Is armor too weak?

[aRottenKomquat]

Of the top of my head, I'd like to see a server running a block config where standard armor weighs 0.1 mass and advanced armor weighs 0.15 mass as opposed to the current 0.15 and 0.25 respectively. At the same time, thrusters need a pretty substantial boost in terms of the thrust they produce and perhaps a reduction to their own mass as well. The formulas for turn rate also need tweaking to increase the turn rate of mid range ships between 10K and 100K mass.

Those changes would make armor tanking substantially less painful and more viable, without breaking balance.

How difficult is it to change those values? Like I've mentioned elsewhere around here, I plan to reset my server when the next major update hits and want to tweak some settings such as sector size. These changes sound interesting but I don't recall seeing settings like that in the server.cfg file.

Sorry for the thread derail...

 

[Panpiper]

How difficult is it to change those values? Like I've mentioned elsewhere around here, I plan to reset my server when the next major update hits and want to tweak some settings such as sector size. These changes sound interesting but I don't recall seeing settings like that in the server.cfg file.

It's a question of opening the file in notepad and changing numbers. The difficulty is in knowing what files to open, what parameters to tweak and what numbers to use. Of those details, I am sadly ignorant.
[doublepost=1481728191,1481725531][/doublepost]

I don't think that advanced armor should have any more mass than basic armor. Just as modern tanks have switched to using composite layered armors to achieve the same results as steel plates and reduce weight.

Actually modern composite armor is vastly superior to pure steel plate in almost every way. Half a meter of modern composite armor will stop almost any tank weapon. Those same tank weapons could penetrate full meters of regular steel. So at the same time as being lighter than steel, they are better than steel.

There are a few downsides to such composite armor of course. Versus smaller rounds, that would stand no chance of actually penetrating either a half meter of composite or a similar weight of normal steel, versus the composite such smaller rounds can damage the internal structure of the composite sufficient to degrade it's effectiveness. It's not quite the same thing as ablative, but composite cannot sustain as much abuse as regular homogeneous steel. Composite armor therefor requires much more maintenance and replacement than would steel during combat operations. Composite armor is also 'much' more expensive than standard steel.

This is why for things like light armored vehicles that are being armored sufficiently to protect against machinegun fire, the armor of choice remains steel plate (or if the budget is available titanium, or if weight is too critical, aluminium). Metal can handle multiple small impacts with vastly more effectiveness than composite. For everything else, and given sufficient budget, composite rules.

 

[Batavium]

How difficult is it to change those values? Like I've mentioned elsewhere around here, I plan to reset my server when the next major update hits and want to tweak some settings such as sector size. These changes sound interesting but I don't recall seeing settings like that in the server.cfg file.

Sorry for the thread derail...

You are not derailing the thread since this how to fix the issue. One of the hardest things to understand about StarMade is how nothing is fixed. Players and Admins figure that when you start StarMade. That the universe and all things in it are fixed. Nothing in this game has fixed values. And most complaints are about the default values the game throws at you when all you do is hit play. This thread talks about armor but it could pretty much talk about any block currently in the game. It is human nature to look for constants.

I agree that the default values need tweaking. Since doing it yourself can be hard and it breaks cross server/game blueprints. Note that in the dev timeline is talk that default values and server settings will change. It's just not high on the list atm. "default server settings should be though!"

To change blocks and this is for servers and single players alike since a single player game is just a local server. Look at the various XML files in:

StarMade/data/config


BlockConfig.xml holds all values for all blocks in the game including armor.

BlockBehavior.xml holds all values for system blocks like weapons if you want a 200 radius nuke look here

FactionConfig.xml is about all things related to faction points

GameConfigDefault.xml let's you choose a fully custom start inventory for your game


These are the important ones there are a few others to mess with in the same directory.

As for the default Armor settings in StarMade i say lower the mass weight of standard and advanced armor. I would slash the mass value in half or even three quarters so you can use more high grade armor. Then it will be more effective.

 

[MacThule]

I like armor, but only on small ships with few or no turrets. Reason being that heavy armor is actually effective in separated plates with spacing, and armored bulkheads between systems goes a long way to containing breeches (a missile getting into your systems can be effectively limited to damaging only one system instead of knocking half your systems out).

Problem is, relying on armor means accepting block damage, which means scrapping and respawning the ship after a few battles. Which sucks if it has a lot of turrets. That's less about the value of armor than problems with our ability to repair ships or at least decommission whole ships (turrets/fighters included).

If damaged/lost armor could be restored with a more reasonable effort on return to a station, it would be better than shields, IMO.

 

[Panpiper]

If damaged/lost armor could be restored with a more reasonable effort on return to a station, it would be better than shields, IMO.

I've not been in a fight in a while where I needed to repair, but concurrent with me building my latest (a 360K battleship) I built a shipyard that could hold it, reasoning that if it took damage, I would use the shipyard to repair it, rather than do the scrap and respawn routine. My battleship has literally exactly 100 turrets, and scrapping it would simply be unworkable. Is there a glitch with shipyards that makes them non-functional with ship repairs?

