Jump to content

[2 dismissals; Archive: 30.10.2017]Remove Nitrogen from Engine room


ToasterStrudel

Recommended Posts

Okay, a message from a distraught engineering main, please just move the Nitrogen from the Engine room, I've seen way too many rounds cut short from new engineers who either set up a nitrogen engine wrong and blow it up, or think the Nitrogen is phoron and do the normal phoron setup that is listed on the wiki. I hardly ever see people outside of the new engineers use nitrogen for anything, so its really just there to be used by mistake. Just move it somewhere like hard storage.


Please

Link to comment

Yumi's player here. Not sure what removing the nitrogen cans would do. Keeping the emitter on will delaminate the SM regardless of the coolant. Not upgrading the SMES will still not power the entire station and if we remove the nitrogen cans people will just look elsewhere. Maybe put a timelock on engineering roles or I dunno, some password on the engine room doors that only engineers familiar with the engine know. Just spouting ideas here.

Link to comment

Why not just move it out of the room that way newer engineers who don't know how to set it up correctly don't just b-line it to them without knowing. Moving it out of the chamber itself would lead to them having to ask where it is, and would give more chances for them to ask for assistance before setting up the engine.


+1 to what Ally said.


Also Alberyk is going out of his way to try and dismiss this for the sole purpose of knowing how I feel about it. I'm not asking for it to be removed from code, just removed from the engine room itself, this isn't about it being a valid engine type.

Link to comment

Alternatively, stop powergaming with phoron. I swear, I'm going to CRANK up the radiation it puts out, if this keeps happening. It shouldn't be a "standard setup", in fact, it isn't. It's not the standard setup detailed in the manual.


Funny thing about nuclear reactors: While they generally put out enough to keep a something running, we don't decide one day to put enriched uranium in instead of thorium or something because we want to wave the powerdong around.


Are people using powersinks regularly? No?


HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

Link to comment

whatever that was

 

This isn't about phoron setup, this isn't about which engine setup is superior, this is about moving the cans of nitrogen out of the engines main room and somewhere else. New players look at the wiki and see the phoron setup (That I will note, a fair amount of engineering mains use because its simple and a lot less to worry about, how using anything in the engine other than nitrogen is powergaming I will never understand) and just assumes that the nitrogen cans are phoron.


I'm not even going to delve into the powergaming thing that you said farther than the statement I said in the brackets. This isn't about that shit seriously.


I will rephrase what I mean about 'Remove Nitrogen from Engine room'

take the nitrogen that is in that little corner, and push it in another room to prevent dumb accidents from new players that generally end the round before the hour mark.

Link to comment

I would prefer learning from experience not costing the rest of the station, or destroy half of engineering.


HOWEVER, if someone is unsure about things they can ask another engineer, unless the other engineers tell them to fuck off (has happened 3 times) or there are no engineers.


HOWEVER, HOWEVER, if there are no engineers around to help and a person needs to setup the engine they can ahelp it and get some assistance that way. I learned the basics for the Phoron setup from ahelping and have stuck with it ever since. I


I like my idea of making phoron more pronounced. If you say that's, "Powergaming". I'll say, "You're dumb." If you say, "That's the baby way of setting up the engine." I'll say "Well you right, but it works." Still if this gets declined I won't really mind.

Link to comment

I can agree with this simply on the fact that I think it would be more appropriate to not push one method over the other, and it would just be better to keep all the gases locked up somewhere so people aren't goofing around with them. That way, if they are at least coherent enough to ask for assistance in getting the gasses they need, then perhaps they are coherent enough to ask for assistance in setting up the engine. That is to say, it would prevent new players from wordlessly fucking everything up because nobody was babysitting them in the engine room with the nitrogen.


However you have to admit, while phoron is definitely the better set up, I'm sure Nanotrasen would much prefer it if engineers used nitrogen, since it would be tremendously cheaper. That being said, the "standard" set up from an RP standpoint would probably be nitrogen, even if its borderline dangerous and obsolete from a gameplay standpoint.

Link to comment

Disagree. Phoron may be the superior set-up but the 100% reason why the SM delaminates if it isn't emitter related is because the filters get set incorrectly. Nitrogen is... not good nor optimal, but it serves as a decent coolant. Despite being pretty terrible at containing heat by itself.

Link to comment

Phoron is currently the official IC and OOC standard setup, according to the wiki guide (which the in-game book links directly to).


Regardless of who thinks what engine is better, the disparity between the presence of nitrogen and guide stating phoron is something that needs to be addressed, and I see no issues for this to be an unreasonable solution.

Link to comment

Well, the difference between nitrogen and phoron is, that nitrogen makes up 79% of the air around you.

So its extremely cheap compared to phoron.


Since a nitrogen setup works ingame there is no need to remove the nitrogen cans from the engine room.

Removing the nitrogen cans from the engine will not remove the problem that certain players do not know how to setup the engine.

Worst case they will just turn it on without gas.

Best case they will find any other gas canister and connect it.


Therefore supporting the vote for dismissal.

Link to comment

snip


You are correct here, as the setup is outdated and does not link to the wiki itself. This just continues to support my claim that just moving the Nitrogen from the Engine room would encourage someone to ask for another engineer to tell them where the gas was, but in reality that isn't going to change because this was dismissed.


Though, you do understand we have ad hominem rules and derailing rules on these forums, correct? You are just attacking people, and not adding to the original posts topic.

Link to comment

snip

 

Though, you do understand we have ad hominem rules and derailing rules on these forums, correct? You are just attacking people, and not adding to the original posts topic.

 

I'm not attacking anyone. I just think it was foolish.


I *assume* this book was for Exodus, and never got updated for Aurora's significantly less robust setup.

Link to comment

snip

 

Though, you do understand we have ad hominem rules and derailing rules on these forums, correct? You are just attacking people, and not adding to the original posts topic.

 

I'm not attacking anyone. I just think it was foolish.


I *assume* this book was for Exodus, and never got updated for Aurora's significantly less robust setup.

 

The book was equally incorrect on the Exodus; the Aurora's engine is literally a copypaste of the Exodus' with a larger radiator.

Link to comment
×
×
  • Create New...