Countering the Death Cube

[Keptick]

Doom cubes exploit many mechanics in the game, because most of them are based on dimensions. Turning is probably the worst balanced value currently out there.

I one made a death ship with no smooth edges. I did, however, add a kind of interior, and I got really creative with the exits once. I made the central part out of ice crystals, and then made 3x3 doors in each side of the cube (the central part was a cube), and then I put something that looked like a table above each exit for protection. The end result was quite nice.
Later versions had lots of black hardened hull, with a very bright interior and a periscope like structur on the one end, which basically was used to cover the entrance and the camera I needed for my salvage ship (it had quite good shielding and weapons too).

Conclusion: people should be allowed to create death cubes if they make an effort to have a nicely styled exterior or interior, or both of course.

There's a difference between a cube shaped ship (like a borg cube) and a doomcube. The latter being a pile of systems tossed together in a hurry with the intent of obliterating everything in it's path.

 

[MrFURB]

On servers where you're likely to see doomcubes, you're also likely to see few to no RP-based rules. Most of my capital ship designs have enough interior to facilitate any experiences one would want to have onboard, but not enough to make more than a 5-10% damper on total effectiveness. Combined with the fact that my non-cube ship is likely to have many more layers of blocks to go through to hit the core than a similarly sized doomcube (almost all put their core in the center) all it takes it the tiniest touch of circumstance and suddenly there's a wrecked doomcube.
The advantages of a doomcube are obviously there, but they are limited. The biggest benefit of doomcubes is that you can just pile on more blocks and get a larger ship without worrying about spending too much time/effort building. Given a week, someone could build a pretty decently sized capital ship with a great balance of aesthetic and combat qualities, or they could fill a couple of sectors with cannons named 'screw the server'.

 

[Lecic]

There's no atmosphere in space, so shouldn't it be mass based turning anyway? : P

I have honestly no idea how space physics work, but I know there would need to be thrusters on each of the axis to rotate the ship. I guess if a ship weren't as long, the thrusters would be closer to the center of gravity making it turn faster(or something). Anyway, that's all I know, correct me if I'm wrong. : D

IRL, the turning of something does depend on it's dimensions- too much inertia on one axis will cause it to rip apart.

However, for gameplay purposes, it should be mass based.

 

[Glutton]

There's a difference between a cube shaped ship (like a borg cube) and a doomcube. The latter being a pile of systems tossed together in a hurry with the intent of obliterating everything in it's path.

Oh good. Here I am designing an intricate layout for the interior of a Borg Cube (it will be glorious!) and I thought everyone just hates cubes. I guess I've seen similar builds but never equated them to be giant hunks of systems. I just though people sucked at building.

 

[SilentRider_14]

I guess if a ship weren't as long, the thrusters would be closer to the center of gravity making it turn faster(or something).

Actually leverage or mechanical advantage would make an object turn easier or more efficiently the farther away the thruster is from the center of mass, however as Lecic pointed out their is the risk of breaking.

Purely mass based turning would be a greatly simplified compromise

 

[jayman38]

Oh good. Here I am designing an intricate layout for the interior of a Borg Cube (it will be glorious!) and I thought everyone just hates cubes. I guess I've seen similar builds but never equated them to be giant hunks of systems. I just though people sucked at building.

I love to see good borg cubes. Keep working on it! I hope you'll share it in the community content when it's ready.

 

[Vengeance42]

In the logic of the starmade universe, there is no risk of a ship breaking due to being turned on a long axis, since ships do not break.

So turning based on mass not only makes gameplay sense it makes physics sense according to the physics of the starmade universe, which is the one we are working with!

 

[Neon_42]

@MeepMoop Mass is inherently linked to turn rate. Torque = Inertia * angular acceleration.

The best Ideas I've seen in this thread are.

