Balancing blocks gut-check

[Energywelder]

I don't see what's so confusing about my idea. There's nothing "circuitous" about it.

According to your original post, you want to remove the benefit of overlapping multiple blocks within the same physical space and thus, disincentivise people from doing it. Am I right?

With respect; my idea accomplishes this goal while yours does not.

My idea not only solves the problem, but does so without impacting existing builds or the ways in which weapons affect them.

Your idea negatively impacts nearly all existing builds while leaving a few holes for determined "cheaters" to continue to exploit. The incentive to use the exploit would still exist under your plan; albeit to a lesser degree.

Well wait, that's something i'm actually interested in. I've been trying to to refine my idea but have never gotten much constructive criticism. In what ways does my idea not discourage exploiters?

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Well wait, that's something i'm actually interested in. I've been trying to to refine my idea but have never gotten much constructive criticism. In what ways does my idea not discourage exploiters?

By focusing on block HP, you can lower the HP gains that overlapping allows but a determined player can still dock on more entities to overlap and thus, increase their armor.

Slabs and wedges can be fit together in the way you explain but there are other tricks as well.

For example, by using plex-doors, blast doors, rail-spawning etc. there is no real limit to how many blocks a player can overlap. They are only limited by the power of their computer and their desire for thrust; which is of course irrelevant if they are building a station.

So no matter how far you cut block HP, a player can continue to overlap blocks until he "un-nerfs" himself then starts stacking on more armor. So not only did you not stop the cheater but you've nerfed everyone else's armor who is playing fair.

My method is geared toward blocking the exploit directly at its source (the overlapping blocks) without breaking everyone's existing builds.

Does that make more sense?

 

[Energywelder]

By focusing on block HP, you can lower the HP gains that overlapping allows but a determined player can still dock on more entities to overlap and thus, increase their armor.

Slabs and wedges can be fit together in the way you explain but there are other tricks as well.

For example, by using plex-doors, blast doors, rail-spawning etc. there is no real limit to how many blocks a player can overlap. They are only limited by the power of their computer and their desire for thrust; which is of course irrelevant if they are building a station.

So no matter how far you cut block HP, a player can continue to overlap blocks until he "un-nerfs" himself then starts stacking on more armor. So not only did you not stop the cheater but you've nerfed everyone else's armor who is playing fair.

My method is geared toward blocking the exploit directly at its source (the overlapping blocks) without breaking everyone's existing builds.

Does that make more sense?

I understand what you're saying, but now i'm confused on another point. I thought that, while using rails, you can get 2 or more non-cubic blocks into the same space, but once the physical non-cubic blocks touch an actual collision is registered and the rail grinds to a halt? Meaning that the number of non-cubic blocks you can clip into the same space is limited by their geometry and is capped at ~4 which would require some creating wiggling for slabs or tetra blocks?

 

[Dr. Whammy]

I understand what you're saying, but now i'm confused on another point. I thought that, while using rails, you can get 2 or more non-cubic blocks into the same space, but once the physical non-cubic blocks touch an actual collision is registered and the rail grinds to a halt? Meaning that the number of non-cubic blocks you can clip into the same space is limited by their geometry and is capped at ~4 which would require some creating wiggling for slabs or tetra blocks?

Physically fitting partial blocks together is only one way to occupy the same space. In theory, you can fit 4 slabs or two wedges but like I said; there are other tricks. After all, collision only affects things that move. But what about things that don't move but instead have an on/off state?

Lets say I place a core and make a wall of blast doors linked to an activation module then "open" those doors and save a blueprint of the object..

Theoretically, I can then spawn this object to dozens or hundreds of individual basic rails all over my ship/station.

...and then "close" the doors. ...for each and every core I've placed; whether it be dozens, hundreds or thousands....

Bolt on enough thrust, and you get something like this

 

[Energywelder]

Physically fitting partial blocks together is only one way to occupy the same space. In theory, you can fit 4 slabs or two wedges but like I said; there are other tricks. After all, collision only affects things that move. But what about things that don't move but instead have an on/off state?

Lets say I place a core and make a wall of blast doors linked to an activation module then "open" those doors and save a blueprint of the object..

Theoretically, I can then spawn this object to dozens or hundreds of individual basic rails all over my ship/station.

...and then "close" the doors. ...for each and every core I've placed; whether it be dozens, hundreds or thousands....

Bolt on enough thrust, and you get something like this

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, i see now what you mean. That IS kinda gross. Well then, yeah your method is more practical. Although i still want non-cubic blocks to be lighter :,(