Greifing or Legitimate Strategy?

    Joined
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages
    39
    Reaction score
    12
    • Purchased!
    I don't play combat so all I can base these ideas on is what I've read.

    Now, using a cloaker tipped with buffed warheads to ram your ship, could be considered griefing, since if you're outside your claimed system, you get absolutely no warning of a cloaked ship around unless you frequently tap your scanner (if you have one) and hope you randomly catch someone who might as well arrive and pull the stunt off between 2 scanner recharges. Again, it's a MAYBE.
    This brings to mind some sort of logic controlled automatic scanner network. This, combined with turrets, could be used to shine the light on pesky cloaked warheads. To overcome this neutral warhead deal, perhaps it could be coded so they need to be manually armed and the only way to do so is by having the warhead set to a faction. If the player gives up the faction on the warhead it immediately disarms. An alternative is for the warhead to immediately give off a hostile signature when armed. This would bypass the need to always faction a torpedo while still allowing them to be targeted as a hostile entity.

    The way I see it, unlike real life, games have obvious defined limits. If possible players will put their heads together to come up with counters to specific strategies. Sometimes a strategy is so lopsided it undermines the entire point of the game. At those times I believe it's when the devs should step in.
     

    Matt_Bradock

    The Shrink
    Joined
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages
    798
    Reaction score
    464
    • Purchased!
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    I don't play combat so all I can base these ideas on is what I've read.



    This brings to mind some sort of logic controlled automatic scanner network. This, combined with turrets, could be used to shine the light on pesky cloaked warheads. To overcome this neutral warhead deal, perhaps it could be coded so they need to be manually armed and the only way to do so is by having the warhead set to a faction. If the player gives up the faction on the warhead it immediately disarms. An alternative is for the warhead to immediately give off a hostile signature when armed. This would bypass the need to always faction a torpedo while still allowing them to be targeted as a hostile entity.

    The way I see it, unlike real life, games have obvious defined limits. If possible players will put their heads together to come up with counters to specific strategies. Sometimes a strategy is so lopsided it undermines the entire point of the game. At those times I believe it's when the devs should step in.
    The problem is, scanners cannot be activated by logic. Then again, neither can be cloak or jammer.

    Example 1: If a cloaked ship launches self-propelled (push effect connected to logic clock) torpedoes at you that have no faction block, your turrets, even though the torpedoes will be seen as they show up on your HUD and nav screen, will not fire, since those (usually) have no active AI and are neutral entities.
    HOWEVER this isn't griefing. The torpedoes will only hit if you remain stationary, any evasive maneuver will probably work fine unless they were fired point blank. And even if you can't evade, a simple missile-missile swarm system with a couple hundred damage/missile fired at the incoming warheads will, by a good chance, blow them up before they could impact. So, the torpedo boats are not a sure-fire way and there is counterplay.

    Example 2: a cloaked ship that has a fixed warhead installation on its front sticking out forward, rams your ship directly. It only decloaked right before the impact, so it would only have the 1 second cooldown instead of the longer 3 sec when taking damage. It recloaked instantly after the impact and despite you having a jump inhibitor running, your chances of catching up are pretty low, considering the guy has 100% Overdrive and he's already at full speed in the middle of his GTFO maneuver.
    You just lost a considerable part of your ship, while he probably lost 20 blocks tops, and you have no idea if he was alone, or you can expect his pals jump in to finish off your wounded bird any moment. And the worst thing? You couldn't do crap to avoid this.
     
    Joined
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages
    1,696
    Reaction score
    1,199
    • Thinking Positive
    • Likeable
    "why would you ever fly a battleship when you can do the same damage with a warhead on a cloaker"?
    Because the battleship can sustain that level of DPS, and warhead attacks are pure alpha. If several enemy vessels are closing to destroy an outpost, a little spite damage from mines isn't going to stop them, but a good battleship might.

    Your question has great merit - why WOULD you put all your eggs in one basket knowing that someone might give it a kick, when you could be creative, economical and wily about your offense/defense while inducing far, far less server lag? Seriously, right back at ya - why? Should we be?

