- Joined
- Oct 13, 2013
- Messages
- 109
- Reaction score
- 82
So. There have been a lot of suggestions on this topic, but I don't think I've really agreed with any of them 100%. So I'm going to throw in my two cents, which you are free to agree with or disagree with as you will.
The Problem:
There are a few problems at work here that most people are aware of, but are often conflated into the same one.
1. Game Mechanics Penalize Large Bounding Boxes. A 1000 mass ship with small dimensions is superior in every way to a 1000 mass ship that has wings and antennae and such. This is because of a number of factors, but the main ones that come to mind are docking areas (rectangular turrets and fighters pack more efficiently) and turn speed (large dimensions reduce turning velocity).
2. Game Mechanics Penalize Open Space. This is related to the point above, but essentially, the issue is that having open space inside your spaceship is wasted space, and it's always more effective to have more shields than more bedrooms and hallways and docking hangars and such.
This leads to a discrepancy between ships that look good and ships that fight good. Obviously there should be practical considerations in ship design that allow for more effective ships, such as placing weapons at the front instead of at the rear and so on, but currently the rules are quite draconian. Most spaceships from fiction which look practical, and would be relatively practical (given sci-fi logic) in real life (such as the Battlestar Galactica, the Daedalus from Stargate, various ships from Star Wars, that kinda thing) are very impractical in Starmade, as they aren't cubes with little to no interior space.
My Solution:
This isn't the only solution, but it is my solution.
1. Change Turn Radius Rules: Longer ships shouldn't turn slower. If anything, they should turn faster, as RCS thrusters can be mounted further apart from each other, allowing for better leverage. There's no air resistance to fight against in space. My idea is to scrap size-based turning altogether, and make it mass-based instead at the very least, or, implement more complicated, more realistic turning calculations.
2. Tweak Block/Power Dynamics: Right now, blocks=strength. There's no reason, except for increase in size, not to add more shield capacity, more weapons, more thrusters, more systems to a space ship. Because of this, 99% or more of an effective combat ship should be dedicated to functional blocks, leaving all ease of life and decorative blocks as handicaps. My suggestion is to greatly increase the effectiveness of all blocks, with power requirements increased as well. The limit to how powerful guns can be on a spaceship should primarily be based off of the power generation of the space ship, not the number of weapon blocks the ship can fit. Similarly, shield generation and thrust would primarily be limited by power generation. Power generation would go up with ship size, meaning that larger ships can mount more weapons and more shields while still have plenty of space left for decoration and docking. You would be limited in how many shield blocks you add not because of space limitations but because your generators can't handle the additional strain.
This would also make combats more interesting. Right now, the most effective solution is generally to have a ship built around a single weapon system. Because you can only fire one weapon at a time, additional weapon blocks that aren't the main one won't be being fired most of the time, and as a result are use-impaired.
However, if limited number of blocks isn't your main currency, you could have several weapon systems on your ship without reducing the effectiveness of the others. Maybe you have a long-ranged sniper weapon, and a rapid-fire weapon, and a slow firing explosive cannon, and you switch between them based on the situation at hand.
Anyway, these are my thoughts, and I thought I'd share them. Let me know what you think.
The Problem:
There are a few problems at work here that most people are aware of, but are often conflated into the same one.
1. Game Mechanics Penalize Large Bounding Boxes. A 1000 mass ship with small dimensions is superior in every way to a 1000 mass ship that has wings and antennae and such. This is because of a number of factors, but the main ones that come to mind are docking areas (rectangular turrets and fighters pack more efficiently) and turn speed (large dimensions reduce turning velocity).
2. Game Mechanics Penalize Open Space. This is related to the point above, but essentially, the issue is that having open space inside your spaceship is wasted space, and it's always more effective to have more shields than more bedrooms and hallways and docking hangars and such.
This leads to a discrepancy between ships that look good and ships that fight good. Obviously there should be practical considerations in ship design that allow for more effective ships, such as placing weapons at the front instead of at the rear and so on, but currently the rules are quite draconian. Most spaceships from fiction which look practical, and would be relatively practical (given sci-fi logic) in real life (such as the Battlestar Galactica, the Daedalus from Stargate, various ships from Star Wars, that kinda thing) are very impractical in Starmade, as they aren't cubes with little to no interior space.
My Solution:
This isn't the only solution, but it is my solution.
1. Change Turn Radius Rules: Longer ships shouldn't turn slower. If anything, they should turn faster, as RCS thrusters can be mounted further apart from each other, allowing for better leverage. There's no air resistance to fight against in space. My idea is to scrap size-based turning altogether, and make it mass-based instead at the very least, or, implement more complicated, more realistic turning calculations.
2. Tweak Block/Power Dynamics: Right now, blocks=strength. There's no reason, except for increase in size, not to add more shield capacity, more weapons, more thrusters, more systems to a space ship. Because of this, 99% or more of an effective combat ship should be dedicated to functional blocks, leaving all ease of life and decorative blocks as handicaps. My suggestion is to greatly increase the effectiveness of all blocks, with power requirements increased as well. The limit to how powerful guns can be on a spaceship should primarily be based off of the power generation of the space ship, not the number of weapon blocks the ship can fit. Similarly, shield generation and thrust would primarily be limited by power generation. Power generation would go up with ship size, meaning that larger ships can mount more weapons and more shields while still have plenty of space left for decoration and docking. You would be limited in how many shield blocks you add not because of space limitations but because your generators can't handle the additional strain.
This would also make combats more interesting. Right now, the most effective solution is generally to have a ship built around a single weapon system. Because you can only fire one weapon at a time, additional weapon blocks that aren't the main one won't be being fired most of the time, and as a result are use-impaired.
However, if limited number of blocks isn't your main currency, you could have several weapon systems on your ship without reducing the effectiveness of the others. Maybe you have a long-ranged sniper weapon, and a rapid-fire weapon, and a slow firing explosive cannon, and you switch between them based on the situation at hand.
Anyway, these are my thoughts, and I thought I'd share them. Let me know what you think.
