Search results

Just want to point out, that before the turn rate change the game already rewarded you more for making big ugly cubes as opposed to nice ships. So nothing has really changed in that department. As far as turn rates, there\'s a server option to adjust how it scales, and Schema even said...

But don\'t confuse me for getting upset or calling your proposal overpowered for the sake of argument. It was because I legitimately felt that way. However, now what you\'re saying makes more sense to me. But before I go on I\'ll answer your question about how AMC\'s are too powerful right...

For the most part I agree with the way you want AMC\'s to work. But I still completely disagree with the splash damage part on AMC\'s. I also don\'t see your argument as a justifiable reason to have splash damage. Missiles should be more useful than their current state, I think many would...

How could you possibly do that? The AI Accuracy config doesn\'t seem to work for anyone. I have it at 1, and they are still laser accurate. A other people posted on the thread I made about it in the bugs section and they had the same experience. Did you find a way to make it work? If so...

We don\'t need hull that\'s good against physical weapons(Missiles, possible kinetic weapons in the future) because that\'s what shields do. As for energy dampening hull, yes that\'s a good idea. But I mean, like I said before, just because we have a lot of crafting materials in the game...

The idea that AMC\'s are the Universal weapon types, where missiles specialize vs hull and an un-named yet-to-be created weapon is going to be better vs shields, is fine. But for that to be the case, Missiles need to be better, AMC\'s need to be worse, and whatever the next weapon is should...

IGN: McDili I\'m interested in building, maybe some consentual pvp occasionally, and just hanging out. Also, if you can\'t find an Admin, I am over 18, I have Skype, and I spent 5 years as an Administrator in the WoW Private Server community.

I think it\'s a great idea with the portals. I really like how gates between stations has a configurable minimum distance, and I really like the default 50km minimum distance a portal can take you. That way there\'s still a lot of ground, pirates, and resources within that 50km distance that...

I\'ve partially discussed this solution in my thread here: http://star-made.org/content/simple-solution-hull-mechanics But to spare you the wall of text, it detracts from customization and is actually kind of goofy. In my thread it was slightly different, mass-based hull-strength, though...

Oh wow I was not aware that plex-glass had these properties. I mean I suppose if plex-glass is meant to be as strong as regular hull, then it only makes sense that plex-glass play the same role as regular hull in my proposal.

As I said, griefing is subjective. You think attacking a ship of someone who logged out isn\'t griefing. I think it\'s extremely unforgiving and thus griefing. Difference of opinion, this is why it should be left up to the owners of a server to set boundaries at their own discretion.

To address plex glass, I have no immediate interest in plex glass sharing the properties of hull. Plex glass is purely aesthetic, it takes up mass and provides no function. It is just nice to look through. I think if you use plex glass, it makes your ship look nice in exchange for less...

No worries about your keys missing, I understand it just fine bud. I\'m not sure I agree that this concept is over-planned. The mechanic I\'m suggesting is already in the game, it exists between missiles vs shields. So the players already have experience with this mechanic. So I\'d say it\'s...

I don\'t want collision damage to be in StarMade. Or rather, I don\'t want the technical difficulties that are involved with it. It takes a lot of calculations to handle things like collision damage, especially if you want it to work properly based on mass and intertia. Long story short...

This is indeed an alternate solution. Before I go forward, I just want to re-iterate, shotgun ships are already the most viable pattern. You get better DPS and penetration in the current game when you build multiple cannons, compared to just having one or two big cannons. My proposal doesn\'t...

The thing is, Missile have a very slow fire rate. In your proposal, you could have high ROF high damage low-range AMC\'s. You\'re suggesting the highest fire-rate be 10 Rounds per Second, which translates into 600 RPM. Which mind you, isn\'t actually that high compared to what we have...

I get the impression that you think I created a proposal in which to solely make missiles more useful. I could be wrong but, I agree with you. There ISN\'T problem with the role that missiles play in battle. But that\'s not what this thread is about. The thread is about Hull being too weak...

So I went and tested this out myself, and I didn\'t have any issues with with the new pirate bases in the recent pre-build(They have their turrets on the outside now instead of the inside) I\'m not sure how you could reproduce this scenario

I just feel like it\'s going to be a real pain in the rear for Schema to code such a system. Making it functional will be one accomplishment, but making it graceful is important too and that will be equally challenging. If it can be done well, then I\'m all for it. +1

On one hand we have the disintegrator, it\'s really not very useful to us against shielded targets. On the other hand if it was very powerful even against shielded targets, it could get really cheesy with players running around ramming others.