Making Ground Combat Suck Less

[rece ktore leczo]

Well, we ARE getting hover blocks for ground vehicles at some point.

Yeah, i've heard about hover blocks, but mine main point was to make thruster block inactive while in the atmosphere.

Seeing as how this would prevent fighters from functioning in atmosphere, there could be some issues from this.

Fighters wouldn't need plenty of thrusters to fly in space but probably would need to focus on the hover blocks to be pretty mobile in the atmosphere. Not using the same fighters to fight in space and in atmosphere could be more efficient and i don't see anything wrong with this as it leads to more specialization of the ships which i really like (to some degree of course).

With one of the new effects (I forget which one) you can cancel planetary gravity. What if it scaled so that it would require heavy dedication for a large ship to keep one running, but relatively easy for a small ship to be built to ignore planetary gravity?

I totally forgot about this effect, haven't played with effects yet... Well i pretty like the idea of ships making reentry to the atmosphere to send some volleys and then escaping to the space or dedicated ones which could withstand the gravity but not being much OP. Maybe once this effect would be turned on, the thrusters could work in atmosphere (maybe with decreased efficiency).

There are 2 types of engines that only require electricity to function, and they rely on the basis that nothing is really a vacuum, and that space is actually full of constantly reappearing and disappearing quantum particles, which can be used to propel an object with clever manipulation. If the engines in game rely on this principle, they wouldn't work in an atmosphere.

So thrusters not working in atmosphere could actually make some sense. I sincerely did not expected that

I've heard about these particles and that we might use them to create negative energy needed in engine squeezing and expanding space, but haven't known about other uses of this phenomenon. I'll check on google later, maybe i'll find something interesting

 

[Planr]

Fighters wouldn't need plenty of thrusters to fly in space but probably would need to focus on the hover blocks to be pretty mobile in the atmosphere. Not using the same fighters to fight in space and in atmosphere could be more efficient and i don't see anything wrong with this as it leads to more specialization of the ships which i really like (to some degree of course).

But planets are so small that atmospheric fighters would never have any use at all.

 

[Equilibrium21]

Planr Not really small ... But still it would be hard to use them :/

 

[darkstar64]

It nice to have unlike the pistol

 

[rece ktore leczo]

Planr The planets can be bigger (already can be changed in server settings) and the atmosphere could also be made much bigger, i guess.

 

[Commodore]

Schema's gone to all this trouble to make death stars possible, now people are complaining about orbital bombardment of people fighting on the planet. Just faction it and build an enclosed structure/tunnel network for all your first person shooter needs.

 

[Viridis00]

Schema's gone to all this trouble to make death stars possible, now people are complaining about orbital bombardment of people fighting on the planet. Just faction it and build an enclosed structure/tunnel network for all your first person shooter needs.

Hell yeah, underground bases on remote planets are where it's at.

Can't (reliably) hit what you can't see, and by the time an enemy tries to go through all of the plates just guessing, I had damn well hope some reinforcements had shown up.

 

[Lecic]

Schema's gone to all this trouble to make death stars possible, now people are complaining about orbital bombardment of people fighting on the planet. Just faction it and build an enclosed structure/tunnel network for all your first person shooter needs.

Schema went through all of this trouble to make varied weapon combinations possible.

Factioning it only works for home bases, which no one is going to attack those anyway unless they're an idiot. With the current system, it's completely pointless to have more than one planet base, because they can just sit out of range of the turrets and breach the core of a planet and blow up your planetary base.

 

[darkstar64]

Schema went through all of this trouble to make varied weapon combinations possible.

Factioning it only works for home bases, which no one is going to attack those anyway unless they're an idiot. With the current system, it's completely pointless to have more than one planet base, because they can just sit out of range of the turrets and breach the core of a planet and blow up your planetary base.

Will you can set up space traps like invisible mines and hidden space turrets behind asteroids be lot of work but it possible. Can also and sensor towers on the planet to tell you when being attack then just warp you fleet in to the battle. :D

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Disagree, for a lot of time I've loved docking my cruiser on my personal planet, also what about landers? I use a cube to fly off the planet because I don't carry Plexlifters around with me when exploring (besides, they're currently glitched.)

 

[Viridis00]

You know, I just realized a niche that land vehicles and mecha can fill.

When we get creatures on planets, are players really going to want to just cause mass extinction from space? Maybe us with more genocidal tendencies. But it would be a lot more interesting exploring on foot and to check out the planet's flora and fauna. I don't think the hand blasters we carry now are going to do the trick to keep us safe. Plus, transportation and more advanced forms of mining are needed for the ground.