 

[KiloZulu]

Ugh, I love rails, but cleaning up all the little docked entities when you want to scrap/salvage a ship is a pain. I envy your 100 turrets - I scaled back on turret/docked entities due to the collision problems that caused massive server lag whenever I neared a station or other ship. I know that Schine has done a lot to fix that, but I've been wary about abandoning the practice. I use heavier turrets, ensure that my limited PDT's provide good coverage, and only use rail doors for important locations (hangars, airlocks, core room, bridge.) At my peak, my largest ship (probably a cruiser by most server standards) had 45 turrets and every doorway was double-doors on rails.

 

[kulbolen]

shipyards are super buggy but are awesome for one thing in particular: deconstructing a damaged capital ship with tons of entities. ready to decon and then respawn from bp in just a few seconds.

 

[Edymnion]

I've not been in a fight in a while where I needed to repair, but concurrent with me building my latest (a 360K battleship) I built a shipyard that could hold it, reasoning that if it took damage, I would use the shipyard to repair it, rather than do the scrap and respawn routine. My battleship has literally exactly 100 turrets, and scrapping it would simply be unworkable. Is there a glitch with shipyards that makes them non-functional with ship repairs?

Yes and no.

There is nothing specifically that makes them not be good for repairs, the ability to deconstruct and reconstruct the ship automatically is a big selling point for them.

However, I have found that for large ships, even if the ship fits in the shipyard it will start saying that it couldn't load the design because of overlaps. You can keep hammering at it to load the design over and over again and eventually it'll work, but the bigger the ship the harder it is for the load to hit the sweet spot to actually spawn it in.

 

[Tamren Shade]

I've not been in a fight in a while where I needed to repair, but concurrent with me building my latest (a 360K battleship) I built a shipyard that could hold it, reasoning that if it took damage, I would use the shipyard to repair it, rather than do the scrap and respawn routine. My battleship has literally exactly 100 turrets, and scrapping it would simply be unworkable. Is there a glitch with shipyards that makes them non-functional with ship repairs?

I haven't experimented with Shipyards for a while, but when I was messing around with them, it had trouble with docked entities. Any docked entity felt like it had a roughly 50/50 chance of just not spawning in. On the flip side of deconstructing ships, docked entities sometimes would hang around after the ship was deconstructed, but in a state where you couldn't interact with them without restarting the game.

The third issue I had with shipyards was that the text on display blocks would be missing if you used a shipyard to construct a ship. This may or may not be an issue on your builds, but it's a problem for me. I use a lot of text on my ships for logic labeling and organization.

The fourth (and worst!) issue I have with shipyards is that the block animation effect for virtual blocks in a shipyard makes me queasy and motion sick within 30 seconds of viewing it . One of only two or three video game related things ever to achieve that!

As of right now, I would only use a shipyard to deconstruct a ship to free up the blocks to respawn it from a blueprint.

 

[Jojomo]

I haven't experimented with Shipyards for a while....

Before or after the improvements from a couple of months ago?

 

[Mork2]

Due to the limited amount of shields you can put on small turrets/drones/fighters. I find that a layer of advanced armour makes small things fairly resistant to other small things. If weight is a problem a layer of advanced armour only on the facing towards the enemy.

On larger ships use as a missile damage soak and to protect small critical blocks (computers etc) from small shots.

 

[T_Lex]

I think the issue is not with armor as it is but weapons. I'm not talking about a nerf of weapons but to make them match the "tier" system of armor.

Right now armor is the only system with tiers (hull/standard/advanced) and they works fine but weapons are only one tier and since the game is in development they had to be scaled to be always effective.

I think if weapons had similar tiers as armor (basic/standard/advanced weapons) could address this issue easily. For example basic weapons wouldn't have piercing effect by default and much lower damage than current weapons so they do little against armor but cheap recipes to make. And ofc something like advanced weapons would have the current/higher dmg and inbuilt effects to be made effective against well armored targets but also very expensive crafting recipes so its not just an hour of mining hylat to make a big cannon array that eats armor for breakfast.

So I'd say wether armor is good or bad is not a question for "now" but thats just my 2 cents on the issue.

 

[Edymnion]

I think the issue is not with armor as it is but weapons. I'm not talking about a nerf of weapons but to make them match the "tier" system of armor.

Right now armor is the only system with tiers (hull/standard/advanced) and they works fine but weapons are only one tier and since the game is in development they had to be scaled to be always effective.

I think if weapons had similar tiers as armor (basic/standard/advanced weapons) could address this issue easily. For example basic weapons wouldn't have piercing effect by default and much lower damage than current weapons so they do little against armor but cheap recipes to make. And ofc something like advanced weapons would have the current/higher dmg and inbuilt effects to be made effective against well armored targets but also very expensive crafting recipes so its not just an hour of mining hylat to make a big cannon array that eats armor for breakfast.

So I'd say wether armor is good or bad is not a question for "now" but thats just my 2 cents on the issue.

This is actually a really interesting concept.

What if weapon tiers actually restricted the number of slaved systems you could use?

