- my own idea for power consumption and thrust power
20% power consumption, 200% thrust power (related to normal atmo thruster)

Reposted:
There is also an issue of altitude. To use STAR WARS as examples.
Small craft hover very low. larger vessles would hover higher.
Small block small = hovers at 5 meters. Small land speeder.
Small block large = hovers at 10 meters. Heavy speeder for cargo.
Large block small = hovers at 20 meters. Jaba's sail barge.
Large block large 3X3 = hovers at 50 meters. Heavy Hover Cargo ship.
Large block large 5X5 (suggested) = hovers at 100 meters. ( think ROGUE ONE Impereal star destroyer hovering over a city ) I have a design that would be perfect for that.

Arguement for low power.
Luke Skywalker left hs speeder hovering 24/7. Didn't do much to the fuel supply.
There needs to be a big selling point behind tthese hover thrusters. Why hover when you can fly? ( beyond being cool )

Why? Why? Why? WHY?

Inexpensive in fuel costs. That would do it for me.

- cost to build: more components? wich and why, also how much

Make it more expensive. I see hover engine as some antigravity device, so using similar components used in gravity generator would be fitting.
Reason - it feels more like a late game tech and right now it's too cheap compared to the usefulness and badassery of this tech block :D

- power consumption: less or more? how much and why
I think that it should have minimum amount of energy consumption of a constant ~20-40% of atmo thrusters for a set amount of weight, and when you add cargo above that point, it would require additional power. BUT! It should require less power to carry same amount of weight than atmo thrusters. This way the more you load your hovers with cargo, the better would the ratio "weight to energy" become in comparison to atmo thrusters.
By changing that set amount of weight and minimum power consumption you can choose the point when hovers get more useful than atmo thrusters in terms of carrying heavy stuff.




P.s.
The best way would probably be to have two versions. One which is more casual, and one which is more hardcore. I personally would prefer harder version (for survival) as it would be more rewarding to achieve the point when you can use it as much as you want while giving some limitations at early stages of the game to provide challenge.

Originally posted by Greyson XMG:

Reposted:

There needs to be a big selling point behind tthese hover thrusters. Why hover when you can fly? ( beyond being cool )

Why? Why? Why? WHY?

Inexpensive in fuel costs. That would do it for me.

Because you wont fall and crash your cargo by accident? Also being cool is actually a major point in sandbox game.

Points for cool. BUT we are talking about things that will be hovering long term. Easy on the fuel would score points too.

Originally posted by Greyson XMG:

Points for cool. BUT we are talking about things that will be hovering long term. Easy on the fuel would score points too.

The point is to find a right balance to make it have it's own pluses and minuses. Because if it consumes as little power as wheels that's too OP then. Which is also fine also fine, just doesn't fit for the challenging survival.

There is a way to make a power off sequence? where the hover engine slowly decrease power output until it turns off and allows you to safely land your ship?. I made that funcion with a bunch of timers reducing the minimum distance to the floor but even doing that its quite a harsh transition between each distance setting.

I’m going to echo Demonic and recommend two variants. One for people who want it as late game tech with expensive components and low power consumption, and one with roughly the same cost and power consumption as wheels, for people that hate the constantly broken wheels.

I concour.

Everything is almost perfect the way it is. My suggestions:

- Add gravity components and super conductor components to the cost.
- Energy cost is fine as is
- Weight limits seem fine
- I like the idea of the engine providing 0 thrust if you are too far from the surface. This would allow us to make jumps and enjoy the hover without being able to "hover" into the sky too far.

I WOULD love to see another version (perhaps large grid only?) that attempted to stay at whatever elevation you tell it to. This more powerful version would require a ton more energy, but would be able to keep your base or ships afloat up to a few thousand meters at least. Space elevator, anyone? Add hotkeys to change the elevation of the upgraded hover engine and climb slowly into space.

Originally posted by Demonic Blight:

The point is to find a right balance to make it have it's own pluses and minuses. Because if it consumes as little power as wheels that's too OP then. Which is also fine also fine, just doesn't fit for the challenging survival.

Almost. The technology must make game sense.

Let's say we want to build a floating base. If we use atmo thrusters we can make it happen, but it's going to cost a fair amount of power, and it's not exactly what you want because it can rotate, fly high, maneuver, etc. I just want a floating base.

An engine that doesn't use as much power in exchange for a steady smooth hover that won't twist my base upside down would be wonderful. The tradeoffs matter.

Originally posted by NECEROS:

Originally posted by Demonic Blight:

The point is to find a right balance to make it have it's own pluses and minuses. Because if it consumes as little power as wheels that's too OP then. Which is also fine also fine, just doesn't fit for the challenging survival.

Almost. The technology must make game sense.

Let's say we want to build a floating base. If we use atmo thrusters we can make it happen, but it's going to cost a fair amount of power, and it's not exactly what you want because it can rotate, fly high, maneuver, etc. I just want a floating base.

An engine that doesn't use as much power in exchange for a steady smooth hover that won't twist my base upside down would be wonderful. The tradeoffs matter.

For floating bases there is a wonderfull mode that adds hydrogen balloons so if you want to make floating base voila. Zeppelin Gas Cell (Hydrogen Balloon) http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=790910033

P.s. Personally I don't see hover engine as a right device for base building purpuse. In my opinion it should be vehicle oriented only. In case of sci-fi tech that makes base float a mod for a different block, which is as big as large reactor and a lot lot lot more expensive, would do much better. Maybe something similar to the zeppelin gas cell but using energy to stay afloat and having ability to change height without the need to regulate level of hydrogen

Originally posted by NECEROS:

- Add gravity components and super conductor components to the cost.

Gravity components yes. But I disagree with super conductors, though. Superconductors are mainly used for devices that have to manage huge amounts of energy. And considering that these hover engines are mainly energy efficient... it doesn't make much sense to include them.

However, gravity components are pretty obvious and should totally be included. As for amount.. I'm not quite sure. But I suppose these could be my suggestions:

Gravity components to add:
Small grid 1x1= 1
Small grid 3x3= 3
Large grid 1x1= 5
Large grid 3x3= 20?

Take those numbers with a grain of salt... I know that the gravity components are quite heavy and can mess up the weight. Adjust as you see fit.

hi to all, we will collect yor feedback to the cost.

for now, lets talk about the new models:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1230558921
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1230562248
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1230564173

my favorit right now ;-)

we like.