[1.1.0.1] Feedback - Gyroscope force changes (Venture gyro nerfed too much)

Saelem Black

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Joined
Aug 25, 2018
Messages
289
Likes
883
Points
205
#21
I would love to see the formula in the code for how gyros work. I suspect that much of the problem has to do with the fact that the gyro formula has an angular term in it somewhere, thus making "cartesian" experiments difficult to interpret.
 

ZeroGravitas

Breaker of Games
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
3,530
Likes
4,641
Points
675
Age
36
Location
UK
Website
www.youtube.com
#22
the gyro maths has been way off like this the whole time, or at least since the GC gyro was in EXP
I was wrong about this, sorry @zanzistar, I lost track with all the twists and turns...

To clarify, in 1.1 (current stable) the GeoCorp torque was 54 blocks. About 257% stronger than it is now. The crazy strength was only in 1.1.0.2. But I'd still say this gyro could stand to go back up more towards where it was... (Matter of opinion.)

Hawkeye gyro got nerfed to half since 1.1, too. (But it's relatively new, so whatever.)

Venture isn't the same as 1.1, it actually got a 50% buff. (When I went back and used a more precise balance with counterbalanced bracket arms.) I'd request that this gets set back down to what it was in 1.1. (a) for continuity and (b) because there is value in having weaker-ish gyros. (As you were exploring.)

And Better Future's got a 100% buff (doubled). As I say this does stop my Tron bike from being able to roll, but whatever.

Here's an updated table, with the old values in too, for comparison:

Cropper2019-05-16-04-01-48-9820037.jpg

man, am I bored of this thread, lol.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Zorgomol

Not a Number
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
198
Likes
351
Points
270
#23
Let's see how many times I'll have to redesign all my hovers because of this juggling back and forth since gyros are the only thing that can keep any hovertech of appreciable mass upright...

Now if only there was something that could somehow keep them moving forwards instead of listing and drifting to whichever non-obvious random direction they want to... but that's off topic for this thread.
 
Likes: Seth_Seth

ZeroGravitas

Breaker of Games
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
3,530
Likes
4,641
Points
675
Age
36
Location
UK
Website
www.youtube.com
#24
Now if only there was something that could somehow keep them moving forwards
How do you mean? Adding an LME or HE rotor would enable continual (low level) thrust forwards. Although it massively screws up the resposiveness of that control axis, of course. Or hover-bug. Or using pitch trim gyros to bias tilt forwards...?

since gyros are the only thing that can keep any hovertech of appreciable mass upright...
You can also have the hover pads higher up than the tech's centre of mass, right? (Looses some clearance.) And if you mean, while on an air anchor, that can be raised up the tech too (but not too high, or it causes feedback oscillations).
 

Wassaup

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
62
Likes
119
Points
71
#25
...Really? ...The gyros are so screwed, so broken beyond repair, that we should just ignore them? Work around them? Well, if that's the case, just roll everything back to 1.1 (except the BF single axis and pitch-trim gyros, those need the buff). I, for one, am perfectly happy with how the gyros perform in the stable branch. If they simply cannot be improved, that's fine by me, and I can't be the only one.
As for the GSO gyro ,the whole reason for this "re-balancing", I remind everyone: just make it exactly as strong as the BF version. Seriously, just copy-paste that crap! No more silly-buggers with the power values! But make it heavier and cheaper than BF, so it still has marit.
 
Likes: Seth_Seth

Zorgomol

Not a Number
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
198
Likes
351
Points
270
#26
How do you mean? Adding an LME or HE rotor would enable continual (low level) thrust forwards. Although it massively screws up the resposiveness of that control axis, of course. Or hover-bug. Or using pitch trim gyros to bias tilt forwards...?
Hover vectoring is braindead so if you have a heavy hovertech on a slope, then hovers will keep pushing at an angle to the slope and no amount of controllable sideways thrust is going to compensate for that, so no matter whichever direction you try to go, the only real option is downhill. And then you'll probably crash on the opposite slope and lose a bunch of outlying parts.

