And Here We Go

[Serene-Switch]

I'll try to keep this short and to the point

Pew Pew!

Cannon recoil should be removed. Though total removal may seem like an extreme stance I have given considerable thought to this mechanic and still can find no justification for its existance. It is a detriment to cannon systems which is not found with other weapons, furthermore it makes the weapons use complicated due to the physics imposed on both the weapon and the target. Given the low accuracy of cannon systems at long range without this mechanic, this seems to only worsen an already present problem.

How Does This Work?

While personally I believe the missile capacity systems should be removed, I cannot deny there is an argument to be made for its existance. The problem is the balance between player choice and game performance and while at first this mechanic seems like attempt to curve build style away from using missiles as a main weapon, I have also been the victim of a server crash due to missile spam.

With proper mechanics I believe this systems can be balanced for both sides of the argument starting with a set number of capacity modules per missile gained, and capacity reload times congruent with missile cooldown. As of now, with the seemingly arbitrary ruleset for missile capacity, finding any balance is unlikly.

Another Dimension? Another Dimension!

A simple concept though probably much harder to impliment, I propose Transporter Systems capable of true rotation, as in changing a players orientation to the orientation of the transporter block they are transported to, rather than to the galactic "up". Given the gravity system we currently have I believe the necessity for this is obvious.

Speaking of orientation, I suggest proper build camera rotation for all dimensions would be most useful. I find it strange that in a space game proporting dedication to realism that it rarly uses the 3D space it creates. As someone who finds it most difficult to build along the ventral side of a ship due to current camera limitations I would very much like to be able to orient myself to whatever plain and direction I happen to be building on.

Last but not least, BLOCK ROTATIONS, MORE BLOCK ROTATIONS, ALL THE BLOCK ROTATIONS!
You may be asking if every block really needs every possible orientation, and the answer is yes. Regardless if you have found a use for a certain block rotation or not does not mean someone else will not, and it never hurts to have more options.

 

[Muffin_man17]

" Last but not least, BLOCK ROTATIONS, MORE BLOCK ROTATIONS, ALL THE BLOCK ROTATIONS!
You may be asking if every block really needs every possible orientation, and the answer is yes. Regardless if you have found a use for a certain block rotation or not does not mean someone else will not, and it never hurts to have more options."

This please! I can't tell you how many times I ran into a design issue because I couldn't rotate a block a certain way. Especially if you are using certain blocks for the the textures on said block only to find you can't rotate to the desired orientation. It's so frustrating!

I'm also for the removal of recoil since it doesn't really do much in gameplay. I have not used missiles enough to know the balance of missile capacity but atleast on paper it seems to make sense. Maybe if missiles locked slightly faster but would reset their lock after each missile launched to help reduce the spam.

 

[jayman38]

I do not believe cannon recoil should be completely removed, instead, being limited to a curve based on weapon size versus ship size.

cannon_recoil_amount = cannon_computer_slave_block_count / ship_block_count // admittedly very much a linear line, versus a curve
if cannon_recoil_amount < 0.0001 then cannon_recoil_amount = 0.0
if cannon_recoil_amount > 0.8 then cannon_recoil_amount = 0.8

This way, cannons that take up nearly all the ship is still wildly recoiling, while normal-size cannons have little recoil. Guns that are less than 1% of 1% of the ship's overall block count will have no recoil whatsoever. Maybe have an "or" part of the if statement that checks if the gun block count is less than some number, like 10, then it will also be set to no-recoil. This would allow small weapons on small fighters to have scalpel-precision, while the same ratio on a much larger ship will have more spray effect due to standard recoil.

Would missiles be better served by a larger starting capacity? Maybe the default capacity should be more than 2 or whatever the initial default capacity is currently. Maybe missile launchers should start with 10 missiles as a default.

I fully agree on transported-item rotation, as well as block rotation completeness.

 

[NeonSturm]

I think cannons have no purpose in space, except for stationary assault or for capital ship battles. Alternatives: Railguns and Antimatter-Maser ´(Masers are like Lasers, just with matter-particle-streams instead of photon-beams)

Railguns as they are now inflict high damage and have a huge impact on the turret, but not too much on the whole ship because the force is usually distributed to 3-5 turrets and 9-15 barrels rarely fire exactly simultanously.

>> SM could include the technique, that at higher distances vs slow targets, you can accumulate shots by giving them different arrival times via trajectory(near black-holes) or weight/velocity-differences.
Especially if we keep the cannon name, this could compensate for it's weakness by not giving the target station time to recover from 3-4 seconds of shooting. It could separate ship-fighter/drone combat and ship-capitalship/station combat if desired.

(Antimatter/matter)-Masers are the best weapons for space-combat. With antimatter, it doesn't really MATTER wether you have a solid bullet or a stream of particles - they annihilate the same ammount of matter.
With masers, you have no problem to compensate the recoil because it distributes over a higher time period.
You probably also spend so much mass in the antimatter containment and acceleration module, that the recoil doesn't really matter.

If you use matter instead, you can configure the targeting system to compensate for the movement of your ship and your target during a short firing burst to punkture through a tiny hole.
The more unpredictable the movement, the lesser the penetration, but kinetic damage remains similar.
You may also opt to use energetic particles against shields or a stream of particles which cause thermal damage on hull (but for thermal damage, the distribution pattern is also very important to calculate damage yield)
Don't think about shotguns here: The particles come in a pinpointed stream and not in a cloud.

If you hit a resonance frequency in the structure with multiple cannons, it might even be more devasting (critical strikes) - either for you or your opponent. Masers have more reliable damage and less impact on your own ships structure.
Build a cannon big enough without collision compensator or thoughts about resonance frequencies and it may rip your ship apart too.

Masers or their components can also be dual-use as thrusters and weapons, depending on projectile spread and their energetic charge - especially with antimatter and quantum reactors.
Depending on specialisation of components, thrusters may also be basic weapons (burn someones face or "put a bullet in the exhaust pipe") and masers components can cause a fusion-reaction of hydrogen in pure form or within specially charged molecules as catalysator.
The heat of thrusters can also be a basic power plant at the same time.

Result:
I'd like to keep cannons. I also like Matter-stream-pulses with Maser weapons if you want recoil to be more reliable (compensate it by substracting thrust force while you use that weapon).

I also very much like dual-use or even tree-al/quadr-al-use.
A trader will most likely have rather expensive engines, even if the ship's structure is mostly basic hull and the systems not for combat.
Wouldn't it be plausible if he has modifications which boost shields with the jump-drive capacitor and use thrusters which can generate plasma for your plasma cannons rather than installing dedicated weapons to have cheap defense when needed?
He may even build a reactor with limited time of use, using the thrusters in short pulses and a recoil-dampener to generate short bursts of power for not-exactly-100%-efficient weapons and the thrusters heat plus the cooled ship mass as reactor overcharge components.

That's what I call realistic!

 

[Ribbons0121R121]

doesnt have to be realistic, but i love the railgun idea.
as long as we can create bfgs