When connecting more than 1 APS firing piece to a APS system, it treats the other firing pieces as extra barrels, decreasing the gauge of each firing piece by the same formula as adding another barrel to 1 firing piece, as well as all the other quirks of multi-barreled firing pieces. This allows greater barrel spacing for aesthetics, as well as redundancy. The other firing pieces will retain their gauge even if 1 is destroyed by damage so long as the gauge increaser(s) remain connected.
(if the player removes a firing piece in build mode however the gauge will change unless the desired shell gauge is already set lower than the max gauge of the entire system)
#Multi-Firing Piece APS
upper furnace
notably, you can still have entirely seperate systems within 1 turret if you don't want to deal with the downsides of a multi-barreled system
brittle hinge
would look nice might be hard to implement though but if they can would be cool
karmic mortar
sounds similar to how a laser system can supply multiple turrets
frigid lintel
Just split the loaders between two firing pieces. If you want a sustained bombardment instead of salvos, you can sync one gun to fire halfway between shots of the other.
karmic mortar
thats what i have on my ciws and main guns, dosnt mean having 2 mantlets per system wouldnt be useful
frigid lintel
notably, you can still have entirely seperate systems within 1 turret if you don...
The only downsides are downsides that come from the cost of the barrel and firing piece, and gauge increasers. At best this suggestion would save 160 mats in gauge increasers per gun.
karmic mortar
and the pain of building compact
and the fact you cant get perfect symetry with a tripple barrel
alot of reasons, and like was mentioned before, diffrent barrel spacing
frigid lintel
and the fact you cant get perfect symetry with a tripple barrel
Is that a challenge?
3 guns, all with the same fire rate.
All you need to do is make sure the area available for your guns is divisible by how many guns you want.
upper furnace
The only downsides are downsides that come from the cost of the barrel and firin...
well it also makes it a lot simpler, as you don't have to divide clips amongst the guns
you would be able to just do what we have now for efficient 1 firing piece tetris but account for a triple barrel gun
frigid lintel
It would require aps code to be completely rewritten I don’t think that’s going to happen.
karmic mortar
Ive never looked at the code so. Idk
I might have a look tho
See what shenanigins i can get up to
viral maple
All you need to do is make sure the area available for your guns is divisible by...
i gets harder on railguns and if you need recoil absorbers
frigid lintel
I forgot about the magnets, thanks. However, you need one recoil absorption/s per rail draw/s. if your two guns each have half the fire rate of a single gun, they will have half the rail draw/s and thus half the recoil. You can split a railgun just fine.
viral maple
i feel like this would be a great QoL anyways
upper furnace
i feel like this would be a great QoL anyways
dusk dragon
would be interesting to see this system in a burst gun
calm lotus
I remember suggesting this way back and being told the main issue is the firing piece being the logical center of the APS multiblock system. So when you place it down, it goes and finds all the attached blocks to calculate the stats and whatnot.
So it would probably take a considerable rewrite to make this work, but it would be really awesome.
If you need a core block, you could probably add a core APS block that acts as the brain of the construct, and divides stuff among the firing pieces. To maintain compatibility, you could add a core+firing piece combo (that would replace the current firing piece, they're equivalent).
But yeah this would be super great for making it easier to build bigger APS without fiddling with the tetris for hours. You could do the same for CRAM as well.
frigid lintel
What part of “divide the area you have by the number of guns you want, and then divide that by the area taken up by a loader cluster and round down to get the number of clusters per gun” can’t you understand?
Alternatively, you can set up your Tetris regularly, and remove clusters until the amount left is divisible by the amount you have left is divisible by how many guns you want
It’s not that hard
agile harness
Respectfully, "It's not that hard if your brain is good at that sort of problem solving"
Mine is not
frigid lintel
Area of a 7d turret/number of guns/area of cluster, rounded down, can get a max of 3 clusters per loader.
calm lotus
It’s not that hard
it's not that hard but there's 0 reason not to make it easier
frigid lintel
Yes there is. Programming it a lot of effort, as it would have to be reworked from scratch, something that the dev team won’t be doing with their new game being focused on. It would also make aps really boring to make with 0 brain cells required rather than the 2 or 3 it currently does.
cinder hawk
this suggestion takes effort to implement, stop having ideas that would benefit the average player likes this cmon man
smh my head 🐢
agile harness
It's not the number of guns/area of cluster
It's fitting them together
Mah brain struggles with that
frigid lintel
More complexity is a good thing in this situation. Putting in a little effort allows you to enjoy the construction rather than just doing the exact same thing for every gun.