    I strongly feel that nasty torpedo and mine tactics, as well as other devious and "unfair" strategies are totally balanced and appropriate. For a multiplayer game - which this is - though not for a single player game. IRL (ik, ik - bear with) does any naval commander anywhere, ever send out a battleship or carrier ALONE? Hell no. That's absurd. Not that I've ever heard of - such huge, very expensive war machines are not deployed without a substantial escort. Typically some relatively expendable advance scouts are desirable to stay aware of approaching threats, as well as a handful of specialized smaller vessels specialized in sub & small craft defense, anti-aircraft, missile defense, etc. Because if you just dump everything into one ship and send it out there, it's easy for any opponent to come up with an innovative trick - like Kamikaze attacks, or nuclear weapons - that will eliminate that single target. So military strength is best deployed in dispersion, by anyone who has half a brain. It's not an issue of fairness at all; it's an issue of players not flying in teams, and constantly flying ships they can't afford to lose. Solo hulks absolutely SHOULD be ripe targets for clever pirates and enemies, because there's nothing whatsoever stopping them from flying with escorts in support and crowd-control ships.

    I feel that complaints about how something might put someone's favorite, lag-inducing, all-in-one, behemoth ship in danger from ingenuity and innovation come down mostly to laziness or Pollyanna naivete. Munchkins want to roll everywhere in an OP beast and they want it now. They don't want to invest the time and effort in building a team and being intelligent about when, where, how and why to risk a valuable asset - they just want to arrive at every situation, every time being OP and able to do everything (and lagging bloody the server).

    See, I think the entire game would both perform better and be more fun all round if the focus was less on bending the game to aid and abet weak, lazy and foolish players in their constant need to roll solo in giant lagstrosities. Smart players should be fully capable of dominating stupid & careless players regardless of ship size, those players shouldn't be protected from their lack of foresight in having an escort along or from their hubris when it demands they must always fly in something larger then they can afford to easily replace when something more modest would just as easily do. You don't have to be able to one-shot alpha stations and strip planet parts in under a minute and have 100,000,000 shield capacity all in one ship. That shouldn't be the gold standard of play or this game will never overcome its performance choke points and will never demand teamwork and group play in order to be truly successful.

    Please don't nerf anymore tactics that allow intelligent players to get over on lazy idiots who just DL a monster BP and expect their huge piece of hardware to simply dominate the server without repercussion. That's basically what happened when warheads got nerfed. No minefields, no kamikaze, no torpedo ambushes - nothing to discourage players from maximizing their server load share every minute they're logged.

    Don't want to be careful about deploying that battle-cruiser? Don't cry to me when it gets jacked - you F'd up, son. C'est la vie. Mommy aint on this server. Think ahead next time and maybe take out a tiny cloaking jump shuttle if all you were doing was shopping, exploring or swinging by spawn, or if your harvesting roll in a light, dedicated miner with a jammer that is cheap and easy to replace with a clone if it gets popped because it isn't loaded with expensive military hardware like shields, advanced armor, heavy turrets and fighters. There are such things as civilian ships, and they actually have a reason for existing - they save you a fortune and keep your head from exploding.

    Mines sucked. Torpedoes sucked. Kamikazes sucked. That's what was great about them. That doesn't mean they weren't fair play. They kept the game healthy, they were part of the Darwin Awards Committee of Starmade, and I for one would love to have them back.
     
