Currently missles and fighters are useless because pretty much any ship can take off like a drag racer. To fix this, simply decrease acceleration (but not top speed) depending on mass, that way a damocoles would take like 100 seconds to get to 50 speed.
Large ships.
- Thread starter EpicFailLord123
- Start date
That\'s why you use smaller ships to get around. And you can still reach max speed, it just takes sme time.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Messages
- 221
- Reaction score
- 25
This is already in the game.... the acceleration equation is (thrust*16)/mass unless thrust = 0 in which case it is 1.6/mass
Then your acceleration decreases by a factor of (1-linear dampening) per second of constant acceleration from stationary
Then your acceleration decreases by a factor of (1-linear dampening) per second of constant acceleration from stationary
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2013
- Messages
- 150
- Reaction score
- 0
As a ship builder, i intentionally make my capitals with lower than standard acceleration.
I do so as resepct for fighters, and the fact that high acceleration capitals look stupid.
I do so as resepct for fighters, and the fact that high acceleration capitals look stupid.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 367
Acceleration is not the problem.
The missiles are slower than the ships. The enemy ship, flying away from you at a speed of 20 will still easily outpace your missiles which fly at a speed of 6.
The real problem is, that the speed difference should be reversed; Missiles / torpedos are ought to be faster than spaceships. IRL it is the case in submarine vs torpedo, tank vs rocket, or airplane vs missile situations. It just doesn\'t make sense for the missiles to be slower than their targets; They would be miserably useless. So much so, that I wonder what made Schema to set them up with their current speed.
The missiles are slower than the ships. The enemy ship, flying away from you at a speed of 20 will still easily outpace your missiles which fly at a speed of 6.
The real problem is, that the speed difference should be reversed; Missiles / torpedos are ought to be faster than spaceships. IRL it is the case in submarine vs torpedo, tank vs rocket, or airplane vs missile situations. It just doesn\'t make sense for the missiles to be slower than their targets; They would be miserably useless. So much so, that I wonder what made Schema to set them up with their current speed.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2013
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 1
+1 this guys idea. -1 OP\'s idea. If you want to sacrifice that much power for thrusters to make a capital go fast, be my guest. And as keptick has said, if your fighters aren\'t as fast as your capitals, then you\'re doing something seriously wrong.
NeonSturm
StormMaker
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2013
- Messages
- 5,110
- Reaction score
- 617
They were meant vs stations.
On ships, you blow up the core. For stations it is very annoying to hit each part \"part by part\".
I know, targeting is not that good and KB/BB aim for the radar spot, but the game is alpha for a reason.
But I would like to see non-AOE initial missiles with a CD of at least 30sec.
On ships, you blow up the core. For stations it is very annoying to hit each part \"part by part\".
I know, targeting is not that good and KB/BB aim for the radar spot, but the game is alpha for a reason.
But I would like to see non-AOE initial missiles with a CD of at least 30sec.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 268
- Reaction score
- 70
Pretty sure this was addressed in the Q&A. Lots of suggestions have been made in regards to the ridiculous accerleration speeds of capital ships; most of which tend to favour the notion that thrusters should become less efficient the more there are. This I support, but I\'m sure the devs have their own ideas.
MrFURB
Madman of the Girders
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2013
- Messages
- 1,116
- Reaction score
- 413
I think this is a pretty good place to drop some food for thought.
The entire \'big vs small\' issue has been developing alongside Starmade for a while now, and the initial questions such as \'is this even a problem\' have already been solved.
It\'s been widely discussed and mostly agreed upon that while capital ships are awesome and need to feel awesome, they shouldn\'t be making the game less enjoyable to those who do not have capital ships or prefer to use other sizes of ships for whatever reason. Comparing Starmade to an RPG and ship sizes to player levels doesn\'t really work out very well because all of the content in the game is equally shared between all players all the time. MMORPGs will have separate content for low levels and high levels to enjoy that is matched to their difficulty, and will usually have tiered PvP so as to not dump newbloods into a match with the elite to get slaughtered until they ragequit.
That said, how would one make the game enjoyable for both frigate and battleship pilots at the same time, in the same battle? We all have our own thoughts on the issue, I\'d like to hear yours.
The entire \'big vs small\' issue has been developing alongside Starmade for a while now, and the initial questions such as \'is this even a problem\' have already been solved.
It\'s been widely discussed and mostly agreed upon that while capital ships are awesome and need to feel awesome, they shouldn\'t be making the game less enjoyable to those who do not have capital ships or prefer to use other sizes of ships for whatever reason. Comparing Starmade to an RPG and ship sizes to player levels doesn\'t really work out very well because all of the content in the game is equally shared between all players all the time. MMORPGs will have separate content for low levels and high levels to enjoy that is matched to their difficulty, and will usually have tiered PvP so as to not dump newbloods into a match with the elite to get slaughtered until they ragequit.
That said, how would one make the game enjoyable for both frigate and battleship pilots at the same time, in the same battle? We all have our own thoughts on the issue, I\'d like to hear yours.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 307
- Reaction score
- 128
(1) slowing down capital ships + (2) implementing FTL + (3) greatly slowing down the turning rate of big turrets + (4) new weapon system update = little ships more important
why?
because:
1 - fighters would be able to manouver around capital ships, running away from them or catching on them;
main capital ship weapon systems would be useless against small ships, so pilots would need to depend either on fighters or turrets - there will be fights fighters vs fighters and capital vs capital and each of this confrontation would matter.
Also the capital ships are usually in the center of battle. Right now this center can move even up to 150 km/h (speed limit on my server) and changing sectors pretty fast. If the capital ships would get slowed down, the battle around them would more or less stick to the same place.
