Big Ship vs Small Ship - PROBLEM SOLVED

[Alexander Prime]

for the turning aspect, what matters is how fast you can change direction, not the speed of the endpoints, how would that help the pilot?


I\'m having a hard time picking out distinct thoughts in your block of text, but I\'m guessing this is in response to my post? If so, read over it again; there is no intent to help the pilot, only to keep the game balanced. I\'m trying to explain that the best way to scale turning thrust is to impose a limit on the linear acceleration of the ship\'s extremities, rather than on angular acceleration around the center of mass. This is a better approximation of real life which balances large ships and supports people\'s existing building habits at the same time. This is also apparently what Schema\'s already said he\'s doing.

 

[John Sheridan]

Don\'t know how this went off on a tangent but yeah these people claiming small fighers should be able to take out a capital ship solo are retarded. The only way this sould be possible is if:

a) The capital ship has no defences
OR
b) You find a blind spot and are an awesome pilot that manages to stay there somehow long enough

No other way. Get over it. There has to be a benefit to building a big ship, you being too shit at building / lazy with resources is not a good enough reason to retard down big ships to \"big tie fighter\" level.

But I still fully believe reversing should be cut down to 50% max throttle speed to stop what I said above: Capital ships fast-reversing and killing small fighters. That\'s just plain wrong.

I like the dimensions idea for affecting turning however it concerns me I dont want to only ever see capital ships that are super wide and never long anymore... thats just wierd.

 

[artillarmech]

I think the reason people want little fighters to beat huge capital ships is the bosses from old space games, or any game with a boss in general where you (as the little guy) take out the big, slow, easy to hit boss which is in reality supposed to be able to instakill you, but they added weaknesses. they view players flying capitals as \"Bosses\" who should be easily defeatable, which is unrealistic

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Internet fight.

 

[HadrasVorshoth]

I like your suggestions, but there are advantages to small ships that do make them capable of taking down larger ships, namely the lower cost of construction, and the following on point of the Zerg Rush Principle allowing a large number of independantly moving ships distract the larger ship\'s controllers for long enough that they cannot focus on the entire battle at once, meaning a few fighters get through the turrets o\' doom and take down key components.

One X wing on its own cannot take down a Death Star, but get an entire Squadron to distract the turrets and TIE fighters, a mystical Force helping that one lucky guy without any experience of flying something in 3 dimensions, and that lucky guy might just have a chance to get a blast into the looked-over exhaust port.

 

[Snapems]

@OP \" \"thrust / weight ratio\" that a smaller ship would need.\" - Yes please. This would be my favorite solution.

1. Make turning requrie the use of thrusts (/power)

2. Set turning speed related to the thrust/mass ratio. (And add- as was just changed, the dimensions of the ship- which is particularly awesome).

3. Nerf thrusts as the numbers get higher - a smidgens harder than it is.

4. Say \"Yay!\"

 

[jamie starmade]

maybe the requirement for fuel using can help?

and also isnt it a little over powering that shield generators can project the exact same amount of shielding over an area however large (is this true? shouldnt they be more like cloaking devices?)?

what about powerplants then? maybe reducing their effectiveness proportional to the amount of things straped to them can help?

i say we let it be possible to turn faster, but to make a big ass fast turning ship would be suicidal and idiotic.

i personally think big ships are only for strategic purposes, like a platform to sustain long ranged battles much like how aircraft carriers are like today. you dont see them driving around shooting at destroyers. in fact you shouldnt see carriers drive around at all.







as i have posted before i think the requirement for fuel is a must have for other things to make sense and fall into place.

 

[XxDanclarke96xX]

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/517111-breaking-bad

 

[jamie starmade]

there is pretty much no point for having a largeship whom is not a carrier other than i guess decimating an entire planet or a shipyard ship or something specialized. if you were to build a single ship for the purpose of killing off an entire fleet you should be able to make a lot of smaller ships that can kill off the same fleet for much cheaper in total

 

[MrFURB]

You\'ve hit the nail on the head, actually. Big ships are a lot less efficient than smaller ones, even though they\'re the most commonly used warship today. Right now there\'s a ton of available credits/resources spread amongst only a few pilots, so each individual has enough spare resources to build those large, powerful-yet-inefficient capital ships.

If the economy changes to make getting credits harder, then the average size of a warship will go down, while the efficiency will go up, and maybe we\'ll see more large factions forming and duking it out for what asteroids/shops/planets are left near their home base.

