Devs Need to Review the V2 Objectives.

Dire Venom · May 6, 2018

petlahk said:
Also Dire. while I agree with your sentiment here, I think the discord is still semi-private. So, unless he received an invite I don't think he can join.

Was referring to the Unofficial Starmade Discord server actually :P
Discord - Free voice and text chat for gamers

Plenty of dev discussion has been filtered through there previously.

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW · May 16, 2018

I think there's a pretty simple answer buried in all this. Basically, stabilizers exist to force spacing. Just remove them and make reactors and systems in general take part of the damage from nearby hits, even thru shields, scaling by their size.

This would make the ideal protection a 3D grid of armor/non-systems with large gaps, which is basically what an interior is.

Nosajimiki · May 17, 2018

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW said:
I think there's a pretty simple answer buried in all this. Basically, stabilizers exist to force spacing. Just remove them and make reactors and systems in general take part of the damage from nearby hits, even thru shields, scaling by their size.

This would make the ideal protection a 3D grid of armor/non-systems with large gaps, which is basically what an interior is.

Acid follows spaced armor and missiles are constrained to their blast radius, so this is already sort of true without changing a thing. RP builders just need to wrap their [edit]systems with interiors[/edit] instead of the other way around if they want to use those pretty inner bits to improve survival.

Agame3 · May 17, 2018

I thought it is the other way around... Place systems in the center then the RP space like a spaced armor then stabilizers and (only if needed) some shield groups right under the external armor.

Of course you will not be safe against anything in the RP area, but who needs to RP during the battle, anyway?

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW · May 17, 2018

Nosajimiki said:
Acid follows spaced armor and missiles are constrained to their blast radius, so this is already sort of true without changing a thing. RP builders just need to wrap their interiors with systems instead of the other way around if they want to use those pretty inner bits to improve survival.

The key thing is needing to place stabilizers is bad, it means way more complexity in ship design and forces tubes. An alternative that's intuitive and involves no extra blocks while working with the spacing goals is important.

Nosajimiki · May 17, 2018

Agame3 said:
I thought it is the other way around... Place systems in the center then the RP space like a spaced armor then stabilizers and (only if needed) some shield groups right under the external armor.

Of course you will not be safe against anything in the RP area, but who needs to RP during the battle, anyway?

Opps! that was a typo. Lol

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW said:
The key thing is needing to place stabilizers is bad, it means way more complexity in ship design and forces tubes. An alternative that's intuitive and involves no extra blocks while working with the spacing goals is important.

I don't think you need to do a single thing to enforce spacing. It's already meta; so, just let the brick builders burn. If it's weaker, why care if people choose to do it anyway?

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW · May 18, 2018

Nosajimiki said:
Opps! that was a typo. Lol

I don't think you need to do a single thing to enforce spacing. It's already meta; so, just let the brick builders burn. If it's weaker, why care if people choose to do it anyway?

Just not sure it's sufficiently weaker, especially with stabilizers pulled out (they're the big issue making ship design annoying).

Agame3 · May 19, 2018

Nosajimiki said:
I don't think you need to do a single thing to enforce spacing. It's already meta; so, just let the brick builders burn. If it's weaker, why care if people choose to do it anyway?

I feel tempted to upgrade just to use the 45 degrees bent axes reactor in a brick with 20% of mass or more weapon systems and 0 RP spaces inside 1 single shield bubble and prove you wrong.

Currently busy recovering wasted time by building in 0.19228 2 station killers and a few yachts. (2M shields with a 10 mins recharge rate or so, push pulse based propulsion, 0 weapons and at least half the ship RP spaces = yacht.) I wanted to build those since before the rails, never go to do it until now.) So the first pow2 build of mine can and will wait.

GnomeKing · May 19, 2018

Nebulon-B_Frigate_FTW said:
stabilizers ..... (they're the big issue making ship design annoying)

Not so much stabalizers per se (they could still work in more interesting ways, and indeed are vastly improved from their first iteration) - but overall the giant 'cubes' of reactor/stabaliser/systems feel a bit crude. I am not sure that shields 2.0 fit well or are even particularly necessary - shields certainly create design problems similar to stabalizers.

However the way the new damage models and weapons seem to be....sigh (exits to desktop).

Scypio · May 19, 2018

Agame3 said:
I feel tempted to upgrade just to use the 45 degrees bent axes reactor in a brick with 20% of mass or more weapon systems and 0 RP spaces inside 1 single shield bubble and prove you wrong.

And you'll have a giant target practice.

Even in previous power system building a brick ship was more efficient(in term of power) until you reached the 2M power cap. However nobody, at least serious in the pvp scene, would ever use this type of ships. So be my guest and do it.