As in, Basic Weapons would be just that, basic weapons. Cannons, missiles, beams, and pulse. No slaved secondary/tertiary systems at all.
Standard Weapons would allow you to slave a secondary, so that you could make homing missiles, machine guns, etc.
Advanced Weapons would allow you to slave in tertiary for things like explosive and emp.

Could keep all the same weapon blocks we have now, and simply have Basic/Standard/Advanced weapon computers.

 

[T_Lex]

This is actually a really interesting concept.

What if weapon tiers actually restricted the number of slaved systems you could use?

As in, Basic Weapons would be just that, basic weapons. Cannons, missiles, beams, and pulse. No slaved secondary/tertiary systems at all.
Standard Weapons would allow you to slave a secondary, so that you could make homing missiles, machine guns, etc.
Advanced Weapons would allow you to slave in tertiary for things like explosive and emp.

Could keep all the same weapon blocks we have now, and simply have Basic/Standard/Advanced weapon computers.

Originally i thought so as well but realised it would require higher tier weapons just to make a simple can/can 1/1 point defense and as such would limit players early on.

In the example of basic/tier1 cannon should have something like base damage of 2-5 and no penetration but access to slave/effect so u can still actually make weapons but with much lower dmg. And stuff like standard would be like 10 base dmg (current) but still no penetration, and what we have now would be the advanced where weapons have inbuilt effects so by default usefull against armor without the need of further effect systems but they would also need a lot of ingredients to manufacture just like adv armor (standard cannon + 20 hylat ignot maybe).

PS. oh and we could have similar tiers for thrusters to compensate for armors mass thats currently an issue.

 

[Edymnion]

Originally i thought so as well but realised it would require higher tier weapons just to make a simple can/can 1/1 point defense and as such would limit players early on.

I dunno, balance wise I think it would still work out.

Someone who can't afford the bigger computer vs. someone who can would already be severely disadvantaged under the current system simply because the person who could afford it can already afford to be flying a much larger, much more powerful ship.

On an equal playing field, Player A won't have point defense, but Player B won't have lock on missiles either. It would be Player A dodging and Player B shooting fairly slow dumbfire missiles.

 

[T_Lex]

I dunno, balance wise I think it would still work out.

Someone who can't afford the bigger computer vs. someone who can would already be severely disadvantaged under the current system simply because the person who could afford it can already afford to be flying a much larger, much more powerful ship.

On an equal playing field, Player A won't have point defense, but Player B won't have lock on missiles either. It would be Player A dodging and Player B shooting fairly slow dumbfire missiles.

Well current cannons are pretty good of their own, if nothing else I'd only lose the ability to add in an extra effect of my preference (usually explosive). Which is loss in terms of allowing player to customize their ships, I don't think removing features for the sake of balance is the solution but i can see it working both ways.

Regardless what form it would be implemented i still think having tiers/classes/etc of different systems to scale the same way as armor does now would help addressing the problems with armor.

And regarding that they could further expand armor tiers, where is the elite armor? Or "subtier" lightweight armors (idk double the ingredients for same protection but less mass?). Theres multiple ways to increase the effectiveness of armor in any case.

 

[Zarth]

they should up the damage resistance on everything by another 10%, then add in a fourth blloock for "military" armor, which would have a 98% resistance.

 

[KiloZulu]

I think the issue is not with armor as it is but weapons. I'm not talking about a nerf of weapons but to make them match the "tier" system of armor.

Right now armor is the only system with tiers (hull/standard/advanced) and they works fine but weapons are only one tier and since the game is in development they had to be scaled to be always effective.

I think if weapons had similar tiers as armor (basic/standard/advanced weapons) could address this issue easily. For example basic weapons wouldn't have piercing effect by default and much lower damage than current weapons so they do little against armor but cheap recipes to make. And ofc something like advanced weapons would have the current/higher dmg and inbuilt effects to be made effective against well armored targets but also very expensive crafting recipes so its not just an hour of mining hylat to make a big cannon array that eats armor for breakfast.

So I'd say wether armor is good or bad is not a question for "now" but thats just my 2 cents on the issue.

Weapons do have tiers, and you kind of danced around it in your suggested solution. The basic tier is just the standard weapon. Second tier slaves a second weapon to the first, and the third tier slaves an effects computer.

Fourth tier adds a color. Pew pew!

 

[Tamren Shade]

Before or after the improvements from a couple of months ago?

Before, I'm assuming they fixed some of those issues? I heard rumours that shipyards where better, but I didn't look hard enough to confirm or deny. Somehow I missed that patch note.

 

[Nickizzy]

I don't think that advanced armor should have any more mass than basic armor. Just as modern tanks have switched to using composite layered armors to achieve the same results as steel plates and reduce weight.

Actually modern composite armor is vastly superior to pure steel plate in almost every way. Half a meter of modern composite armor will stop almost any tank weapon. Those same tank weapons could penetrate full meters of regular steel. So at the same time as being lighter than steel, they are better than steel.

But this is a straight improvement without disadvantages besides cost, which can be a big no no in game balancing.
It's like having "super reactors" that cost 200 mesh but give you 10x power. It just condenses it so it's the same cost per unit but easier to hide, and allows for frigate>Titan gameplay.