And the stabilizing computer is worthless because people frequantly want to move around. And by extension the heavy hovers are worthless because anything so heavy that would need those is going to be about as graceful and controllable as a pregnant greased whale on a waterslide.
 

Rafs

Collecting the Infinity Terminals
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
158
Likes
707
Points
136
Age
27
#28
The time I made a huge heavy hover and wasn't using hoverbug, and needed a powerful thrust in all directions (enough to make it controllable), I had to place one by one ~300 thrusters in a huge area. And so many gyros I didn't even count.
Needless to say, my hand hurted a lot from this, because gyros and thrusters are weak and small when you're going for the big guys, so you need a lot of them. And the number of gyros made my fps drop horribly.

We need to combat block spam. We need to make bigger and heavier blocks also the more efficient at what they do.

I will keep pushing for a Geocorp gyro that is more space efficient than any other gyro, because that is good design, and builder friendly.

The same goes for one of my first suggestions here, a big 2x2x2 geocorp adjustment thruster block capable of helping large hover techs and being more space efficient than smaller adj. thrusters, this makes sense, it has to, and we really need that.
If devs want to provide an alternative to the hoverbug, where each "unit" usually takes a 222 space (hoverplate + wheels), then a large adjustment thruster as powerful and as big is highly desirable and will have a positive impact in the game design.

If we reduce large hover techs to mandatory hoverbug usage for estabilization and maneuverability, we are killing all the progress made with flight blocks and gyros, in favor of a glitch.
 
Last edited:

Saelem Black

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Joined
Aug 25, 2018
Messages
289
Likes
883
Points
205
#30
Yeah, @Rafs and @Zorgomol , I'm not sure I really follow you. My largest techs are all airships or hovercrafts (like the one in my profile picture) and I haven't really had this problem. I suppose I'll echo ZG and ask for a snapshot?
 
Likes: ZeroGravitas

Rafs

Collecting the Infinity Terminals
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
158
Likes
707
Points
136
Age
27
#31
You guys are not getting it. My feedback is on the building process to get the tech right, maneuverable, stable, etc etc, not the tech finished itself. Sending it here would add nothing to the discussion, it is already done and working. Yet it uses 600 BF medium thrusters and 300 GC thrusters (it was made before we had the slightly more powerful HE adj. thruster), intercalated like a sandwich for maximum usage of GC adj. thrusters. The tech costs 20kk BB, while the newer version of it, using hoverbugs, smaller average size and functions (although trading GC batteries for BF batteries), costs 10kk BB, and has on average the same speed and maneuverability.

What I'm saying is that to achieve the levels of a hoverbug tech, using the thrusters we have now, you need to spam a ridiculous amount of them, same for gyros to keep the tech from tilting too much on a hill and sliding to the bottom of it.

I am not only trying to solve the block spam problem, but also providing hoverbug alternatives with blocks such as a bigger and more powerful adj. thruster, also helped with stronger gyros. If you guys don't like it, the devs sure will do, as they said they were looking for these alternatives, so I'm making a genuine struggle to help with that.

People are getting way too used to the hoverbug to see the problems the game has with its blocks and their balance. Do you people really think the GSO horn should be the most powerful thruster available, with the same power of a BF medium ion drive per space occupied, and higher than all other adj. thrusters? Same goes for the GSO gyro, which is an abomination of balance.

And did you guys know you could scrap the BF medium ion drive (again) and use only the Venture 1-way thruster en-mass wich has way more attach points and the same power/space? And might be cheaper too, just get 4 venture ones per 1 bf medium ion drive and you get the same effect.

