Search results

Limited shield repulsion would be great, as long as it weakened shields so ramming still did something to shielded targets. Traffic routes are likely far off when NPCs get a rework.

I can try big modern moving targets, but I don't see much value in it. Isanths make great little moving targets and the results were nearly the same as against a stationary modern bigger target at point blank range; what would would a large moving modern target possibly tell us in addition? Are...

So, a little back-of-the-napkin physics on guns in general: The very concept of bullets is that the most efficient way to kill people and other targets having sensitive internals and nonsensitive externals with a given mass of projectile without explosives is to penetrate. So, make the...

I don't. Configs on core mechanics just are shirking responsibility onto servers to balance the game and make it fun. They should only exist in testing to determine correct balance, not in whatever comes to release.

I like the one-two punch, but yeah, I'd love some variety with cannons, missiles at the moment seem non-optional because even when beams can take out over 10 blocks per firing, that's still not keeping up with missiles. I will be testing against some pirates soon. However, testing against...

Tested it out finally, and I agree; cannons are garbage, missiles are crazy strong, beams are fine other than against unshielded non-small targets (AKA exactly the targets you'll likely be facing in this since fighters still aren't that great and shields are garbage). Also, cannon especially...

I know that, and I'm sure a little more penetration vs. area would help on hollowing out the reactor, but the beams were barely switching to targets to the side anyways. The bigger problem is simply they don't do very much damage; missiles have about the same damage spread pattern as the beams...

More groups with small modules? What advantage does this provide?

Since beams are actually working now, unlike the last time I tried to compare weapons, I was able to compare missiles, beams, and cannons. Here's my impression of them (using testbeds with 4 groups of 3x5x10+1 weapons with a single computer, against a target <100m long with 10k reactor HP and...

I think I'd go a little tamer and just say that systems should suffer soft failures like shutdowns or delays when damaged, and that damage should leech to them from adjacent hits even thru shields, scaling in leech distance by system size. You wouldn't want to cram shield blocks randomly in...

It's not about the freedom to create an optimal system, it's about the effort to create an optimal system. When I build a ship, I don't want to spend an extra hour figuring out the desired integrity to get the effectiveness without vulnerability and create the weird shapes necessary to lower the...

I would like to note I've been watching DS9 lately (ep where they mine the Wormhole last night) and I think it has things about right on station strength: DS9 is like 30 Dominion ships because of a ton of turrets and can twoshot medium ships, but wears out in minutes against dozens of ships...

Make thrusters use a lot of energy and make armor cheap; stations will naturally get an edge in combat for price. Also make shield recharge fast out of combat so people need sustained assaults instead of being able to toss a few ships every now and then.

I think this would be very frustrating to optimize and lead to people running around with glass cannons while shoving systems in random spots in the wall would return. I do think that vulnerability to raw power should be a tradeoff, but it'd make more sense to use stabilizers instead of integrity.

Well-designed code at a high level (mainly following the Liskov Substitution Principle and Dependency Inversion Principles of SOLID) wouldn't have that many issues with this, especially the NPC one (that'd be a massive violation of DIP). Of course, StarMade's code might not be well-designed at a...

Most of what the weapon update is doing has nothing to do with changes to power. It mostly changes how missiles, beams, and block adjacency in damage work. These changes could've come while power 1.0 was in place, with later changes happening with power 2.0.

I'm primarily waiting on weapons update for anything serious, as right now systems are way too frustrating to build and better weapons will at least take away one of the primary headaches.

All in all, I feel that development happened in the wrong order. It should've gone planet revamp -> weapons revamp -> NPC stuff -> power revamp, not power revamp -> weapons revamp -> ???

I put no faith in Schema's reasoning. I also don't think it'll be an exploit if done in a way that high-capacity, low damage missiles aren't worth it on DPS; the niche I see is distracting the PD with worthless spam that could also be used to mess up tiny fighters.

Sounds like a good idea.