Search results

Alright, assuming this is where we are supposed to ask questions, here we go. What changes can we expect to the playstyle of larger ships? -In regards to interface and control systems, will we ever be able to "command" capitals as opposed just piloting them as we do now? -Regarding the combat...

Schema, the million-man army of coders masquerading as a single person has once again outdone themselves.

As in, you know what we should expect but refuse to tell us(If so, thanks. The less spoilers in circulation, the better), or you're just speaking from experience of Schema's mind-blowing tendencies?

How about a "read by developer" indicator for threads? Would allow people with a say in matters of game design to assure players their suggestions are being read, without wasting any time more than that it would take to check a box, and without actually saying something for players to misinterpret.

The answer to your first paragraph- Shield leaking. Would open for some interesting hull mechanics as well.

In my opinion, the fact alone that drones need suggesting is an indicator of amuch more fundamental flaw- Our capitals don\'t have command centres, they have joysticks and \"fire\" buttons. And fixed-forward cannons. And thrusters allowing them to dodge around like nothing. And pretty much...

My opinion: No. Loosing shields should be crippling for a non-fighter ship and force it to retreat asap. The usefullness of hull should be implemented in the form of shields leaking small amounts of damage that the hull has to soak up.

That.... really wouldn\'t make any sense. Sure, that may not be the most important aspect of the game, but still, I really think capitals should be significantly faster than smaller ships when it comes to going from point a to point b. Fighters should still be more agile, but that\'s about it.

Finally some answers!

Would anyone happen to have the tools to replace those initials with our beloved developer\'s avatar\'s face?

I personally don\'t see your problem with large ships requiring a lot of time, rescources and infrastructure to construct, with or without a schematic.

Seems like a reasonable enough implementation, was going to suggest about the same thing myself. Shouldn\'t be dependant on the catalog though, the ability to locally store and apply blueprints would be much more practical. (catalog should still be accessible, though)

Also, with those cut-outs in the quote, the last sentence ends up lacking vital context. Sry for that. Maybe I tried to much to not make my post so long that it takes 10min to read :) Or to little. That sentance was anyway of no relevance to your statement. “Seconds? Direct hits through...

That\'s enough, thank you. We don\'t want to encourage our developer to spend less time the he thinks he needs to get things right. That\'s how the best games are made.

Though, I really do want to know, will we be able to actually program our npcs comehow or just utilize a command line interface of some sort?

My satisfaction is crossing into the \"should have sent a poet\" zone.... Now, if you excuse me, I\'m going to hold a personal \"Finally programmeable systems\" celebration. In short, I\'ve got to agree with 2dozen.

Well, if you it like that... I apologize, it would appear I missunderstood you. And yes, I do prefer discussions over debates.

shields would need to leak damage ... inversely proportional to the remaining shield percentage ... never exceeding a few hundreds until shields are fully depleted ... as it would reduce the need for hull to increase in thickness along with the size of the ship it\'s protecting. People don\'t...

How does this relate to my post? It would appear to be an entirely separate idea....

Well, here's yet another post regarding overall mechanics. Everyone seems to want a say in the matter of combat mechanics nowadays, so I thought I'd have mine. I'm trying to avoid introductions, so I'll just skip to the things I think need doing. Making hull relevant It's widely agreed...