I'm trying to discuss the issue on design level, the implications these imbalances have, the consequences, what it estimulates players to do, what players expect from certain blocks and are not getting (such as expecting a Geocorp gyro to do the best heavy-load job, and getting something inferior). This is what I'm talking about. I don't care if the graphic size of the "gyro ball" is bigger or not, if the HE gyro seems to be "reinforced" to withstand the war, I'm concerned about their efficiency at what they are supposed to do, and that is exactly what I'm upset with.

I guess for now I got nothing else to talk about in this topic. I'll keep my position on my first comment about gyros, it should be very clear what I expect from them, the scaling they should have, etc etc. As for the bigger thruster suggested, I think it is also clear it would have positive impacts in the game, and pave the path for someday, someday far away, alongside many other blocks and solutions, a good post-hoverbug scenario for Terratech, where everyone is happy with the alternatives and balance provided.
 

Saelem Black

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Joined
Aug 25, 2018
Messages
289
Likes
883
Points
205
#32
You guys are not getting it...

...If you guys don't like it, the devs sure will do...

Do you people really think...

I guess for now I got nothing else to talk about in this topic.
...there's a lot of salt in this post, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. I'm not sure who you think you're defending yourself from either; no one was antagonizing you.

I also didn't think we were talking about hoverbug. It's pretty well established that it's OP and the devs want to get rid of it eventually. Personally, I haven't used it since they introduced control schemes. I thought we were talking about the relative power of gyros and adjustment thrusters on very large techs. You and @Zorgomol seemed to indicate there was an issue with controlling large hovercrafts on slopes; I haven't seen this in my own building, but wanted to see the circumstance that you encountered it. Hence, I asked you for a snapshot. I'm just asking you to provide evidence to support your perspective, that's all.
 

Seth_Seth

Confused Leader of the Golden Armada
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
1,425
Likes
1,953
Points
525
Location
Armada
Website
sites.google.com
#34
You guys are not getting it. My feedback is on the building process to get the tech right, maneuverable, stable, etc etc, not the tech finished itself. Sending it here would add nothing to the discussion, it is already done and working. Yet it uses 600 BF medium thrusters and 300 GC thrusters (it was made before we had the slightly more powerful HE adj. thruster), intercalated like a sandwich for maximum usage of GC adj. thrusters. The tech costs 20kk BB, while the newer version of it, using hoverbugs, smaller average size and functions (although trading GC batteries for BF batteries), costs 10kk BB, and has on average the same speed and maneuverability.

What I'm saying is that to achieve the levels of a hoverbug tech, using the thrusters we have now, you need to spam a ridiculous amount of them, same for gyros to keep the tech from tilting too much on a hill and sliding to the bottom of it.

I am not only trying to solve the block spam problem, but also providing hoverbug alternatives with blocks such as a bigger and more powerful adj. thruster, also helped with stronger gyros. If you guys don't like it, the devs sure will do, as they said they were looking for these alternatives, so I'm making a genuine struggle to help with that.

People are getting way too used to the hoverbug to see the problems the game has with its blocks and their balance. Do you people really think the GSO horn should be the most powerful thruster available, with the same power of a BF medium ion drive per space occupied, and higher than all other adj. thrusters? Same goes for the GSO gyro, which is an abomination of balance.

And did you guys know you could scrap the BF medium ion drive (again) and use only the Venture 1-way thruster en-mass wich has way more attach points and the same power/space? And might be cheaper too, just get 4 venture ones per 1 bf medium ion drive and you get the same effect.

I'm trying to discuss the issue on design level, the implications these imbalances have, the consequences, what it estimulates players to do, what players expect from certain blocks and are not getting (such as expecting a Geocorp gyro to do the best heavy-load job, and getting something inferior). This is what I'm talking about. I don't care if the graphic size of the "gyro ball" is bigger or not, if the HE gyro seems to be "reinforced" to withstand the war, I'm concerned about their efficiency at what they are supposed to do, and that is exactly what I'm upset with.

