Search results

i mean its their idea in the first place to have a community elected council. I doubt they have the time to sift through everyone who wants to be in the council. which is why its left to the community

Java isn't an engine, it's a languge. Are you saying a different language would be better, Like C?

Okay. Not at all If you're building big enough and/or they did go a certain way about dealing with docked thrust there wouldn't be. But in situations where space mattered using dock thrusters would be better because you have more space for other things, a larger weapon array or something...

I'm aware that realistically a larger ship should be faster and small craft would realistically be useless, but in a game, ESPECIALLY a sandbox game, that should not be the case. (lets not even get started on realistic space combat, LOL) If a player wants to use a smaller ship, they need to have...

I think that was done with the full intent of making it harder to make larger ships fast, as they should IMO

in that case... Don't change pink because I like it the way it is!! :p

I think fleet implementation would definitely help. Right now you need to bring in the biggest baddest ship you can in PVP since you only "get" one, which sometimes leads to losing something you can't really afford to. I'd assume with fleets people would start to deviate towards stuff that's...

Build mode. If im not mistaken the catalogue seems to still reflect mass as it was before the change to individual block mass

What do you mean? Is there not enough automation or are you talking about resources.. or something else?

Yeah I'm not sure myself but I will see if I can get confirmation on it one way or another. Personally I think at the least docked components should be easily capable of carrying themselves. Otherwise modular ships will be garbage.

What if they're docked inside the ship? They don't. Sticking two thrusters on a ship that has a certain % of thrusters already will net a lower combined thrust then putting those same two thrusters on a docked entity with say, no thruster(and at the same energy cost). Unless this gets changed...

you will find people here think something that turns at the speed of a snail is a fighter as well, lol consensus seems to be anywhere between 100 - 1k mass. I can't see anything bigger than that as a fighter due to how they handle, but that doesn't mean you cant go bigger if you want. As far as...

you dont need to rotate 100s of weapon modules to get it to fire in a different direction i dont really like that idea. it just seems needlessly complex

If im not mistaken top speed is purely based on thrust to mass ratio so if you are somehow able to get a battleship to 2:1 and slap overdrive on you can outrun anything no matter what the size unless they also are 2:1 with overdrive. A 1.5 T/M fighter and a much larger ship also at 1.5 move at...

I have to say it's going to bug the heck out of me how fast you can accelerate backwards, especially on larger ships, but otherwise, so far this is an improvement to what we had before

They seem to pull directly from the mothership. I have thrusters chain docked to a reactor and the additional power required for them is directly added to the power required for the main ships thrust

Yessss.

Reduce missile speed and maneuverability as overall damage increases, while weaker missiles are more agile. In exchange, missiles with higher damage should have an increased amount of HP

Doesn't look like it's in the OP, but the mothership can also inherit thrust from docked entities. Which is gonna be greaaat for modular rail-based ships.

There's a VF-1A in the CC section