1) gang up on the death cube with friends @keptick

2) make turn rate dependant on only mass. @Lecic

 

[Gerion]

Well, if you can get their shields down, a punch-through shot of sufficent strenght (if it doesnt kill the core outright) will do massive damage, since all of the interior is packed with systems. But if you are at that point, its already over anyway.
Maybe with the HP system and the ability to damage systems even when shields are up this will be more of a counter.

btw, i like cubes (or at least: cube sections at the front with small attachment on the back) in one case: Salvagers. Even from an RP standpoint, something designed to fuel an economy with raw materials will just be a massive drill, no nonsense with greedy corporations.

 

[max stripe]

Well, if you can get their shields down, a punch-through shot of sufficent strenght (if it doesnt kill the core outright) will do massive damage, since all of the interior is packed with systems. But if you are at that point, its already over anyway.
Maybe with the HP system and the ability to damage systems even when shields are up this will be more of a counter.

btw, i like cubes (or at least: cube sections at the front with small attachment on the back) in one case: Salvagers. Even from an RP standpoint, something designed to fuel an economy with raw materials will just be a massive drill, no nonsense with greedy corporations.

why would u want systems to get dmged with sheilds up? that defeats the purpose of sheilds

 

[Crashmaster]

The best Ideas I've seen in this thread are.

1) gang up on the death cube with friends @keptick

2) make turn rate dependant on only mass. @Lecic

These are great ideas. I still think less focus could be put on personally insulting people then the currently employed knee-jerk forum strategy.
Also vertical rectangles exploit turning speeds better then cubes - so people should have stopped building cubes long ago anyways.

 

[Trading_Jack]

These are great ideas. I still think less focus could be put on personally insulting people then the currently employed knee-jerk forum strategy.
Also vertical rectangles exploit turning speeds better then cubes - so people should have stopped building cubes long ago anyways.

Hehe. So someone else noticed that. I found that out while attempting to build a mac cannon.

 

[Winterhome]

Easiest way to kill a Death Cube?
Presumably, equip your ship with at least a couple layers of Advanced hull, and the armor hardening effect.

If your main gun is an ion weapon, your secondary weapon is a series of nukes, and you have far more shielding than is healthy on top of the hull, you might be able to kill their shields at roughly the same time that they kill yours. Then it's just a matter of who kills whose hull first - and death cubes are nice and squishy inside.

 

[jayman38]

There should probably be a community rule that if you see someone attacking a cube-shaped ship, you should feel obligated to join in and attack the same cube ship. Or is everyone thinking that already and it's already an unwritten rule?

A cute backstory could be written up to support such a rule. (E.g. A cruel empire rose up which used cube-shaped deathships, setting back technological advancement across the universe by 2000 years. Whenever a cube-shaped ship is encountered, it must be immediately destroyed by any astronaut by any means necessary, to ensure this cruel empire never resurfaces.)

 

[Proxima_Centauri]

A mass-based turning system is a terrible idea, things don't even work like that in the real world anyways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia

 

[Lecic]

A mass-based turning system is a terrible idea, things don't even work like that in the real world anyways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia

Thanks for that wonderful addition to the post. I am aware of moment of inertia. I'm saying it should be mass based for gameplay reasons.

 

[Proxima_Centauri]

Your idea will not fix all these noobs whining about "dooom kooobs". (which are not even cubes anyways)

 

[Lecic]

Your idea will not fix all these noobs whining about "dooom kooobs". (which are not even cubes anyways)

It'll help. One of the reasons people make doom cubes is because they're so compact, and have a turning advantage while having the firepower of a much larger (by larger I mean longer, as large ships are usually very long in SM) ship.

 

[Malacodor]

A mass-based turning system is a terrible idea, things don't even work like that in the real world anyways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia

If you want it to work like in the real world support this.

 

[Proxima_Centauri]

One of the reasons people make doom cubes is because they're so compact

Incorrect.
Show me some pictures of these "compact" doom cubes that you say are ruining the game for you.

In the mean time, here's what the majority of doom "cubes" look like:

You're upset because people who put little effort into how their ship looks are kicking your ass. These ships are built using the exact same rules that your ships are built by and winning because they're better at combat. It's not a problem with the game, it's a problem with your ships' designs.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, GIT GUD.