Search results

It can be done if the surface isn't made of voxels. I'm sure it's challenging, but it is possible. Given the preview of Minecraft-like terrain that we got a while back, I'd say that's not a direction Starmade is going however.

Hopefully not if they're optimized correctly. Weapons have been optimized considerably of late.

Maybe one form of mines could be a sort of "sleeper missile" that has a small thruster on it. It just sits there until an enemy ship gets within 100m or so, then fires its thrusters and slams into the thing like a normal lock-on missile.

Pure minmaxed PVP builds may end up looking like a collection of floating pods relatively near each other. I haven't decided yet whether to care about that or not as long as the pods stay near the main body. I'm leaning toward "don't really care, because it allows for creative freedom."

It’s far from fixing everything, but it does allow stabilizers to fulfil their intended purpose, which they currently do not.

I'd be on board with that.

If I’m not mistaken, missiles and AI currently target a random block.

To further combat "island" ships, the lead aim indicator should have a way to target small floating pieces of ships that may contain stabilizers. To do this, the lead aim indicator should just use a different colored copy of the "highlight" outline you get when you target a ship. This would...

Exactly.

Recapping all the best ideas, I've come up with this: Total stabilizer block count determines the amount of stabilization, just like now. Reactors have a "stabilization distance" value based on their output that determines the efficiency of stabilizers. If a stabilizer group is large enough...

No, the reactor can be anywhere on the ship as long as it's not too close to any of the stabilizers.

I thought mine was easier to understand and work with... depending on the distance config, your solution might make certain shapes like a long diagonal structure more balanced though. With my box dimension idea, something like that would have a larger box dimension than it should for its size...

Actually it does matter if you hit a part of the ship that has no reactor in it. If you happen to disable another system, you've at least done something. If you disable a ship's engines, it's in serious trouble. It would be adrift and unable to turn. If you blast off some of the weapons, it...

Whoops, I missed something. A minimum size to contribute additive distance isn't going to be enough to fix the loophole. You could build several stabilizer groups of the same size close together one one axis. That shouldn't be possible! Instead, the groups should have to be placed in different...

I thought you had a really bad loophole in there until I read this: Either you forgot to mention that before or I misread. In any case, I like it well enough. This accomplishes the purpose of stabilizers much more effectively than the mechanics of the pre-release.

It was clear enough to me from the patch notes.

Well, that's the idea. You don't get a rotating gun for free. Yes, you would definitely have to balance it with rotational speed. Currently there isn't any balancing in place for that. Massive turrets can rotate at max speed if given enough enhancers.

It never goes over max power. The ship automatically limits it and distributes ALL AVAILABLE POWER to the systems highest on the priority. The others get no power until the prioritized systems are done. If your thrusters are lower on the priority than your guns, you WILL lose power to your...