Search results

Dodging my question, Criss? Answer. Stop fucking around. What breaks? Give us the consequences.

"Lol, it's ok the game is broken, just don't play! Then you don't have to play a broken game! xDDDDD" Hey, buddy. I don't know if you noticed. But we're trying to stop the game from getting broken in the first place.

Or... Instead of forcing empty space between all our systems... We could just have crew, which are a positive encouragement for having interior that actually makes the game more interesting rather than the random attempts at forced open space, which exist for no positive reason.

Give us the consequences. What breaks if you remove stabilizers? Plenty of people have been testing configs that remove stabilizer distance or even completely remove the need for stabilizers with no ill effects, and they haven't noticed anything breaking. So please, enlighten us. You know what...

That could work too, but I'm happy with the current system. I don't see a reason to do a massive overhaul of chambers. The way I see it, if you're putting specialization into a system, it's probably one of your larger systems anyway, so you're not really changing anything by basing it off...

Chambers allow for more possibilities than the old effects system, which needed an individual block type for each one. They allow for better specification as you go down the chain of a chamber. As far as function wise, I like how they are tied to reactor size rather than the mass-based of old...

I voted No on your poll because I actually like the reactor and chamber system. I just think stabilizers suck. The update doesn't need to be reworked from the ground up, it just needs the stabilizer code commented out. Oh, and the new shields suck. Those can go too.

You don't know how much interior space and what kind of interior space we're going to need for our crew, and even if you do, WE don't, and it's likely to change anyway. Trying to force interior through the stabilizer system is a stupid idea. Stop trying to justify it. It is harmful to many ship...

Are you even listening to us? I thought we'd made it extremely clear that the problem with your system is that it tries to force players to build interiors. Of course your ships, which are at least 50% interior by volume, are going to be able to fit the new systems without issue. The problem is...

The complaint comes from, if I build a ship with X size reactor, it MUST be Y length long, but the reactor can only support Z systems. Thus, if the specific ship you want to design has a bigger internal volume than the amount of systems you could make in a column from X to Y, you are forced to...

Systems. Powering literally any system. Weapons, shields, thrusters, chambers. You cannot fully fill the interior space of most hulls with systems anymore because the space required between the stabilizers and the reactor is too large. You are required to have empty space because the ships...

Do stabilizer distances still require more space between the reactor and stabilizers than said reactor could reasonably power? No offense, but it seems like you guys are really half-assing a solution that doesn't actually fix the problems people have with stabilizers. You're putting a bandaid...

The concern wasn't that islands were too powerful specifically... The concern was on how the empty space requirements of the stabilizer system would make people want to build islands and dumbbells to get around them, because people don't WANT to be forced to have useless open space in their...

I don't see why removing stabilizers would require players to fill their entire ship with generators. Power that isn't being used is pretty worthless. Without stabilizers, players will fill their ships with systems and enough generators to use those systems. Does this not sound right? I'm...

The fact that we've only had 1 Schine member, Criss, who isn't even directly involved in balance, comment on this matter for a few short posts, is extremely concerning. Hopefully they do something right here.

I'm still not sure if the structural integrity from the armor : systems ratio is actually necessary as a mechanic, but otherwise, good suggestion.

Sorry, are you saying broken things shouldn't be fixed if people aren't currently abusing them? That's what it sounds like. This is a good point and another reason why RHP is a bad system. We should still be using SHP. And this is a good example of why the shield bubbles are a bad mechanic...

Chambers are cool. Schine seems willing to listen to us on why the stabilizers don't work so that's good. you tripped before you even crossed the starting line

You could put mass enhancers for the barrels to move, and thrusters for your mothership to use and to help you dock the turrets. Ideally they would implement a system that lets us link weapons in the base to the barrels.

The only goal of the system is to try and force people to have empty space in their ships, though. If you remove that there's no reason for the system to exist at all. What do you like about them? They don't make ship building interesting or fun, and their goal is better accomplished with other...