Struts simplified#55

Problem: The struts are currently very complex, I have not found any short or simple way of explaining their functioning, and the directionality even if it was more obvious is counterintuitive and complex to work with.

Therefore I’d like to propose an alternative way for them to function that is easier for new players to intuitively grasp:

The strut reduces up to 6 stability from an both stations it is connected to (only the smaller if 1 is smaller than the other), but the stability of a station can only be affected by struts one time (granting a non-stacking buff to the station, basically).

Then the explanation for the strut becomes simple:
“A strut will reduce the stability cost of an equally stable structure or two equally sized structures by 6. A structure can only benefit from this once.”

While this will reduce the power of the struts to completely negate the stability of larger structures, I don’t think this is an unreasonable outcome in exchange for the increase in raw power of a strut negating up to 12 stability while only costing 1.

Us stability lovers will simply have to tolerate our 9 station cores always costing at least 3 stability (not counting struts), and similar for larger structures - there’s only so much any number of struts can do for a huge piece of mass and we now only need 1 strut between 2 equally sized structures.

I would suggest 3 from each side, stacking, but no ifs, buts or maybes; always -3 from both sides.

New plan is to slightly buff station cores and make struts add a bonus 1 stability to a station assuming its connected to 2 things that cost stability.

So its only real use will be to connect things without costing power or stability. But also still allow some super optimization to find places to add a stability point here and there. Goal being you won’t feel like you have to fill all the slots with struts