 

[1adog1]

I definitely agree with this, but I don't think the shielding should be 100% with the atmosphere, more like 90%-95% for energy and 0% for projectiles to mostly stop energy weapons but make misiles still useful (Look up how ICBM's function in real life). I don't think you should be able to have Line of Sight through the atmosphere though, so you'd be firing blind. Also for effective land combat, we need more weapons than laser pistols, and some kind of ability to make ground vehicles that don't have to deal with gravity, but can't go into space.

You know, I just realized a niche that land vehicles and mecha can fill.

When we get creatures on planets, are players really going to want to just cause mass extinction from space? Maybe us with more genocidal tendencies. But it would be a lot more interesting exploring on foot and to check out the planet's flora and fauna. I don't think the hand blasters we carry now are going to do the trick to keep us safe. Plus, transportation and more advanced forms of mining are needed for the ground.

Idealistic view of humans: "Hey an alien, let's try and learn more about it."
Realistic view of humans: "We've discovered an alien species, FIRE ALL WEAPONS!!!!"

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Idealistic view of humans: "Hey an alien, let's try and learn more about it."
Realistic view of humans: "We've discovered an alien species, FIRE ALL WEAPONS!!!!"

More like 'Hey an alien! Lets kill one, cut it open, see how it can be exploited then exploit it!'

 

[Lecic]

I definitely agree with this, but I don't think the shielding should be 100% with the atmosphere, more like 90%-95% for energy and 0% for projectiles to mostly stop energy weapons but make misiles still useful (Look up how ICBM's function in real life). I don't think you should be able to have Line of Sight through the atmosphere though, so you'd be firing blind. Also for effective land combat, we need more weapons than laser pistols, and some kind of ability to make ground vehicles that don't have to deal with gravity, but can't go into space.



Idealistic view of humans: "Hey an alien, let's try and learn more about it."
Realistic view of humans: "We've discovered an alien species, FIRE ALL WEAPONS!!!!"

Well, when people can just build a missile with a high enough explosion radius to kill all life on a planet, it doesn't really matter if they're firing blind.

A system of building our own guns from micro blocks would be awesome.

We're getting a system to make hovering vehicles, the devs just haven't figured out how to make them balanced.

 

[1adog1]

Well, when people can just build a missile with a high enough explosion radius to kill all life on a planet, it doesn't really matter if they're firing blind.

A system of building our own guns from micro blocks would be awesome.

We're getting a system to make hovering vehicles, the devs just haven't figured out how to make them balanced.

The amount of blocks required to make a missile with that much power would be in the tens or even hundreds of thousands. If you have that many missile blocks, then a planet destroyer is what you have.

Microblocks for building guns=YESSSS!

 

[Lecic]

The amount of blocks required to make a missile with that much power would be in the tens or even hundreds of thousands. If you have that many missile blocks, then a planet destroyer is what you have.

Microblocks for building guns=YESSSS!

Have you seen Missile + Pulse + Overdrive? You could build a life form annihilator out of less than 100, probably less than 50 blocks. It'd eat a bunch of power, but that isn't an issue on a large ship with plenty of tanks.

Realistically, an atmosphere would distort laser bursts and beams into uselessness, and burn up missiles.

 

[1adog1]

Have you seen Missile + Pulse + Overdrive? You could build a life form annihilator out of less than 100, probably less than 50 blocks. It'd eat a bunch of power, but that isn't an issue on a large ship with plenty of tanks.

Realistically, an atmosphere would distort laser bursts and beams into uselessness, and burn up missiles.

Realistically, ICBMs function by firing up into space and coming back through the atmosphere onto their targets. They wouldn't burn up. Let the devs balance out the weapon systems and it'll work fine.

 

[Lecic]

Realistically, ICBMs function by firing up into space and coming back through the atmosphere onto their targets. They wouldn't burn up. Let the devs balance out the weapon systems and it'll work fine.

I'm sorry, but that point is stupid. No amount of weapon's stat juggling is going to solve the problem of planets being able to be destroyed so easily, or that a planet can be blown up through it's shields.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

That is because planets should be "kill-able" ? Honestly i don't know how much firepower is needed to kill a planet.

 

[Equilibrium21]

That is because planets should be "kill-able" ? Honestly i don't know how much firepower is needed to kill a planet.

I think that shouldn't be allowed in this game :/.