Game Balance Suggestions

[waski35]

Please lower initial (stock) price of all blocks that are used to build ships and stations. On my server I usually lower them in server config (data folder), but everytime I update I get those insane prices again, and i have to import modded prices. Prices of blocks that are in vanilla make many great capital ships ie. which blueprins was downloaded from this site cost hundreds of millions or even higher, even small craft like starter isanths cost about million credits, which make them impossible to buy from shop by new player, even if he's/she's got milion credits at start. What's more important max credits value is max int32 value, so player simply can't afford many ships ever.

 

[QuantumAnomaly]

Reduce the required radius for spawning blue asteroids. As the only natural source of shield materials other than planet stripping, they can only be found in systems with extreme 45 degree orbits, or systems that glitch out and have the star not centered in the system. Often times, large asteroid belts swing in to other nearby systems, which seems to invalidate the spawn of asteroids since the other system has it's own spawn rates.

 

[Master_Artificer]

Changing the way armor is crafted so that 1 Advanced Armor is crafted with X amount of Standard, and 1 Standard Armor is crafted with X Basic Hull.

X could be 5, it could be 10, 20, or 3.
---
Ores can still be included in the cost, along with metal mesh and pipes and circuit boards, but the goal would be to make advanced usable (cheaper) for armor tanking and not break the bank because the blocks are destroyed when used.

I still want advanced armor to be much more expensive than standard, but not make armor tanking just a thing for competitions and events, and not seen elsewhere.
(I refer to armor tanking ships as craft that rely on armor to soak up a significant portion of the damage in relation to the shield, and not crafts with just armor and no shields)

 

[NeonSturm]

Suggestion : Hotkey-logic (also allows passwords).

Hotkey-Listener-Block : Listens to pressed keys from players that stand on them or nearby players and forwards them to a linked Pattern-Block.
Hotkey-Pattern-Block : registers a hotkey pattern (string,text) at the hotkey-computer for which it activates. Can slave more Pattern-blocks.​

Spoiler: Yes, it is easy to implement

Listener "aldfaopenthedoorasdfw"
Pattern : →o→p→e→n # either progresses through letters, a slaved pattern progresses or it is reset to the first letter "o".
→Pattern : →t→h→e # avoids that entering "the" between "open" and "door" resets the "open" pattern block.
→Pattern : →d→o→o→r # checks pattern match after the master- pattern "open" is complete.
→→now logic can activate the door.
→Pattern : →d→a→t # progresses parallel to "d" from "door". code-internally "oor" and "at" are sub-members of "open" and "openthe"
→→logic may manually reset open once it is finished to avoid "openthedatdoor" to activate "door" after "dat

It will not introduce lag if it only activates once per key-press and is internally ordered into a hierarchy of letters.

Edit: found an easier description of it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie#Bitwise_tries

 

[Guthris]

My suggestion is as follows:

Allow us to link turrets into groups ie: Top, bottom, left, right, ion, heavy damage, missiles, etc
Being able to switch turrets from "selected target" to "any target" on the fly from the comfort of the cockpit.

This will give people the ability to focus fire when needed and switch back to targeting fighters/drones with different brackets of turrets but allow us to change target priorities in a more interactive manner.

 

[Tunk]

Ok, I've got a suggestion for rebalancing the power cap stuff.

Power growth= 1.000289
Gives a similar power growth to previous until around the 594 mark, where it keeps growing and caps out at around the new 2m soft cap.
So you can create larger reactors now, or use more to head towards the cap rather than simply doubling power over all.

[edit]
And now with visual aide, orange one I suggested, blue is old.

Spoiler: chart now spoilered

 

[Chckn Wildstyle]

Make the system of setting up wave spawns better, here are my suggestions for it:
1) Allow more than one wave to be assigned to a difficulty so there can be a little bit of fun in what spawns.
Example: Difficulty 5 wave is triggered: Either a squadron of fighters, frigate, or freighter spawns randomly.
2) Allow admins to assign specific mass ranges as the trigger for waves.
Example: Set Difficulty 1 to be triggered by 0-2000 mass, Difficulty 2 to be triggered by 2001-8000 mass.
3) As an addendum to point 2, make the wave mass range take into account multiple player controlled entities so that a squadron of 6 1500 mass ships does not spawn in wave 1 all day, instead it would spawn wave 3 (or whatever spawns for 9000 mass).
4) Allow the addition of more than one ship at a time from the blueprint list when creating a wave.
5) Allow duplication of waves already created, this would allow admins to lean spawns in the direction they like by adding more waves to a difficulty and would generally make creation of scaling waves easier.

 

[Zackey_TNT]

Allow debates over features, Either here with users able to quote or after the suggestion has been approved by the council.

While the council is likely for our best interests it should not make decisions for the community in a manner that would prevent rebuttal and or debate.

Simply allowing input here and we will decide if your suggestion is worth it is not a good system and will lead to constant rebalance changes as users complain about a balance change.

While I understand flame and debate plagues this forum I do not believe this method will help, Simply because censorship/blockage of debate only leads to boycotting and more debate.

Yours truly, Angry space citizen on crack.

 

[Lancake]

That was our first release cycle so everyone who posted a suggestion before can do so again.

Allow debates over features, Either here with users able to quote or after the suggestion has been approved by the council.

While the council is likely for our best interests it should not make decisions for the community in a manner that would prevent rebuttal and or debate.

Simply allowing input here and we will decide if your suggestion is worth it is not a good system and will lead to constant rebalance changes as users complain about a balance change.