I guess for now I got nothing else to talk about in this topic. I'll keep my position on my first comment about gyros, it should be very clear what I expect from them, the scaling they should have, etc etc. As for the bigger thruster suggested, I think it is also clear it would have positive impacts in the game, and pave the path for someday, someday far away, alongside many other blocks and solutions, a good post-hoverbug scenario for Terratech, where everyone is happy with the alternatives and balance provided.
So basically everything is broken?
 

Wassaup

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
62
Likes
119
Points
71
#35
:eek:... :mad:... Well guys, it's official:

As I've commented on the Steam news post: *all* gyros were not buffed, relative to 1.1 values!

Venture's is up to 150% of previous (I think it shouldn't have been buffed), Better Future's is up to 200% of previous...

But Hawkeye's is *down* to about 50% of previous and GeoCorp's is down to about 40% of what is was. Big nerfs that quite a few players are going to be frustrated with, I think.
The devs want us to spam the small gyros. This is what they've envisioned! This is the new design meta, ladies and gentlemen!!!

...Why, yes, I am quite irritated, thanks, for asking. I guess, I'ii just wait for the next update to sort this crap out. Maybe by then, we can convince the devs, that gyros aren't cans of soda. That the bigger ones aren't there to be more economic, but to be more and better than the sum of their parts, i. e. a bunch of smaller gyros:rolleyes:
 

ZeroGravitas

Breaker of Games
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
3,530
Likes
4,641
Points
675
Age
36
Location
UK
Website
www.youtube.com
#36
What I'm saying is that to achieve the levels of a hoverbug tech, using the thrusters we have now, you need to spam a ridiculous amount of them, same for gyros to keep the tech from tilting too much on a hill and sliding to the bottom of it.
I think you should start a new suggestion thread (please) dedicated to Adjustment Thruster rebalancing. And/or to reducing block spam in general by rebalancing.

I agree that it's a little odd (or unfortunate) that the biggest BF adj.thruster is about half as strong as the smallest, by unit volume. But for the record, the strongest adjustment thrusters (Venture 1-way and GSO Horn) are a little *less* powerful, per unit volume, than the Ion drives and Ven Zero Propellers. Which would be my go-to for steering large hover techs, personally (given that bigger techs don't benefit as much from the responsiveness of the Thrusters)... But let's talk about this in a different thread (you can cross quote me if you like). :)

As for the GC gyros - same thing, yeah. When they were first in EXP I seem to remember them being specifically touted (by the devs) as being there for extreme stabalising capability and avoiding spamming the Venture gyro (e.g. on old style hover-bug airships). The modest re-buff @zanzistar last promised won't get near that. I've already seen other builders switch to GSO gyros, but still disgruntled they take up more space than a single GC did in 1.1, for the same correction force.


Let's see how many times I'll have to redesign all my hovers because of this juggling back and forth since gyros are the only thing that can keep any hovertech of appreciable mass upright...
Going back a bit to this comment - yeah this is exactly why I'd been droning on about these values, to try to avoid all current players being hit by these backs and forths in values... But looks we missed that window. :confused: So I guess I personally won't be publishing any gyro dependant techs for the next 6 weeks, and will suggest others don't, either (if it comes up). Given the topicality of hover and anti-grav techs, that seems kind of inconvienient. But I suppose the three BF gyros might all be in a good place now, just all the others to tweak, still...

Funnily, Lathrix discovered the big GC gyro nerf in the unstable, hours before the 1.2 update hit, affecting his bike and sky base, #timing:

 
Last edited:

zanzistar

PAYLOAD STUDIOS
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
928
Likes
1,582
Points
505
Age
33
Location
London
#37
Hey,

Cool, more feedback on Gyros. Ok, the remaining issue I'm seeing a good amount of consensus for is that most people in this thread would like the HE and GC gyros to be much stronger and more efficient space wise than the GSO one. That's fine, I can shift it that way. I'll leave the others alone for now.

