?

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:34 am
by Limey
Singulo is the embodiment of SS13. Remove it and the game's a clown-filled husk

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:47 am
by Incomptinence
I like them being released but I miss the engine getting out and just not mattering sometimes like oh hey the singulo left recall. The ramping up of their deadliness doesn't really add much old singulo motor boated the station you still got the fuck out.

Mass murder is fine when my environmental code baby does it!

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:39 am
by letshavecake
The singularity has traditionally been the most important thing to get running on the station
And also the most dangerous
And the easiest to fuck up
And the most boring
Something is horrifically wrong there

The only reason the sing is so godawful is because all of those things combine to make it impossible to change
If you want to make the sing more fun to work with, people will complain that you're adding more busywork to something that already sucks
If you want to make it harder to fuck up, people will complain that you're removing practically the only thing the job is there to do in the first place
If you want to make it less dangerous, people will complain that one department being able to accidentally destroy the entire station is somehow core to the experience
And of course few people even want to do code for something so uninteresting anyway

This is all so bad, people are so afraid to change the sing, that the only way to even modify any of this even a tiny bit requires you to make it an entirely new kind of engine that works practically the same, like we saw with the tesla

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:30 am
by oranges
Firecage going full kicking rad place to be

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:47 am
by Lumbermancer
Don't do this Jimmy.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:46 pm
by CPTANT
To be honest I have thought the same.

And usually the tesla or sing isnt even that destructive, but rather functions as an immediate CALL SHUTTLE NO RE device.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:57 pm
by D&B
You're asking for non destructive engines and really used birdboat's SM engine as an example?

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:10 pm
by PKPenguin321
Extremely h u g b o x trash. How have we fallen so far?

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:25 pm
by Okand37
I can only snicker at this from the sidelines, as I get ready to deploy deltastation that has both a supermatter and a conventional tesla/singularity engine.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:26 pm
by CPTANT
I don't think the singularity or tesla is that dangerous without beacon to begin with.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:07 pm
by Incomptinence
I just want maybe not a shuttle call when they get out. Machines literally attract the tesla so that one can never go away and I stand by old singulo.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:17 pm
by Anonmare
Honestly if the singulo get's loose within 5-8 minutes it should probably auto-call the shuttle because the alternative is to just smash the consoles and wait 25 minutes which ain't a lot of fun for anyone

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:51 pm
by iamgoofball
Engines being WMDs are a requirement and a core part of engine design philosophy

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:01 pm
by pubby
why hasn't anyone made the solars deadly yet

PACMAN too

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:22 pm
by iamgoofball
someone should get on that, I should be able to cause solar flares with solars

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:21 am
by Screemonster
The issue here might be that for all the departments that have ways to deliberately destroy huge amounts of the station and its crew (singuloose, plasmaflood, killer viruses, toxins bombs, megafauna, and so on) the engine is the only one that routinely happens accidentally.
Like, it's the only one that people assume "incompetent engineer" before "deliberate sabotage".

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:41 am
by iamgoofball
why is that a bad thing

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 1:42 am
by Screemonster
It isn't, it's just that because it's the only one that can happen without people really going out of their way to do it, it's the one that gets people yelling "I ded pls nerf".

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 1:51 pm
by Arianya
As an alternative take on this, how about giving people the means to combat released singulos/teslas? I know about the whole bag of holding in a small singulo but that only works up until a certain size and generally singulo will grow beyond that stage in the time it takes R&D to find out about the singulo, which is to say nothing of the fact that bags of holding are pretty hard to tech up into.

Something like a portable particle accelerator for singulo that requires you to dance on the edge of the singulo but with enough particles will cause the singularity to collapse in on itself. Something involving capturing energy for the tesla.