While I understand flame and debate plagues this forum I do not believe this method will help, Simply because censorship/blockage of debate only leads to boycotting and more debate.

Yours truly, Angry space citizen on crack.

We'll extend the process it takes to get an approved suggestion into a release build then.
Now when a suggestion is approved by the council (weekly meetings) and we have found a good value for it, we'll create a separate thread for each suggestion with the proposed changes to allow discussion and change accordingly. They'll be posted in the Council sub-thread and linked to all issues in the APPROVED Spoiler. Please don't make these threads yourself!

One more thing, you're completely allowed to propose game mechanic changes...but it will take months if not years for them to get implemented if they're even approved.

 

[Matt_Bradock]

Suggestion #1: Increase base cargo capacity per box to AT LEAST match the player inventory. A 1 cubic meter box should be able to hold as much as your backpack, pockets and utility belt. Right now, it only holds a fraction of that, which is contradicting even the most basic logic that should apply even to a imaginary video game, especially that the whole point behind the cargo update was realism.

Suggestion #2: Consult better known builders BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY PvP-savvy players about planned balance changes.

AND TO ALL PVP'ERS INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE COUNCIL: I suggest you get your lazy butt on the prebuild test server and test the planned balance changes, then provide feedback to the devs while they are still WIP instead of only complaining when they are finished and released. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you're late.
Although I have to add, the game is still in development, therefore even a release kind of counts as a test build. Still, right now, the people making the combat stat balance changes unfortunately almost never actually take part of PvP and the closer they get to it is when they stream a PvP event. Which is bad. Hence the above mentioned suggestion.

 

[Kingofanime]

Whenever I go slightly out of my faction territory with my salvage ship, the amount of resources I get seems completely pointless. I suggest making the gap between faction territory mining and non-faction territory mining smaller. Even when I start a new game I immediately buy a faction module and claim a sector before I do anything else. Reduce the faction mining bonus from x12 to x4, and also raise the amount of ore and crystal you get per block from 1 to 3.

 

[Winterhome]

Missiles. Grant Missiles an HP pool based on damage output. Something like 1/5000th of its damage output or something.

That should encourage fewer, larger missiles, and more thoughtful Point Defense design. To balance this out a bit, allow Bobby AIs set for missile targeting to be configured to target a specific missile damage range (defaulting to "0-infinity")

 

[GornCaptain]

Shields should be able to block star damage, but when you're in range of a star's damage your ship's shields don't regen, which would prevent people from camping inside of stars. Perhaps there could be a specific type of shield enhancement that adds a resistance to star damage.

 

[Katorone]

Allow for templates to be pasted centred on the ship core. This would make duplication of turrets or other movable objects a lot simpler.
Create docking -> paste base -> create docking -> paste turret
As it is right now, pasting requires putting down helper blocks, in sometimes inaccessible locations (due to other entities)

 

[RabidBat]

I suggest stop constantly rebalancing the game and add some actual gameplay.

Lock it in and give us some game play already.

 

[Batavium]

Let a timer respawn your ship after you lost it and make a shot ship despawn and unsalvageable.

I played this game for almost a year now. And been a server admin for many months. This game has no player base except for a hardy few. Who all have there own unik way of play. They are all most always hostile to others not playing the game their way with religious zeal.
I try not to be on this forum unless i have to. The cargo update got me stuck to the point that i had no choice but to enter the lions den.

So why post here. The game needs dynamics. People need to go out and shoot each other without fear they lose that what took 3 months to get together. Your shot ship should reappear next to your home base or as a filled blueprint in your inventory. There should be another type of reward for shooting people something other than stuff. Stuff should only be gotten through mining. And please KISS Keep it simple stupid.

 

[Comr4de]

Faction stuff
1)Faction point income debuff with territory loss - currently there is no reason to defend territory as it only lessens the FP cost to the owning faction. This is silly.
2) Add new config options in the faction config, namely being able to disable homebase invulnerability, disable homebase location broadcasting, and allow people to claim territory with negative FP (for alternate FP income setups)

 

[Malacodor]

Add ship repair. No, not block replacement. A REAL repair funtion that brings all blocks back to 100% HP.

• Both reboot and trade station repair only affect structure HP, not block HP.
• Shipyards can't repair block HP without an undamaged design either.
• Manual repair is unreliable since damage textures aren't visible on slightly damaged blocks.

Ways to solve this:

• Let shipyards also repair block HP.
• Admin command
  
• Or at least display the damage texture on every damaged block, even those with 249/250 HP.

This is alpha, people make longer breaks to wait for more content and bugs being fixed, not everybody has a shipyard, yet. Some people still have WIP ships built the old way which might have been damaged a year ago, so even an up-to-date blueprint doesn't help.

 

[Ithirahad]

I am aware that this is somewhere in the twilight zone between feature suggestions and balance suggestions, but:

• Allow Micro Assemblers on ships.
• Have Micro Assemblers break down large amounts of terrain 'junk' blocks into small amounts of either crystal composite and alloyed metal mesh, or random coloured crystals and metals.

We require some way of dealing with massive amounts of junk in our mining ships.

 

[Valiant70]

Allow all factories on ships, but NOT enhancers.

1. This way you can craft whatever you want on a ship. It just takes a while.
   
2. Limiting to one of each type per ship might be a good idea.
   
3. Keeping track of factories on docked entities might not be worth it. If people want to go to the trouble to build a docked factory, rig it up with cargo transfer, and set the recipe, then they deserve that extra factory or two dozen.