This object is in archive! 

The new blocks are not useful. A short essay on my experience with the public test.

Zachary Hutchison shared this feedback 22 months ago
Declined

I want the new blocks to enable greater creative flexibility, more than I want "progression." Balance should be prioritized only after this.

I was most excited for the new small batteries and was sourly disappointed with them in the test. They should be either A; only slightly less energy-dense than the old batteries to account for the greater surface area of the "shell" around the smaller batteries, B; the same energy-density, or, C; more energy-dense and later in the progression, since batteries become more energy-dense (smaller) as technology progresses. I was excited for small batteries because they could enable my compact builds to become even more compact. As they were balanced in the test, I couldn't find them useful for anything. There is no way to salvage power cells, thus, there is no way to acquire more of them until a basic assembler is built. Essentially, they are made redundant from the moment they are available by the bigger--better battery we already had.

As for the hydrogen engine, I didn't expect much (I already consider hydrogen "low tech,") but I still managed to be disappointed by their max power output. I had hoped it would mirror the natural balance of the thrusters, with hydrogen being able to output oodles of energy, while consuming fuel inconveniently fast. Also, without a smaller hydrogen container I didn't find it useful later on. A player is forced to work with the tiny amount of fuel the engine holds, or strap a water tower onto their build. I'm holding out hope that this will be one of the surprises alluded to. Arbitrarily limiting options isn't balance. Pressure vessels are an especially basic technology to be limiting so severely in a sci-fi setting. On this count, I accuse Keen of laziness.

I did not test the wind turbine, as I tested the new moon rover start. Which worked great, except for a major bottleneck when trying to power my first large grid, revolving around the pre-existing inability to salvage powercells.

In conclusion, the new progression felt forced where before there was a natural progression. I believe there exists a balance to be found that will both support your ideas for progression while maintaining the usefulness of the new blocks beyond a new game start. Releasing new blocks that will only be useful at the very start of a new game seems like a waste of your efforts. That said, thank you for all of your hard work! Space Engineers is a great game with even greater potential!

Comments (3)

photo
2

FWIW, the small battery is more for drone/satellite/torpedo builds, and something we've been clamoring for for quite some time. It's also good for hydrogen craft where the 2x3 battery to keep the lights on isn't nearly as important as the hydrogen storage, and where a hydrogen engine would be sucking up valuable thrust fuel.

However, I absolutely agree with the need for a smaller hydrogen tank. Maybe a 2x2x4?

photo
4

I was thinking more like 1x1x2 tanks for both oxygen and hydrogen. Perhaps make the existing tanks interchangeable in settings, since they are just pressure vessels after all. Then there would be 3 different tank sizes for both o2 and h2 for a minimal amount of work.

photo
4

a smaller hydrogen tank for small ships too would prove useful the 5x5 is too big adding the oxy gen is the only option for small ships, also I would see a large hydro engine useful on small blocks that model would look great on a rover size 3x3x6 and a bigger large grid one could be cool too

photo
1

Progression comes from learning life's limitations and experiencing its triumph and fortunes, and surviving its trials and tribulations. Mainly, it usually just means, surviving yourself!

photo
photo
3

The hydrogen engine runs just fine directly connected to a H2/O2 generator. I flew the new large grid starter ship around for hours in the "Learning To Survive" scenario. The new batteries also work as intended. They are more for drones and the like. Again there are at least two drones in "Learning To Survive". One is to teach you how to build a drone. The other is a SPRT drone you need to fight. They both flew around on ion thrusters and didn't seem to be suffering any power issues.

The smaller battery also makes for a more flexible building style. It may have less energy density. Can't say that I noticed. But that would be the price to pay for the greater flexibility.

If you don't like the progression system. I believe it can be turned off in the game settings.

photo
1

Hello, Engineer!


Thank you very much for you feedback.


We really appreciate all of the suggestions, ideas, and bug reports we receive from our amazing community, as we truly believe that this feedback combined with our own design philosophies help us to create better games for everyone.


While we can’t always implement all of the ideas we receive, we’d like to let you know that your feedback and passion for Space Engineers hasn’t gone unnoticed.


Kind regards,


The Space Engineers Team

photo
2

What exactly is your design philosophy?

From what I can tell it's,

"Arbitrary limitation > Creative flexibility."

It would explain alot.

photo
2

This is just a standard reply which is quite apparent in this case as it doesnt make any sense in the context of this threat. Which looks kinda lazy and disrespectful as a response for the time the customers invest to give detailed feedback on their work.


You could get the impression that Keen is not really interested in feedback and suggestions that do not match what they want themself. In so many threats and players are asking for smaller hydrogen tanks and right now you could get the impression that they are all just being ignored looking at the "solution" by a bigger internal tank for the hydro engine.

photo
2

@Mornedhel Part of me is still hoping that they're just trying not to spoil one of the "surprises" in the update, that "completed" actually means completed (like they keep marking on the small hydrogen tank threads.) The other part is assuming any surprises remaining will me just as questionable as every other decision made in this update. They had good basic ideas, but their "design philosophies" seem to be negatively effecting their decisions.

photo
2

Another implementation of this cookie cutter response.

photo