Page 1 of 1

Fuel Injector & Cargo Ships

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:09 pm
by Sendraks
Would it be possible, to tie the fuel consumption or speed of the injector to the mass of the ship using the injector?

I only ask because, while I know slower ships go slower using the injector than faster ships, the injector does (to my mind) largely negate the disadvantage of the large ships being much smaller. I presume the the injector uses a fixed multiplier on the ships speed when activated, so a slower ship covering the same distance will use more fuel than a faster ship as it takes longer.

However, two ships of the same speed but with different masses will still use the same amount of fuel.

Where I'm going with this is that in combat situations against vessels without the injector, this device allows a commander to control the combat range with great ease. I personally find it valuable against vessels with multiple front mounted military lasers (Hydras, Rattlecutters, Basilisks etc, not so much Imp Couriers or Iguanas), where the injector makes it easy to close range and get behind the attacker. This is easy enough to do in a combat ship as it is a hauler.

Basically my thinking is whether there should be more limiting factors on injector use for the bigger ships. I don't whether this is simple to do or not, but tying the ships mass (the cargo capacity) to the amount of fuel used by the injector? This could force a hauler commander to weigh their options more carefully in a combat situation between fighting and running.

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:26 pm
by Commander McLane
Interesting idea, tying the injector's fuel consumption to ship size. Kind of like it.

However, we also have to reflect what it would mean for NPCs using injectors.

Oh, and as mentioned a couple of times quite recently, the injector indeed uses a fixed multiplier. Injector speed = normal top speed * 7.

Re: Fuel Injector & Cargo Ships

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:27 pm
by Diziet Sma
Sendraks wrote:
Basically my thinking is whether there should be more limiting factors on injector use for the bigger ships. I don't whether this is simple to do or not, but tying the ships mass (the cargo capacity) to the amount of fuel used by the injector? This could force a hauler commander to weigh their options more carefully in a combat situation between fighting and running.
If you're going to do that, it would make more sense to tie it to the actual mass being moved.. an empty or lightly loaded Anaconda ought to be at least somewhat more nimble than one hauling 700 tons of Beanenian lethal brandy...

Re: Fuel Injector & Cargo Ships

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:42 pm
by Sendraks
Diziet Sma wrote:
If you're going to do that....
....I'd have to know what I was doing first. Seriously, most of this scripting stuff is utterly incomprehensible to me, left to my own devices I could set out to create an oxp that modified the fuel consumption of the injector and I'd probably wind up creating something which turns ships bright pink at the press of a button. :?
Diziet Sma wrote:
it would make more sense to tie it to the actual mass being moved.. an empty or lightly loaded Anaconda ought to be at least somewhat more nimble than one hauling 700 tons of Beanenian lethal brandy...
This........is a very good point.

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:50 pm
by Cmdr James
I think it makes sense to use the mass that is disclosed by the appropriate operation on the Entity. Generally when the mass is used, for example is collision damage detection, this is the vaue used, and at some point in the future, I guess it should/could be updated to return a modified value including cargo. This way everything using mass would keep working as is.

Re: Fuel Injector & Cargo Ships

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:01 pm
by Diziet Sma
Sendraks wrote:
left to my own devices I could set out to create an oxp that modified the fuel consumption of the injector and I'd probably wind up creating something which turns ships bright pink at the press of a button. :?
Now THAT sounds like a fun OXP!! when can we expect to see it? :mrgreen: