Game Balance Suggestions

[Omega563]

I think a good way to encourage and even reward boarding parties would be to make shields exclusive to the outside of a ship (no more shields on the inside). I realize this is probably not an easy task to accomplish due to the complexity of determining what an inside actually is, or an outside for that matter. Just food for thought suggestions aren't really my thing; but while I'm at it, I also think that making the distance a ship can jump depend on the efficiency of the drive (something similar to power with additional rules so as not to cause the same shape replication as efficient power) and it's size. I think it would also be prudent to have a max jump cap(say 24 sectors) so no drive could jump absurdly far.

 

[Freedom16789]

for the shields in the game i think you should have a shield around the ships at list 1 block away from the ship or more so you can expand it to cover other ship if needed and the expanded shields should weaken the total shield strength

 

[Proxima_Centauri]

Reduce the range of missile/beam from 4.8 sectors to 3.2 sectors

It's nearly double the range of every other weapon and is stupidly unbalanced and OP.

 

[Ghent96]

Make hull and armors lighter. Perhaps half the weight. I think their weight creates too large of a penalty for the benefit.

Better armor must have a balance. It must weigh more and be more expensive to produce. Also... (reference my above post) servers have and are currently making custom armor blocks (such as Mushroom Fleet) where there are further options past Adv Armor - eg - stealth armor & Quadranium.

 

[Lecic]

Better armor must have a balance.

Right, and it currently does. Higher mass and higher cost. However, that doesn't mean that these things aren't TOO high.

 

[Malacodor]

I realize this is probably not an easy task to accomplish due to the complexity of determining what an inside actually is, or an outside for that matter.

It's outright impossible to determine, unless you're happy with a system that can be easily broken.

 

[Ghent96]

Right, and it currently does. Higher mass and higher cost. However, that doesn't mean that these things aren't TOO high.

Aye. I'm almost always frustrated by my small fighter craft not moving like a fast fighter, despite 2.5 thrust:mass ratio maxed out, and basic hulls. I think that arises from the thrust nerf months ago, not so much armor weight, tho. I think if thrust was rebalanced, we would all be happier with the weight of armors.

 

[IronDusk33]

Increase Warhead damage.
Currently Warheads can only really be used offensively by using them in complex missile drones, or placing them as an astronaut. And the damage they do doesn't seem worth all the effort. So making them more powerful compared to most weapon systems, will make them viable weapons in combat.

 

[Kingofanime]

Make display modules default to a blank screen or spacebar press instead of "no data". I sometimes see ships loaded with display modules that say "no data", and it would be better if they were blank. I sometimes make a 2x4 wall of display modules to simulate a giant screen and I have to press R > Spacebar on each one of them.

 

[Captainredfox]

Make Pulse-Missiles fire and forget and make Beam-Missiles fire and hold

This would help bring the missiles on even grounds in terms of usefulness, since beam-missiles fare much better against anti-missile turrets than pulse missiles do. I know that others have suggested that missiles have health based on their damage; however I believe that this would make it even more impossible to survive an attack by a much larger ship. Missiles should require more in-depth tactics to be effective instead of the near guaranteed damage dealers that they are.

 

[Livaria]

Small ships aren't all that effective against big ships because they do not have enough ability to overcome shields that are too powerful.
What if a new type of damage value was introduced to the game? This new kind of damage would completely ignore shield protection for a much smaller but guaranteed amount of damage. Smaller ships could deal some amount of effective damage no matter what kind of shields the enemy has.

 

[Nauvran]

Small ships aren't all that effective against big ships because they do not have enough ability to overcome shields that are too powerful.
What if a new type of damage value was introduced to the game? This new kind of damage would completely ignore shield protection for a much smaller but guaranteed amount of damage. Smaller ships could deal some amount of effective damage no matter what kind of shields the enemy has.

a group of small ships with the same mass as one big one are usually better than the one big ship

 

[boomchacle]

As a person who likes to build big ships, I think that it would be a good Idea to make the build mode have three settings instead of two. Sometimes I feel like it would be nice to be able to go a few kilometers in the space of a few seconds instead of like ten minutes.
[doublepost=1473125415,1473125325][/doublepost]

Small ships aren't all that effective against big ships because they do not have enough ability to overcome shields that are too powerful.
What if a new type of damage value was introduced to the game? This new kind of damage would completely ignore shield protection for a much smaller but guaranteed amount of damage. Smaller ships could deal some amount of effective damage no matter what kind of shields the enemy has.

That is what warheads are for. They go through shields and will always damage Armour instead of shields. also, smaller ships have the option to use ionic cannons as well as normal ones.

 

[Livaria]

Warheads aren't really all that reliable. Instead of dodging my suggestion by telling me about what already exists in the game. Try to think of the consequences of my suggestion and how it would affect gameplay. I for one am not convinced that fighters/bombers can contribute any amount of lasting damage against a much larger entity. I don't care if you agree or disagree I care about feedback.

 

[Nauvran]

Warheads aren't really all that reliable. Instead of dodging my suggestion by telling me about what already exists in the game. Try to think of the consequences of my suggestion and how it would affect gameplay. I for one am not convinced that fighters/bombers can contribute any amount of lasting damage against a much larger entity. I don't care if you agree or disagree I care about feedback.

You need more minions. Don't attack a frigate in a lone bomber, have a squadron of bombers or multiple.

 

[nightrune]

Also as a reminder, this thread is not for discussions but for suggestions. Try to limit it to one post and do not reply to suggestions. If there needs to be a discussion start a new thread where all can comment!

 

[Malacodor]

Also as a reminder, this thread is not for discussions but for suggestions. Try to limit it to one post and do not reply to suggestions. If there needs to be a discussion start a new thread where all can comment!

Is this thread even monitored still? The first post looks pretty dead.

 

[Ithirahad]

No idea. CIR ? Lancake ?

 

[xDEAD-LORDx]

yo creo Que deberia mejorarse los tipos de entidades generados en el rango, ejemplo: cuando hay demasiadas naves atracadas en un lugar o una nave o base modular, que cuando uno abandone el ship core de esa entidad, esa entidad se vuelva un solo bloque visual, solo hasta que reciba un cambio en algunos de sus valores de caracteristicas EJ: cambio en energia, escudos, cantidad de masa o bloques. al cambiar uno de esos valores, se reinicia el sistema virtual de esa entidad para agregar los valores nuevos y se vuelve a bloquear para convertirla en un solo bloque. PD: rduciria el lag y funcionaria de una manera similar a la nueva logica anti-lag de los asteroides

 

[rocketman221]

Would it be possible to show discovered stations on the map in different colors to indicate friendly, neutral, and enemy like the radar inidcators?