Search results

Exactly - floaters are relatively 'easy to make' - But i can also just mount loads of fighters on a huge open grid like rack of non-physical, disconnected pickup-points and call it a ship with docked guns - with no significant hindrances or penalties. I could accept happily something like a...

I strongly dislike the ability to easily make free floating turret pods - these are essentially just tethered ships to do all the shooting on auto-pilot, and impose no real design limits on how they are mounted on the main entity (ie can easily just remount them further away...). So far I have...

i think we are agreed there is some scope for better gameplay with missiles - and yes turret fitting can be a pain, especially on a sever, but that is not really the point here. I could think of all kinds of ways to make missiles more complex - i guess it is in the end dependent on the...

The 'area-placement' rule for the new shields is a similar mechanic to ideas about 'heat', conduits, ect already raised. In addition to other positives, this kind of solution is good because it is not too arbitrary nor specifically limiting. Consequently, 'area placement rules' are a great move...

"How many of those tentacles do you think will have good shield coverage?" they will have distributed shield coverage, and like all well behaved, classic Googly-eyed-tentacle-ships, it will progressively loose its tentacles to the brave little hero...but hey, 3/8 tentacles might just be enough...

"I can agree with you that mass is the single most intuitive system for determining the relative power of a ship." ?! I can't agree : why would eg a heavy cargo ship, have the same 'power' based on its mass as, eg a sleek stealth frigate ??? (insert other examples as required)

i don't think Area-Shields is 'limiting' (and i am very much against 'limits' in general - for example, happy to see googly-eyed-tentacle-ships) - Small parts, far from the main body of a ship should be easily damaged - cupolas/pods and more substantial projections and auxiliary structures...

-A new option is added to bobby AI modules. They can be set to target Weakest/Strongest/Random and also Closest/Furthest/Random. [Fig 3] .......to mitigate recalculations as entities receive damage/move, this could be a periodic check (eg 10seconds?) rather than on the fly calculation "but most...

non-sense : the game is about better/worse designs, not equally balanced statistics based on block count. (that would a card-trade game) dimensional rules XYZ, logarithmic bonus, diminishing return mechanics, etc are what keep people coming back to the game. complex power rules (as a basis for...

"The way they have it now encourages you to either stay inside the bubble or go far enough outside it to make another strong bubble, anything in between those is just a liability." this is actually a big problem if overlapping shield-bubbles are in any way problematic :/

agreed - no longer can shields be located in trunk, trailing behind in the next sector :)

Would you at least agree that 'Area-Group-shields' are better gameplay concept than 'plonk-anywhere-and-forget-shields' ? What do you think about 'All-or -nothing' vs 'Progressively-weakened' damage mitigation for shields ?

"...depending on the builders skill", "if you are a good pilot" / "if they are poorly built" it is not false that that currently when a 'small' ship (excluding a small glass cannon) fights a 'large' ship (assuming it is competently built and well shielded) it often can utterly fail to penetrate...

Offense beats defense because huge weapons get built...yes, ships are "egg-shells-with-hammers", which is meant to imply that even the largest Naval vessel was potentially breakable by cannonades from small frigates (everybody has hammers). Starmade systems should, i feel, fall somewhere within...

just exactly that > i am happy for Tiny and Titan to coexist :) but faction/sever dynamics are affected when a player knows they are essentially invulnerable - or must fend off near invulnerable opponents... DireVenom "Just throwing out potential ideas, main shielding around the ship with...

maybe yes - multiple options and ways of making power could be very interesting. Perhaps even up to reactor blocks where power generation algorithm and rules could be player configurable and define the extent to which different bonus/penalty scheme are applied to particular forms of reactor...

This looks very interesting (potential exploits aside) > the old shield system is quite simple/crude/linear...the problem of 'larger' ship shields being virtually impermeable sets in motion a number of other mechanics, generally trending towards gigantism/block spam/alpha-only weaponry ect...

i also think there could be scope to have player settings which change reactor behavior, with or without chambers > for example a slider that shifts from eg 'more power/less HP/etc' to 'less power/more HP/etc', or perhaps that effects progressively the need for additional blocks/stabilizers...

"You won't destroy anything big with a single fighter in these games. What you do is defeating few big ships with many small ones for the same resource cost as the big ones. And that is exactly what we already have in StarMade for quite some time." Except that fleet commands/targeting are very...

efficiency drop off is very rapid in 2.0 rapid and over a small physical range . it is also easy to 'see' the drop due to the HUD graphics. Therefore I assume hardly anybody will build a reactor which is so obviously inefficient, unless they are trying to re-fit a pretty hull. also: adding an...