    Joined
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages
    6
    Reaction score
    1
    So social interaction, helping and being helped by other people to prosper in the game, are not reasons to be online?
    Sure they are. Lots of online games have those. How many weapons systems, combat support tools, and layers of defense does this game have though? It really seems like warfare is a central focus of starmade, given the strong dev focus on warfare tools! If just socializing & building without any combat is what is wanted, maybe a game that isn't focused on fighting would be of interest to players who rage out when their stuff goes boom. Minecraft is still fun... and Farmville... I hear Candy Crush doesn't have any weapon systems that can be used against other players at all...
    [DOUBLEPOST=1445014847,1445014268][/DOUBLEPOST]
    Someone who spends more time and resources *SHOULD* have an advantage over someone that just slops some stuff together in 10 minutes and calls it done. People who work harder at the game should get bigger rewards than those who just flit in every once in a while.
    LOL - what? So quantity over quality? Mindless grinding should trump cleverness? That's hilarious bullshit - then the game exists only for dependent minors and unemployed people to enjoy XD

    If I can build & deploy a ship in 10 minutes that counters a ship someone spent 10 weeks developing and building then mine is just... better. And shame on you if that happens to you. That's pathetic. I can't help it if people spend massive amounts of time on useless crap and waste time building weapons based on un-tested concepts and unrealistic expectations about what combat in Starmade really is!

    Wow. You seriously want to penalize brilliant engineers and genius tacticians in favor of complacent morons who just "spend a lot of time" purely because they... "spend a lot of time"???
     
    Joined
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages
    39
    Reaction score
    12
    • Purchased!
    Because the battleship can sustain that level of DPS, and warhead attacks are pure alpha. If several enemy vessels are closing to destroy an outpost, a little spite damage from mines isn't going to stop them, but a good battleship might.

    Your question has great merit - why WOULD you put all your eggs in one basket knowing that someone might give it a kick, when you could be creative, economical and wily about your offense/defense while inducing far, far less server lag? Seriously, right back at ya - why? Should we be?

    I strongly feel that nasty torpedo and mine tactics, as well as other devious and "unfair" strategies are totally balanced and appropriate. For a multiplayer game - which this is - though not for a single player game. IRL (ik, ik - bear with) does any naval commander anywhere, ever send out a battleship or carrier ALONE? Hell no. That's absurd. Not that I've ever heard of - such huge, very expensive war machines are not deployed without a substantial escort. Typically some relatively expendable advance scouts are desirable to stay aware of approaching threats, as well as a handful of specialized smaller vessels specialized in sub & small craft defense, anti-aircraft, missile defense, etc. Because if you just dump everything into one ship and send it out there, it's easy for any opponent to come up with an innovative trick - like Kamikaze attacks, or nuclear weapons - that will eliminate that single target. So military strength is best deployed in dispersion, by anyone who has half a brain. It's not an issue of fairness at all; it's an issue of players not flying in teams, and constantly flying ships they can't afford to lose. Solo hulks absolutely SHOULD be ripe targets for clever pirates and enemies, because there's nothing whatsoever stopping them from flying with escorts in support and crowd-control ships.

    I feel that complaints about how something might put someone's favorite, lag-inducing, all-in-one, behemoth ship in danger from ingenuity and innovation come down mostly to laziness or Pollyanna naivete. Munchkins want to roll everywhere in an OP beast and they want it now. They don't want to invest the time and effort in building a team and being intelligent about when, where, how and why to risk a valuable asset - they just want to arrive at every situation, every time being OP and able to do everything (and lagging bloody the server).

    See, I think the entire game would both perform better and be more fun all round if the focus was less on bending the game to aid and abet weak, lazy and foolish players in their constant need to roll solo in giant lagstrosities. Smart players should be fully capable of dominating stupid & careless players regardless of ship size, those players shouldn't be protected from their lack of foresight in having an escort along or from their hubris when it demands they must always fly in something larger then they can afford to easily replace when something more modest would just as easily do. You don't have to be able to one-shot alpha stations and strip planet parts in under a minute and have 100,000,000 shield capacity all in one ship. That shouldn't be the gold standard of play or this game will never overcome its performance choke points and will never demand teamwork and group play in order to be truly successful.

    Please don't nerf anymore tactics that allow intelligent players to get over on lazy idiots who just DL a monster BP and expect their huge piece of hardware to simply dominate the server without repercussion. That's basically what happened when warheads got nerfed. No minefields, no kamikaze, no torpedo ambushes - nothing to discourage players from maximizing their server load share every minute they're logged.

