Big Ship vs Small Ship - PROBLEM SOLVED

[John Sheridan]

It is I, your solutions man, here with another epicly simple solution.

Firstly Big ship > small ship. The end. The idea of one small ship taking out a big ship is retarded. Please stop. I don't see an X-wing taking out a star destroyer. Move on. It's not possible.

Nerf time:

So firstly there are a few issues right now with the game.

1. Giant ships (10000 mass) turn just as quickly as smallish-medium ships (300+ mass). You don't even need thrusters as it has no impact on turning ability. Both of these points are plain wrong and hopefully will be fixed.

Solution for turning speed is like I mentioned before: Make thrusters "degrade in efficiency" the more you have. Just like shield blocks. This means giant ships need significantly more thruster blocks to achieve the same "thrust / weight ratio" that a smaller ship would need.

Add a formula so turning speed is affected by either mass (far more granuly than now) or is affected by thrust ratio as above. The max turning speed being hard-coded to be "ship core solo" turning speed (or wahtever is the fastest combo in the game as of now - that).

I've fought small ships that cloak, in my giant capital ship. These annoying bastard I just cant' kill, I spray bullets everywhere, but I cant turn fast enough, obviously if his dumb and I get lucky his finished very quickly... but doesn't happen.

As a capital ship pilot, what I CAN do, is do the old FULL REVERSE move and hope I reverse behind him and spray and decimate his little ass in 5 seconds.

Clearly this is WRONG. I should not be able to do this. Solution: MAKE REVERSING 50% MAX SPEED, as well as PURE left/right strafing - to stop you cheating a faster speed by holding down S and D.

Now this move can't easily be done.

But I hear you bitching "BUT THEN YOU CANT EVER SHOOT HIM cause he'll always be behind you pecking at your shields slowly".

I hear you. Solution: No worthy capital ship goes around without some kind of basic turret protection. THIS is how you fight small fighters. JUST LIKE EVERY SCI FI SERIES IN EXISTANCE. Same as modern day carriers at sea. Turrets my friend.

"But we can't use turrets because chain docking doesn't work and we wouldn't be able to dock our carrier if we attached turrets!!!"

Solution: Tell schema to prioritise chain docking!

So you are in a small ship and want to kill a big ship by yourself. Well firstly understand the immense task at hand and the difficulty.

Your rice shooter is going to take a lot of shots to break down a capital ships shields. But you should find a blind spot where its turrets cant fire. And shoot there. If it has too many turrets, target them and kill. I think they are on a seperate shielding system (I hope), so should be weaker to kill. If this is not the case it needs to be!

Destroy a few turrets with your small fighter then enjoy your blind spot.

Do you have a big ship, have no turrets to defend against small ships you cant quickly reverse behind?

Dock a small ship in your hangar, or beg for help, because you are screwed - as you should be.

 

[jamie starmade]

ehh

 

[Trollerbobman]

I dont exactly agree on this, for one, a battlecruiser made out of thrusters should be able to turn or possibly move as fast as a smaller ship, wait a sec, this has given me another shipbuilding idea!

But i get what you mean with the turning.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Realistically, big ships should be slow, lumbering and very powerful, and also requiring lots of power modules with an escort convoy to protect against agile ships. Small ships should be fast, agile and weak. I don\'t see why this is a problem for people.

 

[John Sheridan]

Yep thats it. And if you want a giant ship that turns/accelerates fast, put on stupid amounts of thrusters (the efficiency degrade in affect of course)

 

[tomassus]

Totally agree

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

\"Dock a small ship in your hangar, or beg for help, because you are screwed - as you should be.\" LoL

Yeah it\'s a little weird how you can get large ships that do 0-50 in no seconds flat but they still turn like molasses. I also support a speed drop for reverse and strafing but 50% might be a little extreme.

 

[Glatonn]

i think the speed thing does need to be addressed for side and back even foward on a huge ship. but i also think the speed should be more dynamic cause atm if any ships is ofver X mass then it doesn\'t matter how many thrusters you put on it still turns slow so yes like fighters should be super fast and bigger ships slow but atm my crusier and BS turn at the smae speed for the most part the crusier a little faster but not much shoul be setup so that ship under 150 0r 200 is super fast then 200 - like 500 is 20% slower 500-1500 is 30% then 1500-3000 40% slower and anything over 3000-6000 is 50% and anything over 6000 is 70% and anything higher is molasses speeds. or some kind of formula like that not saying these are the right numbers just using as an example. and then make thruster sizes and PLACEMENT have an effect as well like wing thrusters will help it turn faster than all the thrusters in one big block in the center. and also coulkd have hyper drive cores so fighters need to dock to larger ships to go fast over long distances and maybe even wormhole drives for jumping to anysystem but they require enough power blocks and generators to use so that only big ships can use them.