Basically, they'll still have extreme damage potential and the potential to go totally out of control and destroy the station, but the engines getting released won't be a round-ending event in and of itself.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:54 pm
by Cik
THE ROOT PROBLEM IS THE ENGINEERING BURNOUT LOOP

for reference engineering burnout loop:

>there is nothing to do in engineering, so no experienced players play engineer exclusively like other jobs
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers
>therefore, no one trusts the engineers to fix anything
>therefore, the shuttle is called if there is minor damage to the station because no one trusts the engineers
>therefore, new engineers never get any experience
>therefore, engineers get bored
>therefore, engineers go do something else
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers

>as a consequence, nothing is ever added for engineers to do because engineers are never competent enough to handle engine basics because of step 2

as a consequence, the whole thing repeats indefinitely

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:27 pm
by yackemflam
Why not just have broken shit all over the station.
With (maybe) a 50% chance to be shortcircuted.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:36 pm
by Limey
Here's a better idea:

Make everything 200% more deadly

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:54 pm
by onleavedontatme
Cik wrote:THE ROOT PROBLEM IS THE ENGINEERING BURNOUT LOOP

for reference engineering burnout loop:

>there is nothing to do in engineering, so no experienced players play engineer exclusively like other jobs
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers
>therefore, no one trusts the engineers to fix anything
>therefore, the shuttle is called if there is minor damage to the station because no one trusts the engineers
>therefore, new engineers never get any experience
>therefore, engineers get bored
>therefore, engineers go do something else
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers

>as a consequence, nothing is ever added for engineers to do because engineers are never competent enough to handle engine basics because of step 2

as a consequence, the whole thing repeats indefinitely
This is not actually the loop.

The real sequence of events is

>something gets broken
>it will take 40-50 minutes to repair it when the average round only lasts an hour
>it will take 15 minutes to just call the shuttle and reset the round and there is literally zero incentive to keep the station going

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:06 pm
by TehSteveo
Kor wrote:
Cik wrote:THE ROOT PROBLEM IS THE ENGINEERING BURNOUT LOOP

for reference engineering burnout loop:

>there is nothing to do in engineering, so no experienced players play engineer exclusively like other jobs
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers
>therefore, no one trusts the engineers to fix anything
>therefore, the shuttle is called if there is minor damage to the station because no one trusts the engineers
>therefore, new engineers never get any experience
>therefore, engineers get bored
>therefore, engineers go do something else
>therefore, there are no experienced engineers

>as a consequence, nothing is ever added for engineers to do because engineers are never competent enough to handle engine basics because of step 2

as a consequence, the whole thing repeats indefinitely
This is not actually the loop.

The real sequence of events is

>something gets broken
>it will take 40-50 minutes to repair it when the average round only lasts an hour
>it will take 15 minutes to just call the shuttle and reset the round and there is literally zero incentive to keep the station going
Pretty much. I mean I've actually seen engineers/atmos/engiborgs/drones do work quite fast but by the time you can fix wiring, APCs, air pipes, disposal pipes, and getting walls rebuilt from say a bomb usually the shuttle is called and there by the time you are halfway through. At which point you realize it was all for naught and hate yourself.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:49 am
by DemonFiren
On the other hand, fast construction is incredibly abusable.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:03 am
by KAP
This is a terrible idea, but what if when a department gets blown the fuck up, it's not there next round.

Like centcom decides that since the crew blew up the science department and evac'd they obviously didn't like it, or need it, so they spend next shift 'Re-designing' R&D, and it's not there next shift.

This way, if engineering dosent fix shit, and the shuttle gets called, people won't have that job.

Edit: this should probably not happen if like the engine gets loose.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:15 am
by DemonFiren
Very tempted to go Cuban Pete all over the station if this is implemented.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 9:45 am
by CPTANT
Lack of incentive to stay is sometimes a problem.

On the other hand we now have the unfortunate situation that boring rounds last long and eventful rounds are short.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:58 pm
by imblyings
fast construction is worth any and all potential abuse

that is an objective fact and can't actually be proven wrong

in fact a related objective fact is that fast construction being potentially abusable is an objectively good thing, you just have to make deconstruction fast too

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:14 pm
by firecage
Re-adding fast construction(and naturally fast deconstruction) would definitely make it WAY more worthwhile.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 10:50 pm
by Luke Cox
G I T G U D
I
T

G
U
D

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:58 pm
by oranges
firecage wrote:Re-adding fast construction(and naturally fast deconstruction) would definitely make it WAY more worthwhile.
>readding

what did he mean by this guys

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2016 12:38 am
by onleavedontatme
There used to be far shorter delays on most construction and deconstruction actions, and some didn't have delays at all.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2016 1:08 am
by Dagdammit
Bear in mind that the sing and tesla add alot to the engineering experience purely through the fact that they COULD destroy the station if you fucked up. That makes them more intimidating+interesting to deal with.