I'm not desperate for Block spam, but part of the plan with Block balancing is to avoid a linear progression of Blocks of a certain type where the bigger one is always better. We try to vary their strengths and weaknesses based on size, cost, mass, health, strength and any other factor (sometimes more successfully and sometimes less). We're trying to present a range of Blocks where Players are not always automatically gravitating towards any one specific Block that's clearly the best at doing whatever it does, but instead, ideally, Players would need to weigh up choices from a variety of options.

You're right, It's a double-edged sword nudging these values back and forth as it's annoying to rebuild Techs based on the new values, I see that. But that's what we're trying to do in this thread, make some changes, gather feedback and then adjust further in the hopes of reaching a better balance overall. There is no way to test it out on a wide audience like yourselves without putting it into the builds, in unstable it's less tricky as it's a faster turn around, but those values will make it into stables over time. As the conversation evolves those values should get closer to a mark that the majority agree on.

There's no need to get upset, I'm here in this thread actively discussing it with you all and basing balancing passes on those discussions. Some of these comments seem to be written in a despairing tone as if we're unnamed devs who are not listening, there is no need for that, we're here and we are listening. This is a process and if you think we should make a change, just suggest it and set out a case for it with some examples (like @ZeroGravitas has done), again I'm here listening and I appreciate the feedback.
 
Last edited:

ZeroGravitas

Breaker of Games
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
3,530
Likes
4,641
Points
675
Age
36
Location
UK
Website
www.youtube.com
#38
I'll leave the others alone for now.
Can you please set the Venture gyro back to what it was originally.

As I say, it's just over 50% stronger than it was before the adjustments started (1.5 blocks as opposed to exactly 1, on the balance). Just one of them is now definitely now too strong for use in very small planes. A use you seemed to be looking at accommodating even more, back when you were originally experimenting with making it weaker (and the bugs overshot that).

Halving the current strength would be acceptable (to 0.75 blocks), in my opinion, but I think a straight reversion makes more sense.
 
Last edited:

reaperx1

Crazed Builder
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
4,486
Likes
3,457
Points
670
Age
38
#39
I have been playing a bit with the gyros on my new build and lets just say there are over 500 gyros on it.
However it is hitting build limits in every direction and it still handles just the way I want with the use of the anti gravs.
I have used over 100 GC gyros just to help keep it upright. The rest of the gyros were all BF passive gyros for all around stability.
Also there are hundreds of BF adj thrusters used for the propulsion and steering.

These are the design problems you have to deal with if you want to build big. On a tech the size of the one I'm talking about it just seems almost unreasonable to think it should work without all those parts in place.

I may have missed the point on this thread a bit, but it seems like there are a few players that want an easy way out with a big gyro or adj thruster . I may be wrong, but that is the feel I get from reading through this thread.

Have a good one [8D)
 
Likes: Seth_Seth

Wassaup

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
62
Likes
119
Points
71
#40
...part of the plan with Block balancing is to avoid a linear progression of Blocks of a certain type where the bigger one is always better. We try to vary their strengths and weaknesses based on size, cost, mass, health, strength and any other factor...
I am terribly sorry, but I just cannot let this go. The sole purpose of a big block is to replace a bunch of small blocks. This is especially true in the campaign, where the bigger blocks are higher grade and take more time and work to unlock. I think it's fair to expect something that takes more effort to get to perform better than what we already have. Now, among the blocks that are the same size, yes, having a variety of stats is fine, even preferable. That way we can choose between cost-efficiency, or weight-efficiency or whatever else we may need. However, some stats just don't factor in certain roles. For example, health isn't something I consider, when choosing a gyro, as it is a internal component, that you should never leave exposed. Likewise, I don't consider weight (as in it's own weight) when choosing wheels. Bottom line: bigger should always be better! And this goes for all block types, not just gyros! Don't worry about the small blocks becoming obsolete, because we need them for small builds and even on big builds we always use them to fill the gaps (both literal and metaphorical). There's nothing wrong with being linear and straight forward;)
 
Likes: Rafs