A real world example would be instant cake mix. Initially, all the were was throw water in the mix and put it in the oven. And people hated it. It was too easy. So they removed the fake egg from the mixture and made the “baker” add it themselves. It was a hit and cake mix remains that way to this day
I’m all for simplifying systems, but this is too far. It wouldn’t feel good.
In fact my favorite turret to make was a shitty 3gun, balanced horizontal loader mixed 4 clip hybrid railgun that I spend hours trying to balance that thing and it was so satisfying when all the numbers were finally evened out from all the fiddling and calculations.
And it was shit
And I still remember the feeling 2 years later
I will die on this hill
frigid lintel
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3005044880 feel free to point an laugh all you want and it probably won't hurt
(this was duing my "new player sbb" phase that a lot of us go through)
agile harness
And I still remember the feeling 2 years later
Respectfully, I have over a thousand hours in this game
And I still can't fucking figure it out
In this instance it's actively detracting from my enjoyment.
calm lotus
I can figure it out myself, but I realize it would be much simpler if multi-firing piece was possible
I don't see the enjoyment in fiddling with the tetris, but if you do, just use the firing piece + APS core I proposed
And new and less experienced players would benefit from it
native nova
Another way to achieve a very similar thing would just be to have more ways to place APS components adjacent to each other but unable to cross-connect
eg, autoloaders that only connect to other autoloaders or clips top/bottom and nowhere else
calm lotus
that would make things a little simpler I suppose, but it would add a bunch of blocks and not really solve the problem in a satisfying way
agile harness
That is the hardest part, isn't it? Solving the issue in a way that feels satisfying to use.
frigid lintel
If that’s the case, then the system is broken
native nova
The easiest solution of all is to accept lower density on the turret and put a metal wall between each aps gun
that way nothing can cross-connect unintentionally
though since recoil absorbers only have one connection point, they're a good choice to weave in into the gap where you had the wall
vale hearth
I think it is fine the way it is, otherwise everyone would just do that, making the multi barrels feature that already exists in a firing piece pointless in everything but the most compact builds. The trade off here is better accuracy for a more complex build and more space required.
cinder hawk
the built-in extra barrels for a firing piece has the advantage of better cooling but gets worse accuracy, so is rarely used anyway , more physical firing pieces would increase cost and size of the weapon making it in theory a bigger target and obv more expensive, this change would just make it easier not change balancing at all
brittle hinge
with 3 separate systems you get more redundancy as well
vale hearth
I guess it just depends how practical it would be from the programming side of things. You would essentially need to take all the component, divide those by the # of firing pieces, and then assign accordingly and dump the modulus onto the oldest firing piece I guess. Then you have to consider if that logic would work in other situations as well, like if a player connects 13 firing pieces to a single auto loader. Every time a piece gets destroyed you either leave it the same as it was, or have to recalculate the balance, depending on how CPU intensive it is. And then the question comes up of how do you assign pieces to each firing piece? Do you try to assign each piece to the closest physical firing piece to make it similar to the separated ones like today, or do pieces just get randomly assigned to each firing piece, which would cause all sorts of interesting chaos when things start getting destroyed.
tame shadow
youd probably need a laser-like core block instead of the firing piece being the core block
since as it is, the attached components are connected to a single core block
thats how all the multiblock systems work
so for multiple firing pieces, the firing piece can't be the core block
lasers get away with it using the multipurpose laser block, which isnt a firing piece
old pac did it by having the output lenses use the main lens as a core block
native nova
Hold on guys
What if we just had a 3m-wide mantlet so we could multibarrel from one firing piece and widen the barrels out more
3m or 5m wide mantlets would put multiple barrels in a line instead of a ring and allow for spacing them out up to the width of the mantlet
Problem solved, in a way nobody's thought of yet
paper marsh
3m or 5m wide mantlets would put multiple barrels in a line instead of a ring an...
and maybe with the addition of 2m mantlet as well
native nova
but it'd also have to allow you to get 500mm gauge
As long as you can add enough gauge increasers to support it, which would be the same amount of gauge increasers you'd need over multiple separate 500mm firing pieces
calm lotus
yeah
it has the added advantage of probably being simpler to code, and making the gun sturdier
it would look goofy af tho lol
native nova
it would look goofy af tho lol
Not really, as long as the model is done well