- Joined
- Dec 30, 2012
- Messages
- 790
- Reaction score
- 1
And the guy anyway had not enough energy for his guns, 3-4 k damage per bullet ? Very \"rapid\" ?
Right.
Right.
A bit of good news for thr turning and shielding of larger ships!
- Thread starter FlyingDebris
- Start date
How about putting a soft cap on shields? (The more you add, the more you get, but a little bit less each time)
Shield capacity could be linear, perhaps, but shield regen should soft cap somewhat rapidly so that a ship can\'t be fully immune to anything but a massive 1km wide battle station.
However, if this is done, the strength of armor should be greatly improved, because at the moment they get torn through by even the weakest of weaponry.
Shield capacity could be linear, perhaps, but shield regen should soft cap somewhat rapidly so that a ship can\'t be fully immune to anything but a massive 1km wide battle station.
However, if this is done, the strength of armor should be greatly improved, because at the moment they get torn through by even the weakest of weaponry.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2013
- Messages
- 635
- Reaction score
- 875
the problem is that you cannot do that with the uncapped infinite scale of weapons (provided enough energy)
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2013
- Messages
- 383
- Reaction score
- 114
ok so this topic seems to not want to die.
let me ask all of you this, are any of you astropsysicists? I know I am not, but I do know one thing everyone knows. THERE IS NO FUCKING GRAVITY IN DEEP SPACE!!!!!!
so all of thius talk about logically bigger objects must move slow talk is bullshit. and when you all have PHD in psysics to explain otherwise call us because we wont listen otherwise.
let me ask all of you this, are any of you astropsysicists? I know I am not, but I do know one thing everyone knows. THERE IS NO FUCKING GRAVITY IN DEEP SPACE!!!!!!
so all of thius talk about logically bigger objects must move slow talk is bullshit. and when you all have PHD in psysics to explain otherwise call us because we wont listen otherwise.
MrFURB
Madman of the Girders
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2013
- Messages
- 1,116
- Reaction score
- 413
You are correct, there is no gravity in space. However, there is still mass, and a more massive (what people refer to as \'heavy\' even though it\'s weightless) object will require more force to propel itself as fast as something with less mass...
But all of what I just said is moot anyways because it\'s Starmade and the universe follows what rules Schema wishes for it.
But all of what I just said is moot anyways because it\'s Starmade and the universe follows what rules Schema wishes for it.
That would indeed be a problem.
I think perhaps weapons should be balanced such that bigger cannons do more damage and have more range, and an overall higher DPS, but will have low velocity and rate of fire, making the shots easier to evade.
On the other hand, smaller cannons should be capable of much higher velocities and rates of fire, but have a notably lower DPS.
Energy recharge could be given a soft cap too, but the capacity could be linear, so that large ships could fire powerful weapons for long durations but once their energy is depleted it would be a long wait for a full recharge.
I think perhaps weapons should be balanced such that bigger cannons do more damage and have more range, and an overall higher DPS, but will have low velocity and rate of fire, making the shots easier to evade.
On the other hand, smaller cannons should be capable of much higher velocities and rates of fire, but have a notably lower DPS.
Energy recharge could be given a soft cap too, but the capacity could be linear, so that large ships could fire powerful weapons for long durations but once their energy is depleted it would be a long wait for a full recharge.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Messages
- 427
- Reaction score
- 53
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2013
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 16
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2013
- Messages
- 99
- Reaction score
- 0
You are correct, there is no
You are correct, there is no gravity in space. However, there is still mass, and a more massive (what people refer to as \'heavy\' even though it\'s weightless) object will require more force to propel itself as fast as something with less mass...
But all of what I just said is moot anyways because it\'s Starmade and the universe follows what rules Schema wishes for it.
That is not true there is and always will be some sort of gravity in space. If you said their was no gravity in space life would not and could not exsist due to the sun not forming. Even if their was a sun then their would be no planets in orbit because \"their is no gravity in space.
You are correct, there is no gravity in space. However, there is still mass, and a more massive (what people refer to as \'heavy\' even though it\'s weightless) object will require more force to propel itself as fast as something with less mass...
But all of what I just said is moot anyways because it\'s Starmade and the universe follows what rules Schema wishes for it.
That is not true there is and always will be some sort of gravity in space. If you said their was no gravity in space life would not and could not exsist due to the sun not forming. Even if their was a sun then their would be no planets in orbit because \"their is no gravity in space.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 0
Pwhg\'thulum Dgh\'thalt\'ha Ghri\'thilam Tra\'tis Mar\'gurdah FALI\'TIKQE!
Hey look at that, my Necromancy is still slightly viable.
Reading through this made me facepalm hard enough to leave a handprint on my face. Why are poeple so stupid? Ugh. If you\'ve ever seen a real battle, taking one fighter vs. an aircraft carrier is stupid and suicide, as suicide would be the only way to even remotely defeat the carrier. Yet there is no way the carrier could turn as fast as the jet.
From a basic physiics standpoint, a larger and more massive object needs more force to overcome it\'s previous inertia, including null inertia, while a smaller and less massive object needs less.
If you try to roll a small rubber ball, it\'d be rather easy. If you try to push over a huge spherical boulder, it\'d take a shitton out of you, if it\'s even possible.
Bigger is better, smaller is more manueverable. Get over it people!
Hey look at that, my Necromancy is still slightly viable.
Reading through this made me facepalm hard enough to leave a handprint on my face. Why are poeple so stupid? Ugh. If you\'ve ever seen a real battle, taking one fighter vs. an aircraft carrier is stupid and suicide, as suicide would be the only way to even remotely defeat the carrier. Yet there is no way the carrier could turn as fast as the jet.
From a basic physiics standpoint, a larger and more massive object needs more force to overcome it\'s previous inertia, including null inertia, while a smaller and less massive object needs less.
If you try to roll a small rubber ball, it\'d be rather easy. If you try to push over a huge spherical boulder, it\'d take a shitton out of you, if it\'s even possible.
Bigger is better, smaller is more manueverable. Get over it people!