1. 17th of July, 2019: SMD is currently under maintenance, the site may go down while we are working on it. Apologies for the inconvenience.

    Game Balance DISCUSSION

    Discussion in 'Council' started by Valiant70, Dec 22, 2015.

    1. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      Y'all goofballs have been making a lot of work for Lancake trying to keep the suggestion thread clear of discussion and other non-suggestion posts, so I made this thread.

      How to use this thread:
      1. Quote a post from the suggestion thread (reply button works)
      2. Select the code the forum generates in the reply section when you click quote or reply
      3. Cut from that thread, paste to this thread, go to town.
      Staff quit issuing account warnings about misusing the suggestions thread some time ago, but now people are just abusing it more.
       
      • Like Like x 2
    2. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      Already added this to my suggestion, but not sure if it will be read as it's already too buried:
      According to the wiki each consecutive thruster module adds less thrust than the previous one. As long as all thrusters from all entities are put into a single pool (as it is now apparently) it doesn't matter where they draw their energy from, the diminishing returns will remain the same.
       
      • Like Like x 2
    3. Lancake

      Lancake Head of Testing

      Joined:
      Aug 20, 2013
      Messages:
      794
      Sure, use this thread to discuss stuff not yet approved/denied ^^
       
      • Informative Informative x 2
    4. Deserea

      Joined:
      Jul 23, 2015
      Messages:
      415
      Another reason im kinda for this, the new thruster mechanics limits building certain types of ships, on a game very limited already when it comes to getting an optimal design. Docked Engines should be a way to get more thrust, without having to turn the mothership into little more than a massive thruster module. Plus, if docked Engines could get their thrust and use their own power, it be an even bigger incentive to take them out! Every scifi thing ive ever read has bombers performing runs on ship engines ranging from corvettes to dreadnoughts. In the current game, Once you hit the max curve as ive apparently done with my current build, and each thruster only adds about 0.7 thrust, but uses the same amount of power(Power drain should drop as the curve max is reached, another suggestion), building Battlecruiser style ships, that are both large and fast becomes a problem(Not sure if thats a good thing or not, they typically have less armor to have more room for engines and other modules). Adding more thruster units is pointless, and docked thrusters are pretty pointless too in the current game for large ships, but again, i may be missing something here too, and if i am please feel free to point it out.
       
    5. godmars

      Joined:
      Dec 28, 2014
      Messages:
      262
      What if they're docked inside the ship?

      They don't. Sticking two thrusters on a ship that has a certain % of thrusters already will net a lower combined thrust then putting those same two thrusters on a docked entity with say, no thruster(and at the same energy cost). Unless this gets changed, docked thrusters seem to be the superior choice after a certain point
       
      • Informative Informative x 1
    6. Deserea

      Joined:
      Jul 23, 2015
      Messages:
      415
      I didnt even think of docking them in a ship, but then i guess it would be like battery units wouldnt it? My thrusters are always placed in a engine housing, so for me having engines that look and function like engines, just makes sense and its what i do, and docking them inside, doesnt even cross my mind! :O

      They still add so much power drain to the mothership that if you wanted to build a decently fast battlecruiser, the mothership would be little more than a engine docking array. And all guns would *have* to be in the turrets.

      Ive got a ship called the Horizon, and it was supposed to be a fast destroyer, hell id go so far as to even call it a scout destroyer, its fast alright, but now after this patch, i cant fire my ships weapon systems anymore. 2.02 million power goes to maintaining its engine speed, with a thrust of 45k.(before it had 60k thrust, ship weighs 72k with all docked entities(four hangar doors, and quite a few AMS and PD turrets.). Its to small(and by that i mean the way the ship is shaped) to house many large turrets. If i could use docked thrusters on it(that used their own power), i could transfer some of the thrusters(in this case) half of them to a docked entity, and have a ship that was functional again!
       
      #6 Deserea, Dec 22, 2015
      Last edited: Dec 22, 2015
      • Agree Agree x 1
    7. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      Which leads to the question of the day whether this is intended or not...
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    8. Jaaskinal

      Jaaskinal ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      Joined:
      Jan 19, 2014
      Messages:
      1,377
      It should probably be changed to a total thruster count instead of a total thrust count to combat docked thrust, unless this is intentional, in which case it's kinda cool. Like docked reactors, but different.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    9. godmars

      Joined:
      Dec 28, 2014
      Messages:
      262
      Yeah I'm not sure myself but I will see if I can get confirmation on it one way or another. Personally I think at the least docked components should be easily capable of carrying themselves. Otherwise modular ships will be garbage.
       