    Don't want to be careful about deploying that battle-cruiser? Don't cry to me when it gets jacked - you F'd up, son. C'est la vie. Mommy aint on this server. Think ahead next time and maybe take out a tiny cloaking jump shuttle if all you were doing was shopping, exploring or swinging by spawn, or if your harvesting roll in a light, dedicated miner with a jammer that is cheap and easy to replace with a clone if it gets popped because it isn't loaded with expensive military hardware like shields, advanced armor, heavy turrets and fighters. There are such things as civilian ships, and they actually have a reason for existing - they save you a fortune and keep your head from exploding.

    Mines sucked. Torpedoes sucked. Kamikazes sucked. That's what was great about them. That doesn't mean they weren't fair play. They kept the game healthy, they were part of the Darwin Awards Committee of Starmade, and I for one would love to have them back.
    Reading your post I'm getting a better idea as to the meaning of the question asked in the OP. Since I don't play combat it took a bit to discern what the two sides were saying. I find myself in agreement with what you say. The times I'd like to see something nerfed is when there is legitimately no way to counter a specific strategy or it went against the spirit of the server. As has been mentioned before, those who don't want to lose their ships shouldn't play on a server where everything is one big free for all. I'd likely avoid those types of servers since I'm more interested in building than combat. This is why I play on a Minecraft server with Creeper damage disabled.

    Here's something that happens to everyone who plays survival Minecraft. I go out mining with our best gear and everything is going find and dandy. M inventories are near full, it was a productive run. Suddenly a creeper blows me down into a pool of lava causing me to lose everything. My best gear, diamonds and other ores, all gone. Man, does that suck. In time I've learned not to get overly pissed off, after all losing stuff part of the game. If I didn't want my stuff to go up in smoke I should have stayed on creative mode. To note, creative mode isn't bad, it's just a different play mode which operates without the limits of survival.

    Edit:


    It boils down to fair play.

    Someone who spends more time and resources *SHOULD* have an advantage over someone that just slops some stuff together in 10 minutes and calls it done. People who work harder at the game should get bigger rewards than those who just flit in every once in a while.
    Sounds like one method of play. The vision I get is a form of civilized warfare where riflemen from both sides lineup and take turns firing at each other.

    I agree with your post in the sense that those with more resources should have an advantage. On the flip side, mismanagement of those resources can lead to a big disadvantage.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages
    1,696
    Reaction score
    1,199
    • Thinking Positive
    • Likeable
    As has been mentioned before, those who don't want to lose their ships shouldn't play on a server where everything is one big free for all.
    And that's all it really comes down to IMO - there are plentiful RP servers and PvE servers out there. I don't understand why some people who prefer that playstyle want to ruin the game for others who prefer the challenge and rigors of PvP & survival on servers which cater to that by asking that anything not in line with their playstyle be labelled as griefing throughout Starmade and even removed from the game or nerfed.

    Just play on the right server. If people try to Carebear-stare on a PvP free-for-all server they'll be pixel-raped, repeatedly, and it will be no one's fault but their own. If someone does that and then cries "griefing" I think it actually borders on trolling, because people should know better.
     
    Joined
    Dec 14, 2014
    Messages
    745
    Reaction score
    158
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    Generally, I'd say griefing is killing other players or doing major harm to their structures (ships and stations alike) using methods and creating situations that allow no or almost no chance of avoidance or counterplay. This includes, but isn't limited to, basecamping, newbie sniping, battleship bullying, trapping ("Free stuff! Free ships!" Yea, for me after I blow up anyone who shows up with my inhibitor-equipped megaship), and abusing bugs and exploits in the game code or game mechanics to do harm (bypassing homebase protection, for example - although I hope that was only a scare and not a real thing)

    Now, using a cloaker tipped with buffed warheads to ram your ship, could be considered griefing, since if you're outside your claimed system, you get absolutely no warning of a cloaked ship around unless you frequently tap your scanner (if you have one) and hope you randomly catch someone who might as well arrive and pull the stunt off between 2 scanner recharges. Again, it's a MAYBE.
    Base camping I consider a strategy not griefing. This game is a territorial based game with land control. So your strategy has to be to force in part people to move and get out of area's you want to claim. It isn't as if their isn't a huge universe to make use of and come back and retaliate.

