Search results

The MFleet server, which has been in a state of peace for about a month now, has been hunting a griefer en masse who keeps killing undefended warpgates. Since no one is really fighting, few thought to put turrets on their gates. That guy has been the bane of our existence, and it's really...

I was thinking a fog of war system, where gates won't *update* their status to you unless you have *seen* the gate (by obtaining visual confirmation). So, if you haven't seen a gate or an incoming gate, you can't see the connection. But, if the gate is destroyed while you are away, you wouldn't...

Where was that stated by a Schine team member? I thought the 5 ship limit was just a rumor.

Which is why we will be getting fleet control soon. It will enable smaller factions to project their power based upon their economy and ship quality. Right now, the amount of power you can bring is limited by the number of folks on your team.

YOU KNOW WHAT WE MEAN DAMMIT ;) Will we still have docking modules/turret modules after the rail change? Will docking be based around rails, or will rails be supplemental?

Easy solution is to give weapons a much larger dmg/power ration - instead of 1/10, increase it to 1/50 for example.

I second this man's concerns over mass/power relationships. :D

Bench, what's the idea behind rails? Is there a guiding principle you could mention to give us an idea of what to expect? Something besides "They're rails....sort of" :) Is there any previous invention from either VR or the RW we could draw from to visualize the concept? When will the 'rail'...

Quite. It makes missiles actually useful against shields and the like. Believe me, if they took the full power, you would need TONS more capacitors :D They take so long to reload that it balances out.

Beam missiles were adjusted a little while back. They give twice the power, four times the damage, twice the speed, and four times the reload of a default missile with the same block count. I dunno how that effects your numbers - i'm not sure what you're getting at.

Again, the original idea would work beautifully IF we had unlimited computation power. It addresses the issue with antennas and the like, while also keeping ships with equal mass on the same footing, even if their weight distribution is drastically different. That said, we don't have unlimited...

But that doesn't come into play unless you out- weigh your opponent at least twenty to one. At which point you should probably check your assumptions. :D

I agree with this. You shouldn't be able to hop into this random flying cube-ish thing you threw together and just dominate a smaller ship, no matter the pilot. That said, your conditions cover the bases quite nicely. I'd also like to point out that for the sake of pure efficiency, drones...

I'm not claiming anything. I agree it would be more realistic to use box dims IF (and this is a big if) we were using thrusters like Space Engineers. There, turning is based on gyros, not thrusters. In terms of balance and gameplay, your argument is flawed. Right now, we have a size based...

Cool ideas like that just aren't feasible with the weapon balance the way it is. You could probably do it on a custom server, but not all ships come with adequate power supply beams :/

Is it more realistic? I'm not sure. The grass is always greener, though. :) That said, it would make sense from a purely GAMEPLAY AND BALANCE standpoint to implement a mass-based turning system. It would help to standardize ship classifications (because some people are fans of Dalmont and...

We already have a turning system based on dimensions. It's terrible for balance, because ships with lots of negative space (*cough* Star Trek *cough*) are unfairly handicapped by an illogical turning system.

I would, but my computer is half toaster. :(

I'm not sure how else to say this, but this thread is one of, if not the most well-liked suggestions in the forum for the last few weeks. :P

Personally I would skimp on Adv Armor for drones.