I feel like the core issues are twofold.

-No effective way to respond once sing is loose. I'd say there's a simple solution: Make a reskin of the syndicate power beacon. Place one in engineering secure storage and two others in similarly secure emergency storage locations at the SE and W-by-SW extremities of station (and the NE and SE ends of metastation?).
-Virtually no point to having lots of power. If you follow the boring paint-by-numbers guide to setting up engine, you supply all the power a station will ever need forever. Literally all the mechanics are in place to instead make a setup that delivers 10x that amount of power, it is THE primary thing a robust engineer can use their skills to do, and in practice it's damn near pointless- unless you're antag and wire everything straight to the grid so you can kill people via electrocution. Imagine what R&D would be like if it was impossible to Protolathe anything with a Tech Origin (any category) greater than 2. So you COULD spend more than 10 minutes on it and get research levels maxed, but there was literally zero benefit to do doing so. That is exactly the situation Engineering's in and it sucks ASS. There needs to be stuff you can DO with all that power.
--One simple place to start: Give alot of the items in Engineering Secure Storage (especially Emitters and Anti-Breach Shielding Projectors) the option to crank their range up to INSANE levels (as much as like 40 tiles) in exchange for proportionally massive spike in their power draw.

And two other simple things that would do alot to give engineering rounds some interesting variety (It's been a while, so let me know if either of these has been changed already)
-300% more mice spawn points, with at least two in EVERY hallway section of maintenance (anything separated by a door is a different section). Each spawn point has only a 25% chance of actually spawning a mouse.
-With some exceptions (probably just trajectories that would release the tesla+sing or miss the station), the invisible rod event should travel in a random direction (vertical OR horizontal) and hit a random stretch of the station. And it should DESPAWN WHEN IT LEAVES THE STATION Z-LEVEL, not loop through the station repeatedly.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:52 pm
by firecage
No, seriously though. Round Ending engines can go die in a Ditch. I would really prefer we replace them with something else. And seriously? What bloody asshole made the Tesla be even more deadly? It really didn't need to be made worse so it also causes explosions everywhere.

Atleast add more reliable tools which we can use to either limit the damage of the engines, or destroy them. And no, a Bag of Holding isn't a reliable method, since in nearly every round where the SInguloth is loose, there are no Bags of Holdings, and even then they are very unreliable. And Tesla Coils for the Tesla is pretty useless aswell.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:17 pm
by Cik
engineering just needs coder attention

what was the last thing that was even added to engineering? the goofball, which paid attention to the part of engineering that least needs attention.

the core part of engineering, that of producing / storing / providing energy to the station, and fixing things is "fleshed out" but not really in a way that actually interacts with the station. having power above sustainment is useless, and fixing things is also pointless because >lol escape shuttle if there's a two tile breach because i'm not antag this round

research, botany, and medical must be changed so that they take a significant amount of energy. in particular lots of problems with other departments like >sleepers too easy >telescience too broken >research too powerful >whatever can be fixed by "actually requires power"

>re-add telescience as a roundstart thing but it requires 500 million watts per teleport or whatever
>make the AI core process require power; give friendly AIs hacked modules in trade for absurd amounts of power
>lessen how "free" sleepers are by making them require power from medbay APC per chem used
>botany requires tonsapower but gets bonuses to growing things by using lots of power
>cargo can sell supercharged SMES cells for points
>research can get more per item if using lots of power for decon
etc etc

the fact that this stuff isn't in the game already is a crime tbh

how fucking cool would that be

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:49 pm
by Saegrimr
Cik wrote:research, botany, and medical must be changed so that they take a significant amount of energy.
Passively increasing power consumption means nothing when power generation is also passive.

