Search results

But last I checked, the ship core doesn\'t get protection from the ship\'s shields, meaning if you have your ship core exposed it can take damage even if the ship\'s shields are up. That alone could make boarding a useful tactic. Though, for any sort of boarding to happen, player coordinates...

The reactor setup is a specifc design. Not all power generator designs are reactor designs. As the OP did not specify, it made more sense to me at the time to assume that he meant power generator designs in general, including ship-lines.

I think he was asking whether or not it would be worth it to weave thrusters through his ship alongside the power blocks; he used the phrase \"power blocks\" and not \"reactors.\" And, the answer to that is \"sort of\", since the additional exponential scaling that thrusters get means that a...

Unlike power generators, thrusters also grow exponentially in addition to their box dimension growth, so the wasted space in the middle of a reactor configuration would give you less thrust than if you had simply filled the entire thing with thrusters. It does, however, mean that the same...

...tend not to work very well. They\'re too verbose for the devs to scan over for ideas, and too unfocused for the community to discuss properly. Many of these have already been discussed many times in other threads as well.

Only if the station is set as your faction home.

Actually, a standard cube uses 12 polygons if all faces are exposed; it takes two polygons to make a square in most modern graphics APIs. More on topic, though, the biggest issue I see here is that you would need many, many more inventory slots for the different block types. Either the game...

I envy your MSPaint skills.

That was a reply to me2005, not you.

The issue with AMCs is that their diminishing returns are based on the individual AMC grouping regardless of how many blocks are on the ships. After you have the range you want, you can double your AMC damage by doubling the number of canons you have. As a result, AMC damage scales...

If you\'re speaking in terms of central gravity, then the problem is that the only place you can build a square structure is on the exact center of the planet on the six major axis, otherwise the buildings would end up \"jagged.\" If you\'re speaking in terms of a planet who\'s voxel geometry...

What you don\'t seem to understand is that Pytheas essentially is using a cleverly-disguized loading screen to get around the fact that you can\'t interact with a warped cubic worldspace from an un-warped cubic worldspace. In starmade, you can mine blocks on a planet\'s surface from space...

Turn speed hits it\'s lowest point at 300 mass, or 3000 blocks. A small friggate turns just as fast as the biggest ship on your server.

It\'s really not necessary to post this in every ship classification thread.

Catch being, if you have any turrets docked to your ship, their AI modules will turn off as you cycle through them. I really wish they didn\'t do that...

Yes, if you take any single giant capitol ship and remove all the blocks, then split those blocks evenly down the middle and use them to make two new ships, the two new ships will be more powerful than the capitol ship. That, however, is entirely irrelevant to the discussion, because you can\'t...

\"Pretty much everyone agreed...\" Translation: \"Three people I talked to agreed...\"

That\'s a strange shape for a salvage ship, what with the deadzone in the middle.

I tend to just use this along with the words \"flak\" or \"cannon,\" where a \"flak\" turret is one that shoots many weak lasers and a \"cannon\" turret is one that fires few strong lasers. So I could have a \"Micro Flak Turret,\" a \"Class A Cannon Turret,\" and so on. Your \"chaingun\"...

At least, not unless they have a completely new mode of operation, like the recent pulse canons. I think it would be better if the current weapons were tweaked to make them fill more roles. The one that gets thrown around a lot is having AMCs fire slower the larger they get instead of faster...