 

[Gasboy]

An X-wing totally didn\'t take out the Death Star. Yep yep, no sir, wait, what...?

You\'re right, a fighter totally couldn\'t drop a nuclear bomb and take out a carrier and her fleet, I mean, that\'s just impossible...

 

[EpicFailLord123]

Uhhh... :]

DURRR IN SPACE THERE NO MAGNETIC FIELD OR AIR SO NO BIG \'SPLOSION!

In space there is no medium for the million degrees produced by a nuke to travel at all unless droppes inside a ship, where presumably there would be air and hull for the nukes huge heat output to CONDUCT AND CONVECT THROUGH in space there is only radiation, which wouldn\'t do anything. A nuke would make a floating invisible fireball perhaps 10 feet in diameter that would heat up to a few million degrees and stay that way for a good, oh I don\'t know, a year or more?

 

[AdmSolomon]

A nuclear explosion in space would send energy radiating in all directions. Radiation does not require a medium to travel through (an example: deep space radiation, comets forming tails when they near stars). There would still be an explosion that would severly damage ships close to it.

 

[Apples]

As a fighter pilot, i disagree with everything you say, your already overpowerd enough as a capitol pilot. Your guns take me out easily, take tf2, a balanced class based game, it is easy for a scout to take out a heavy, by shooting from behind...

considering how easy it is to get way too much money in starmade, saying a big ship is better because it costs more is quite frankly, a silly notion.

fighters are a better choice for your average pilot, and capitol ships should not be buffed or debuffed.

and for the last god dammed time, BIG SHIPS GET SLOW TURN RATE, END OF STORY

 

[lazarus78]

Not against a modern day US aricraft carriar fleet. They have an effective defensive range 10x larger then any other carrier fleet in the world. No plane could get close enough to even deply an atomic bomb.

And the xwing taking out the death star was done for the movies. If you look up at the stats of the deathstar, you will realize the rebals would not have stood a chance. The death star holds hundreds of thousands of fighters, and os civerd in turrets. No fighter would have been able to get close.

 

[kahulbane]

Here is food for the NUK discusison, bottom line, if it goes off next to you, bad, 1k or more away, not bad for big ships with good hull, little ship, dead pilots... But this will explain it better. But we dont have them in the game so...



http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacegunconvent.php

 

[killerdude8]

Ahem, World War 2 Would like to have a talk with you.

 

[kiwionthemoon]

Instead of reducing/buffing turning speed make it so that cannons can fire in all directions ( they have to be facing that way ofc) and cockpits be able to see in all directions because this will a) make big ship battles more realistic as in the movies big ships rarely have a huge gun at front but lots of smaller oness all around and they usualy have broadside battles. Also look at old fashioned ships (before turrets) they had to get really close and then fire a broudside b) it will be easier to kill of fighters and c) you can be like \"all cannons fire broadside\" in a suitably epic voice

this will also add a hole new strat to big ship piloting as you have to know how to position you ship as to recieve as little of his volley as possible and him get as much of yours. I think the best way for this (correct me if il wron) is to form a T shape with your ship (you are the bar of the T) so he gets a full broadside and you get whatever guns he has at front/back

 

[EpicFailLord123]

t shapes are already the most effective for cloak ships because you can get the max efficiency boost from the power generator.

 

[Riftmaster]

Most ships in StarMade seem to have at least 1 spinal mount weapon - thus crossing the T, which was and probably still is viable for wet-navy ships IRL, would mean....they have a bigger target to hit with their GIANT FREAKIN CANNONS (and/or missiles).



ODOH, I understand that currently massive arrays of 1-block AMC cannons are the most DPS per area - so if you could mount AMC cannon SIDEWAYS (as in, firing out the \"broadside of the ship\")...well it might balance that consideration.

A large number of 1-block AMC array turrets might somewhat meet that requirement, but....

 

[kiwionthemoon]

But the side cannons could take up a lot of space, reducing the amount of spinal weapons. And also turrets are boring. U cant scream fire and then watch the devastation unfold

 

[Defentrix]

+1 for support for the main idea. I believe that a nuke even in space would still create some form of a shockwave.