    In this sort of game I would consider griefing doing something more on the lines of damaging others property by using a method that isn't equally available. Such as if someone had admin priv and deleted another person's ship or station or simply turned off the protection on a home base so it could be wrecked.

    That also then depends on the server rules. If the server had set forth rules everyone abide by then those operating outside the rules may very well be considered griefers if breaking the rules allowed them to damage others property and so on.
     

    Edymnion

    Carebear Extraordinaire!
    Joined
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages
    2,709
    Reaction score
    1,512
    • Purchased!
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    LOL - what? So quantity over quality? Mindless grinding should trump cleverness? That's hilarious bullshit - then the game exists only for dependent minors and unemployed people to enjoy XD
    No, but if I give you a 100 blocks and 5 minutes, and I take a week with 10,000 blocks, I should win in any fight imaginable between us because I had more resources and more time to build/prepare.

    But if we want to frame it in your terms, yes, the hardcore should win in a fight against a casual. To use World of Warcraft terms, given an equal level of skill, a max level character in full purps should steamroller somebody in quest greens. Every. Single. Time.
     
    Joined
    Dec 3, 2013
    Messages
    552
    Reaction score
    182
    • Legacy Citizen 9
    • Purchased!
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    Edymnion, I think (could be wrong) that Bodhitron was talking about a diffrence in skill when it comes to building. Taking torpedo's as an example. With default settings, you can still design torpedo's that will do some damage. Not tons but some. Now if you custom build some MIRV torpedo's or like my "Javalin" torpedo that can strike the same location multiple times, you can do some actual damage. Still not nearly as much as missiles though. NOW IF a low skilled player with lots of time on thier hands, didn't know this was possible, and therefore didn't build with extra armor in the likely spots for a torpedo attack, the the guy with the knolege to build said weapon SHOULD strike a hit, and cause more damage then someone who actually planed for such a tactic to be used against them.

    Torpedo's natural enemy is in fact armor. The current settings I'm using in testing the warhead configs makes it so that a "+" shape with 5 warheads only makes it through 1 layer of advanced armor. IF that is the only thing in the way it will kill a small number of blocks underneath. We are talking single digits. Multi-layer hull and armor in the right locations can literally make torpedo's almost useless. I think what many don't like about torpedo's and mines existing as a viable tactic (a tactic where you can reduce the risk) is that they don't want to have to redesign their ships around thicker armor to defend against such attacks. Especially as turrets cannot aid them in the effort unless they are at war with Neutrals.

    Another major factor working against torpedo's is that they can be hard to fire. if your ship is moving, there is a high chance of damaging your own ship. If one torpedo blows, and you have a magazine of them, odds are the entire thing is going to explode and damage a good chunk of your ship. They also can't track a target. They are dumb fire. SO any ship that can move or turn just enough to avoid a hit, can also avoid damage. This means they are only good vs really large, and really slow (or stationary) targets. Most of those targets can afford the extra layers of armor.

    I think the main issue people see, is that they need to rebuild ships in order to combat torpedo's, mines, and the random idiot trying to Kamikaze. I can say, that even with the boost to warheads I have done (about 7x damage and a blast radius of 6 instead of 9) It can be a challenge to get through 2 or 3 layers of advanced armor. A challenge at least while your trying to keep the total size of the torpedo manageable.
     

    Lecic

    Convicted Lancake Abuser
    Joined
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages
    5,107
    Reaction score
    1,228
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 11
    This brings to mind some sort of logic controlled automatic scanner network.
    Until we get some sort of system where scanner mass has to overpower jam/cloak mass, logic scanners should not be in the game, because every smart person will have a small, docked, logic fired scanner running all the time.