    10. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      The arguments against this are actually pretty shaky. It's worth considering. Alpha damage is a tradeoff against sustained damage. Both have their strong points, and there are defensive setups to combat both. Most warships today seem to have a balance of shield capacity and recharge, but if people have enough trouble with high-alpha ships, we may start to see more capacity-centered builds.
       
    11. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      This would make offensive overdrive manadatory. Also, because power drain and EMP weapons would be A LOT more effective no sane ship builder would rely on capacity alone and risk getting rock-paper-scissors'ed, which they don't have to anyway, since having high capacity AND high regen wouldn't be hard.
       
    12. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      Not necessarily. That would still be for high-alpha ships.

      Sure, you'd see a lot more ships with high power capacity than there are now. There would still be design decisions to be made about whether to devote more space to shield capacity or power capacity.
       
    13. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      Every good ship would be a high alpha ship.

      It would usually be more shield capacity (to survive the insane alpha damage dished out by everyone and their mom) AND more power capacity, but with fewer blocks.
       
    14. alterintel

      alterintel moderator

      Joined:
      May 24, 2015
      Messages:
      868
      Honestly I'm just happy to see this idea being given honest discussion. Thanks.
      Just to reiterate, this idea would totally change the way ship battles and ship builds are done. Instead of limiting ships to how much power they can produce you would effectively be limiting ships to how much Thrust vs Shield capacity vs Alpha damage.

      This change would literally move the game from a "bigger is better" paradigm to a "rock, scissors, paper" paradigm.
      Battle Contests wouldn't need a mass or block limit anymore.

      Would effectively move the limiting factor of ship size from power capacity to thrust/engine capacity. Which I think makes more sense anyways. Especially considering too much mass would make the thrusters too power hungry to move the ship without depleting it's power. To the point were any meaningful power recharge would be impossible during battle and would have to be done after battle if you survive. May even lead to disposable ships. Also would probably raise the need for some kind of capital ship propulsion system?

      What I think is the best part, is that this could potentially reduce the need for laggy docked reactors, depending on whether or not people are trying to go for tank recharge time. Also, literally every ship would have some form of sniper missiles and or nukes. This could also make temporary cloaking ships a possibility. Be careful though, because if you cloak too long you wont have enough power left to fire your alpha weapon :)
       
      #14 alterintel, Dec 26, 2015
      Last edited: Dec 26, 2015
    15. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      Things should be slightly rock-paper-scissors, but not too much so. I'm thinking a modest increase to capacitor size would be a good idea, but not necessarily on the scale you're suggesting. We may get better results by striking a balance, which is the idea of the default configs anyway; to be the most well-rounded and flexible configuration that will work for the vast majority of people. Servers with different taste in combat mechanics can of course change the capacity however they want.

      I'm thinking something between a 2x to 10x increase in capacity would be best. This would make ships somewhat less dependent on recharge without completely flopping combat into something that it has never been before. As a matter of fact, some ships won't even have to refit to take advantage of this. They'll just have to change their tactics a little and fire more stuff at once.

      This suggestion isn't a big "we need to do this" thing, but it's definitely to be considered. Other mechanics may ultimately need to come into play to balance high-alpha ships more effectively.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    16. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      If you want to play RPS why do you build space ships in a video game? Don't you have fingers?
       
      • Funny Funny x 1
    17. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      If RPS is all there is to it, it's bad. If it gives just enough advantage that size matters less then it's good.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    18. Jaaskinal

      Jaaskinal ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      Joined:
      Jan 19, 2014
      Messages:
      1,377
      The immediate issue I see with increasing power capacitors power capacity is that all weapons have the same power consumption by alpha, and the same power consumption by dps. Drastically increasing the power capacitor levels of ships would lead to ships that are capable of higher alpha, yes, but also ships capable of higher, longer sustained dps. All it'd really do is increase the amount of damage ships could do at a size.

      That all being said is dependent on weapons having the current power formula, which I guess could be changed.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    19. Valiant70

      Valiant70 That crazy cyborg

      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2013
      Messages:
      2,188
      So in the end the effect would be to decouple ships' DPS somewhat from their power recharge. That doesn't sound like a bad idea.
       
    20. Malacodor

      Joined:
      Mar 2, 2014
      Messages:
      1,293
      Why?
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    Loading...