Cik wrote: >re-add telescience as a roundstart thing but it requires 500 million watts per teleport or whatever
>make the AI core process require power; give friendly AIs hacked modules in trade for absurd amounts of power
>lessen how "free" sleepers are by making them require power from medbay APC per chem used
>botany requires tonsapower but gets bonuses to growing things by using lots of power
>research can get more per item if using lots of power for decon
All this is going to mean is lights flickering constantly and people complaining until the AI just force turns equipment power on instead of auto.

Cargo selling batteries back to centcom is the best idea here, but still mostly a benefit for Cargo at the cost of Engineering doing more work.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 11:34 pm
by kevinz000
Make it like FTL where you can charge bonus things.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 3:33 am
by Cik
it means there is incentive to actually engineer things. something desperately needed because, you know, there isn't any at the moment.

if you want to add a supercharger system to APCs so that things in the effected room require 4x the power but have 4x the output or whatever that'd be cool too but that would require more work than adding standalone benefits to various
departments

also a power allocation console that can select which departments receive no power, adequate power or extra power, thx

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:04 pm
by CPTANT
The sing is boring because there is no counter play, it means inevitable end of the round. The only things that CAN stop it are so infeasible that they might as well not exist.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:46 pm
by Cik
the counterplay is locking the emitters, watching the containment field against tampering, checking the camera every now and then, making the power supply triple redundant, etc.

you might say "no one does these things" but that's really just a symptom of the problem; the problem being there is literally nothing to fucking DO in engineering past 3 minutes in so no one sticks around.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:47 pm
by Saegrimr
Bombing/throwing a BoH into the singulo used to be a pretty legitimate strategy.

Does it just not work anymore or do people not know you can?

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:52 pm
by Cik
AFAIK it still works but most time the sing goes rogue are like ~15 minutes in due to engineering failures and BOH is a rarity at that time

or, well, the BOH is the source of the rogue singularity, so whoever controls the pile of them isn't going to do it.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:54 pm
by Incomptinence
Saegrimr wrote:Bombing/throwing a BoH into the singulo used to be a pretty legitimate strategy.

Does it just not work anymore or do people not know you can?
My understanding is the resulting explosions fuck with getting enough bags in on time. Maybe it deletes them maybe it pushes them away whatever.

Just it's statistically improbable to get all the four or so bags you need into it to kill it before it grows back up again.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:22 pm
by Saegrimr
Incomptinence wrote:My understanding is the resulting explosions fuck with getting enough bags in on time. Maybe it deletes them maybe it pushes them away whatever.

Just it's statistically improbable to get all the four or so bags you need into it to kill it before it grows back up again.
I wonder if buffing the effectiveness of that is in order.

That said, there's zero similar counter for the goof ball either aside from just dragging around your own personal lightning rod and staying away from machinery that will blow you up.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:31 pm
by CPTANT
Saegrimr wrote:
Incomptinence wrote:My understanding is the resulting explosions fuck with getting enough bags in on time. Maybe it deletes them maybe it pushes them away whatever.

Just it's statistically improbable to get all the four or so bags you need into it to kill it before it grows back up again.
I wonder if buffing the effectiveness of that is in order.

That said, there's zero similar counter for the goof ball either aside from just dragging around your own personal lightning rod and staying away from machinery that will blow you up.
Throwing a BoH in usually does decrease it by 2 stages or so, which basically does fuck all when its stage 5.

Also it's pretty rare for there to be BoH at all.....

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:37 pm
by PKPenguin321
Yeah, I haven't seen a boh since r&d rework

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 8:03 am
by Incomptinence
Seems to be possible but you need to decon several natural bluespace crystals and decon the night vision goggles for the plasma tech.

Re: On round ending engines

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 1:10 pm
by Gun Hog
Incomptinence wrote:Seems to be possible but you need to decon several natural bluespace crystals and decon the night vision goggles for the plasma tech.
You must deconstruct exactly two bluespace crystals (for BS tech 7. Botany plants only get you to 6. Singularity beacons/wizard tele scrolls are also a possibility), and a phazon torso for plasma 6 (you can also use a glowshroom). Science's ability to get the bags depend on if miners bring back natural bluespace crystals.

Bags of holding simply explode when consumed by a singularity, and that explosion weakens the singularity. It would be impressive to see a hero actually save the station using them!