    LOL - what? So quantity over quality? Mindless grinding should trump cleverness? That's hilarious bullshit - then the game exists only for dependent minors and unemployed people to enjoy XD
    If I can build & deploy a ship in 10 minutes that counters a ship someone spent 10 weeks developing and building then mine is just... better.
    Wow. You seriously want to penalize brilliant engineers and genius tacticians in favor of complacent morons who just "spend a lot of time" purely because they... "spend a lot of time"???
    Speaking as a member of a primarily combat engineering faction...

    I don't want to be able to massively outclass someone in terms of resources spent. I do not think that, in a 1v1, you should ever be able to kill more than... 4x your size, unless the enemy is a complete incompetent. Good engineers are already massively rewarded for their efforts. Smart stat balancing can let you take down ships much larger than your own. But a tiny mine/bomb that has minimal resource cost and has no counter doing insane damage to a much bigger ship? That's ridiculous and overpowered, and, frankly, a bit offensive to imply that engineers like myself and my friends want to be able to break the game in such a way.
     
    Joined
    Feb 8, 2015
    Messages
    226
    Reaction score
    36
    • Purchased!
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    Until we get some sort of system where scanner mass has to overpower jam/cloak mass, logic scanners should not be in the game, because every smart person will have a small, docked, logic fired scanner running all the time.



    Speaking as a member of a primarily combat engineering faction...

    I don't want to be able to massively outclass someone in terms of resources spent. I do not think that, in a 1v1, you should ever be able to kill more than... 4x your size, unless the enemy is a complete incompetent. Good engineers are already massively rewarded for their efforts. Smart stat balancing can let you take down ships much larger than your own. But a tiny mine/bomb that has minimal resource cost and has no counter doing insane damage to a much bigger ship? That's ridiculous and overpowered, and, frankly, a bit offensive to imply that engineers like myself and my friends want to be able to break the game in such a way.
    first of all, I agree on scanners, and definatly no stealthed torpedoes. Stealthed ships firing torpedoes yeh, but the entity they are a part of shouldn't be able cloak. Secondly, massive damage? Hahaha no. One Warhead should not deal more than 4-5 advanced armor blocks of damage, so maybe 13-15 k damage, as well as stacking damage. And there is a very simple counter. Move or shoot it down. I agree there would be a problem with neutral torpedoes, as there is no auto-target. The devs could fix that by simply making warheads an auto-targetable entity by changing their flag. It can be fixed is what I'm trying to say.

    Also, you seem to forget that warheads demand skill to play with. A magazine I was building earlier on the NFD build server inexplicably blew up on me. Some noob could go kamakaze on you and it really wouldn't kill you unless you were in a tiny drone or something, so he'd be shredded by you, yes? This game will never be fair, because it is sandbox. Every action has a counter, but some haven't been thought of or fleshed out yet. I myself am testing countermeasures. If you don't like it, don't do it.
     
    Joined
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages
    6
    Reaction score
    1
    No, but if I give you a 100 blocks and 5 minutes, and I take a week with 10,000 blocks, I should win in any fight imaginable between us because I had more resources and more time to build/prepare.
    That's PvE thinking, it doesn't apply to PvP. What if you suck at systems engineering? What if you suck at PvP micro? isn't this what the whole thread is about? players with tiny, perfect little ships or clever tricks wrecking expensive junk cubes, but you say it's not possible... yet...

    there have been many times in PvP that on my own i beat down 3 and 4 simultaneous, teamed humans each with WAY better resources than me, working together to kill me even. resources and time invested mean ZERO in PvP without experience and skill.

    But if we want to frame it in your terms, yes, the hardcore should win in a fight against a casual. To use World of Warcraft terms, given an equal level of skill, a max level character in full purps should steamroller somebody in quest greens. Every. Single. Time.
    i didn't use the terms hardcore or casual. you're framing it in your own terms, which are apparently WoW terms. i don't know. there aren't even quests in this, so i'm super confused about why you think that what determines the outcome of a PvE chain quest should have any relevance in PvP combat "every. single. time." apples & oranges, man.

