Oolite Bulletins

montana05 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:23 am

However, by using TC for drives there is another way to stop small ships from getting an über-drive.

I try to move away from this approach, because it means that the more TC a ship has, the better it is: more equipment (even without counting OXP equipments that balance the advantage they provide with a TC disadvantage, there's pax berths in the core game), and/or more benefits from trading.

An other way to make small ships more interesting would be to reduce their injector fuel burning rate. Contrary to my first proposal it is (easily) OXP-able, but I believe it has a less "specializing" effect: the better fuel injectors can be used offensively and defensively and has little effect on the ability to execute contract runs - partly because the time spent in the wormholes dominates the time spent on the lane. Maybe dividing the jump times by e.g. 10 for everyone would allow both fuel injectors and ship base speed to play a more significant role in contract runs?

Astrobe wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:50 pm

montana05 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:23 am

However, by using TC for drives there is another way to stop small ships from getting an über-drive.

I try to move away from this approach, because it means that the more TC a ship has, the better it is: more equipment (even without counting OXP equipments that balance the advantage they provide with a TC disadvantage, there's pax berths in the core game), and/or more benefits from trading.

So using ship mass instead of TC would be a better approach. Laser canons already using this kind of selection.

Astrobe wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:50 pm

An other way to make small ships more interesting would be to reduce their injector fuel burning rate.

Good idea imho.

montana05 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:29 am

So using ship mass instead of TC would be a better approach. Laser canons already using this kind of selection.

Sorry, I'm the one conflating them.

Astrobe wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2017 6:46 pm

montana05 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:29 am

So using ship mass instead of TC would be a better approach. Laser canons already using this kind of selection.

Sorry, I'm the one conflating them.

My apologies and thanks for the clarification, I didn't know that it was your brainchild, just considered it as a very useful idea.

Norby wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:30 am

Astrobe wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:50 pm

An other way to make small ships more interesting would be to reduce their injector fuel burning rate.

Good idea imho.

Then what about these rates (default is 0.25)?

- Adder: 0.15 (40% less)
- Moray Star Boat: 0.17 (30% less)
- Cobra I: 0.20 (20% less)
- Fer-de-Lance: 0.20 or 0.17

... and maybe 0.30 (20% more) for Cobra III?

One side effect of the rate reductions is that one can "double-jump" more confidently because being low on fuel after the second jump is less of an issue. So it can indirectly save time if you know your ship well.

I think the best if Cobra III and ships above keep the original rate and light ships can get somewhat more bonuses than you listed.
Moreover we need a formula which can be calculated in js to OXP ships also. For example: This give the oiginal rate to Cobra III and all ships over 200t mass, Moray/Cobra I/Fer-de-Lance get about 50% less and an extremly light (1t) ship get 66% discount.

It's possible to change it with a shipdata-overrides.plist (I've just tested it on the adders' template). It seems to me that it would affect a few core ships only, and OXP ships probably have their own advantages.