 

[jamie starmade]

im very glad that you agree, if anyone is interested or just wants to kill some time why not read up on this idea list ive composed a few weeks ago:

http://star-made.org/content/fuel-vector-thrusters-and-subsequent-ideaz

its rather lengthy and not all of the ideas are good ideas but at least i think if you were to read through them it will at least take 20 mins of unallocated free time away form your hands.

 

[FlyingDebris]

Go and google \"starfish prime\" it was a nuclear test in space. It also happened to be the gayest nuke ever, seeing as to how it made a giant rainbow. :P

 

[keylan118]

I put a crazy amount of thrusters on my ship.....it can\'t turn. IT IS HUGE but it can\'t turn. 40% is thrusters but it can\'t turn. It can go left and right and backwards with EASE but when i use the mouse to turn around IT CAN\'T!

 

[Riftmaster]

I think thrust efficency should increase slightly as the block numbers increase - since, I think, making an efficent propulsion system might be easier at larger sizes...could be wrong.



Not much though...perhaps 0.1% per 1000 blocks or something.

 

[Moph]

I agree, it would get bigger, in terms of volume, since there is no atmosphere slowing it\'s expansion; but not neccesarily more powerful as the size of it alone shows that it\'s force dissipates more than if it was in a confined space, or under pressure. I suppose it could\'ve been more \'destructive\' simply because of the size, but that word only relates to whether things have been destroyed or not rather than commenting on the power of the blast. When considering a blast next to an object in deep space, we\'re only really concerned with the force/impact from the explosion on that object, rather than how many other things it reaches.
Not that I think movies are a reliable scientific source, but just to illustrate the point, in Armageddon, this is the whole reason they send a drilling team to the asteroid so they can plant a nuclear bomb as deeply into it as they can. If the explosion would\'ve been more powerful being surrounded by a vacuum, they would\'ve left it on the surface. The effectiveness of avoiding asteroid collisions with a nuclear bomb is another story however.

Also, one major thing to note is that the rainbow effects happened because the explosion was interacting with the planet\'s atmosphere; we\'re talking about the power of an explosion next to a ship in deep space.

 

[2ft7Ninja]

Don\'t get me wrong. Massive ships still need to be better, but a tiny little badass ship shouldn\'t be out of the question. I\'d love a nasty little fighter just as long as an op fighter was expensive as a massive ship because I its expensive parts.

Maybe make it a Rock Paper Scissors thing. Small ship beats big ship, big ship beats medium ship, medium ship beats small ship, AS LONG AS EACH OF THEM IS AS EXPENSIVE AS THE OTHER ONE. This will make you want to team up with friends because being a lone ship would be dangerous if you find your counter.

 

[MichaelSeph]

Stop fooling around ( \"original\" ideas that are just more problems, complaints, crying, etc) and hating big ships already, when most of you never even got the time or skills to build such big ships... everything at them is nerfed now, energy, AMCs, missiles, thrust power, lately the major shield nerf that made them have no regen and now agility nerfing.



Just go and stop complaining about balance until StarMade goes BETA.

There are more critical stuff to be worked on than minor details about balance which isn\'t even properly reported.

 

[z1967]

I second this and agree. Balancing will come later. For now, adapt.

 

[Captain Sideguy]

small ships arnt easy to hit cause there small larger ones get hit more cause its a bigger target and a small ship cost less to make more money for wepons and other cool suff.

 

[refirendum]

but how unlikely is that? also, they had more than 1 squadron. i don\'t know how many squadrons but they had y-wings, x-wings, and larger warships in the fray, meaning there were a LOT of fighters out there. squadrons aren\'t very large, and afaik consist of around 10-20 pilots/craft

okay, let\'s say you place a professional pc gamer in front of a cheap computer. sensitivity and all is the same. but the computer is light duty. doesnt have more than a basic intel integrated gpu and is a tiny intel atom cpu. low end. make them try to win vs a pro-amateur player on good equipment (decent cpu and gpu). 1v1, when the game is highly demanding ont he hardware, the hardware determines the winner. no amount of skill and finesse will fix 3 frames per second vs 60 frames per second.

okay add maybe 2-3 other pro players on similar crap equipment. okay now you\'re talking an even fight. but what happens when you make both sides, player level the same? pro-am with crap gear vs pro-am with good gear? you\'ll have to start adding more players with crap gear to overcome the one player with good gear.

liken this to fighters vs large ships. the fighters are inferior in a hardware sense, in the same manner as my example. and when the task is too demanding, it will always fall short regardless of pilot skill. if the larger ship is just a bit larger, but not by a lot. that\'s something you can overcome. however, when the larger ship is larger by, lets say a magnitude of 100 in all directions and is turreted appropriately (shipwright skill), you need squadrons to make that attempt, and individuals with no support should never be able to take those out.