    PvE is just build a hulk and park it by the rats, if it's big enough you win. this isn't WoW though - most humans aren't going to just line up and let you skillessly "farm" them like NPCs do, so don't think that the same thing that happens in PvE is going to happen in PvP or else it means someone's doing something naughty.

    SKILL+INNOVATION > NUMBERS

    both IRL and in online PvP games someone with far less than you have can completely tear you a new one (except, i guess, in WoW maybe - sounds super elitist). get used to it and stop crying foul because you can't just win easy and never even break a sweat. learn to adapt and overcome or be owned. or just stick to PvE servers and stay out of my PvP if it bothers you XD
     
    Joined
    Dec 14, 2014
    Messages
    745
    Reaction score
    158
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    No, but if I give you a 100 blocks and 5 minutes, and I take a week with 10,000 blocks, I should win in any fight imaginable between us because I had more resources and more time to build/prepare.

    But if we want to frame it in your terms, yes, the hardcore should win in a fight against a casual. To use World of Warcraft terms, given an equal level of skill, a max level character in full purps should steamroller somebody in quest greens. Every. Single. Time.
    I get your what you like. Your like most the people who get so involved in games. Games have gotten to the point the reward mindless toil over actual intellectual ability or simple problem solving. People don't like loosing and don't want it to cost them greatly when they do.

    Honestly I was hoping this game would turn out to be something different from that. After all its a game about creation and building and competition. Since I am not the type of person that likes games that reward mindless toil I probably will just end up leaving it for RL like most games.

    People have different ability and skill levels I tend to find most people who actually like a challenge and thinking don't like the type of game you are describing. Maybe an occasional play to unwind and not use the brain. Which has become more and more what I do on here. So it probably isn't long till I just don't come back. But that is me I get tired of stuff real fast when I don't find it interesting or mentally challenging.
     

    Lecic

    Convicted Lancake Abuser
    Joined
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages
    5,107
    Reaction score
    1,228
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 11
    The game already allows to smart engineers to dominate people using fewer resources. We hardly need to make that even larger.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: MacThule
    Joined
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages
    1,696
    Reaction score
    1,199
    • Thinking Positive
    • Likeable
    Agreed, but we don't need to level it more either and some people would love to see even more changes that prevent outside-the-box tactics and force players to just face off toe-to-toe and pew-pew it out like Napoleonic armies. Let's not turn this into Starmade Final Fantasy please.

    Counters exist for mines & torps (Cm shotgun arrays for one). They were never OP - just unique and poorly understood by many players.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: GRHayes
    Joined
    Jun 10, 2015
    Messages
    333
    Reaction score
    98
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    You know, MacThule, I think you've pretty much nailed it.

    A lot of people who complain about certain tactics being used are convinced that their lag-titan should be able to beat anything in the galaxy, but when a clever player comes along and puts a hole in his supposedly invincible ship he must be greifing.

    I put as much time and effort into developing my torpedo bomber, the torps it launches, min/maxing the systems, and figuring out the team and tactics needed needed to make it a viable PvP ship. It really burns my ass when some clown shows up alone in a lag-monster, then calls fowl on me and my team because he doesn't want to do anything more than left click on anything with a red marker on it or watch the AI fireworks. Well, we put a half dozen torps up the tailpipe of your tortoise speed monstrosity using our tactical prowess, teamwork, and came out with minimal losses.

    So who's better? The giant or the giant-slayer?
     
    Joined
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages
    1,696
    Reaction score
    1,199
    • Thinking Positive
    • Likeable
    This sounds like exactly how I feel.

    My PvP ships are small, agile and may not be "pretty" but it's not because they're just slopped together. I spend days experimenting with how the systems perform, running tests, and optimizing the final build. No, they don't look like the Millennium Falcon, but that's because I engineer based on how systems perform best in-game, not based on a show I saw once and really liked. Pilots laugh at my funky-looking 1K ship until I give them a playful little taste of my shield drain (so awesome for PvP) and they watch millions of shields evaporate in a few seconds and suddenly they stop messaging and leave (without so much as a 'GG' or 'WP'), presumably to go contemplate why a ship less than 1/10th the size of theirs is able to drop the defenses on their ship to dangerous levels so quickly.

    Spoiler alert - it's not because of imbalance; it's because my ships are finely tuned PvP machines evolved with only one purpose in mind. Dominating other human players in whatever they might be flying. They may look "thrown together"... but only to someone who doesn't understand what they do or why they look like that. I see other players in PvP rigs that PvE pilots are calling ugly and to me, many of them look absolutely gorgeous. Deadly and beautiful stars, spiders, rods, and letter shapes with their partially exposed systems glittering brightly in space.

    All you need to do to get a giant ship is grind long enough to fill a BP - no thought or skill required, just repetition. Am I supposed to be respectful and not kill it? Great - totally do your thing, have fun your way. It's all love. But if you're on a PvP server you better remember that those stupid AI monkeys aren't the only danger in the universe, and are far from the worst. Don't QQ when you get nommed on by an alpha predator; take a step back, figure out what happened and adapt your playing strategy to the game you're actually playing. And ditch the Enterprise clone. Or, again, switch to a PvE server.
     

    Lecic

    Convicted Lancake Abuser
    Joined
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages
    5,107
    Reaction score
    1,228
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 11
    You can have good looking PvP ships, you know.
     
    Joined
    Jun 10, 2015
    Messages
    333
    Reaction score
    98
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    You can have good looking PvP ships, you know.
    True. I build my fighters for performance, but I try to make them look good too, at least on the outside anyway. Kinda hard to have a nice interior when you only have a 1x2 cockpit to work with, but I pretty it up with a nice crystal armor canopy.
     
    Joined
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages
    199
    Reaction score
    20
    And that's all it really comes down to IMO - there are plentiful RP servers and PvE servers out there. I don't understand why some people who prefer that playstyle want to ruin the game for others who prefer the challenge and rigors of PvP & survival on servers which cater to that by asking that anything not in line with their playstyle be labelled as griefing throughout Starmade and even removed from the game or nerfed.

    Snip

    This sounds like exactly how I feel.

    My PvP ships are small, agile and may not be "pretty" but it's not because they're just slopped together. I spend days experimenting with how the systems perform, running tests, and optimizing the final build. No, they don't look like the Millennium Falcon, but that's because I engineer based on how systems perform best in-game, not based on a show I saw once and really liked. Pilots laugh at my funky-looking 1K ship until I give them a playful little taste of my shield drain (so awesome for PvP) and they watch millions of shields evaporate in a few seconds and suddenly they stop messaging and leave (without so much as a 'GG' or 'WP'), presumably to go contemplate why a ship less than 1/10th the size of theirs is able to drop the defenses on their ship to dangerous levels so quickly.

    Snip

    None of this changes the fact that as of right now torpedoes are griefing.
    • not because they bypass shields.
    • not because they can be used from a cloaked ship
    • not because sticking 50 of them floating in space 12 meters in front of your ship and then cloaking takes neither skill no creativity
    they are griefing right now because they are not counterable while you are offline/to some degree while you are online.

    Oh torpedoes just dodge them ok thats fine till its your station they are shooting at.... you are offline and your turrets can't shoot them and you can't move what do you do. Either you shoot at neutrals like an ass or you get abused neither of those is acceptable. I don't agree with Edymnion that we need some ships win by block count and time system, but as it stands right now properly designed torpedoes and ships have a 0% counterplay element to them which is not acceptable in any game which wants to have thriving pvp.

    For instance even in eve where people are allowed to lie steal cheat kill you without mercy take advantage of you in almost every way possible, you still aren't capable of going up to their station / pos while they are offline and destoying it or actually even damageing any parts of it while they are offline.