But what\'s supposed to be the speed limit? I have no idea. I can imagine battles with capital ships flying with max speed 20 km/h but this kind of system, if was about to be implemented, should be discussed more.
2 - slow moving capital ships would be a pain and moving around the universe would take hours, so the FTL is necessary. In my opinion one of the best FTL system ideas is here:
http://star-made.org/content/my-take-ftl
3 - without this fighters would be taken down in a matter of seconds. When slowed down, the bigger turrets would rather focus on the enemy capital ship, while smaller turrets would be attacking enemy fighters.
smaller turrets = much less damage output + slower flying lasers (yeah, there will be beams, missiles, etc., but you get the idea) ---> fighters have a chance to survive flying around capital ships
4 - Right now we can mostly imagine how the new weapon system would work, but i guess we are going to get at least few weapon combinations which could be used by bombers. Of course not typical bombers but ships which would be able to destroy enemy capital ships turrets and gaining this way an upper hand in the battle. The turrets don\'t need to be the first target of the bombers, but before capital ships shields are down, they\'ll be the easiest target.
Now \"What if...\":
Tl:dr
capital ships more useless and vulnerable while on their own --> need of the escort fleet
this way each class of ship would be needed in the fleet and the problem is gone
why?
because:
1 - fighters would be able to manouver around capital ships, running away from them or catching on them;
main capital ship weapon systems would be useless against small ships, so pilots would need to depend either on fighters or turrets - there will be fights fighters vs fighters and capital vs capital and each of this confrontation would matter.
Also the capital ships are usually in the center of battle. Right now this center can move even up to 150 km/h (speed limit on my server) and changing sectors pretty fast. If the capital ships would get slowed down, the battle around them would more or less stick to the same place.
But what\'s supposed to be the speed limit? I have no idea. I can imagine battles with capital ships flying with max speed 20 km/h but this kind of system, if was about to be implemented, should be discussed more.
2 - slow moving capital ships would be a pain and moving around the universe would take hours, so the FTL is necessary. In my opinion one of the best FTL system ideas is here:
http://star-made.org/content/my-take-ftl
3 - without this fighters would be taken down in a matter of seconds. When slowed down, the bigger turrets would rather focus on the enemy capital ship, while smaller turrets would be attacking enemy fighters.
smaller turrets = much less damage output + slower flying lasers (yeah, there will be beams, missiles, etc., but you get the idea) ---> fighters have a chance to survive flying around capital ships
4 - Right now we can mostly imagine how the new weapon system would work, but i guess we are going to get at least few weapon combinations which could be used by bombers. Of course not typical bombers but ships which would be able to destroy enemy capital ships turrets and gaining this way an upper hand in the battle. The turrets don\'t need to be the first target of the bombers, but before capital ships shields are down, they\'ll be the easiest target.
Now \"What if...\":
- capital ship does not have turrets? - much easier target for bombers and fighters/interceptors
Of course taking down the shields of capital ship would require plenty of them, but here is where frigates (or something like that) come in handy - still fast and manoeuverable enough to stay on capital ships tail and have enough fire power to take shields down. - one side does not have an escort fleet? - again - much easier target as balancing of the fleet (and capital ship turrets) would be the key to victory, rather than \"more blocks = win\"
Tl:dr
capital ships more useless and vulnerable while on their own --> need of the escort fleet
this way each class of ship would be needed in the fleet and the problem is gone
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2013
- Messages
- 126
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 307
- Reaction score
- 128
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2013
- Messages
- 67
- Reaction score
- 0
Sigh
A space shuttle weighs several million times as much as a firework. which one goes faster?
-AtraUnam
Certainly, while a space shuttle can obtain much higher speeds, it has much less acceleration during early launch stages. Missiles and fireworks have incredibly high impulse; they accelerate very rapidly, and pick up a fair bit of momentum over relatively short periods of time.
I am in favor of different missile types; slower ones intended for use against slower ships and/or stations, and faster, shorter-ranged missiles for engaging fighters and other more agile targets.
A space shuttle weighs several million times as much as a firework. which one goes faster?
-AtraUnam
Certainly, while a space shuttle can obtain much higher speeds, it has much less acceleration during early launch stages. Missiles and fireworks have incredibly high impulse; they accelerate very rapidly, and pick up a fair bit of momentum over relatively short periods of time.
I am in favor of different missile types; slower ones intended for use against slower ships and/or stations, and faster, shorter-ranged missiles for engaging fighters and other more agile targets.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 367
The only time when a space shuttle is really fast, is when it\'s sitting on the detachable booster rockets; which in itself prooves the point: A disposable rocket is faster.
Without the boosters, I think a couple missiles already exists that could do the job. (You know, the kind that picks off satellites from the sky - which orbit just as fast as a shuttle)
Why?
A spaceship needs to carry a lot of stuff. Keep people alive. Stay intact so it can be used again. Missiles are lighter. They need less power to achieve greater speed, which they need to maintain only for a short time.
So yes. \"Sigh\" indeed.
Without the boosters, I think a couple missiles already exists that could do the job. (You know, the kind that picks off satellites from the sky - which orbit just as fast as a shuttle)
Why?
A spaceship needs to carry a lot of stuff. Keep people alive. Stay intact so it can be used again. Missiles are lighter. They need less power to achieve greater speed, which they need to maintain only for a short time.
So yes. \"Sigh\" indeed.
AtraUnam
Maiden of crashes
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,121
- Reaction score
- 869
The point I was trying to make is that in the end ship size does not determine maximum speed, a fighter and a capital ship both have the same top speed with their acceleration determined by their TWR. If someone builds a capital ship with a higher TWR than your fighter then thats perfectly logical and nobodies problem but your own.
On that note though it would be far more balanced if thrusters did not get more efficient with size. That way a capital ship would have to invest the same % of blocks as a fighter in thrusters to get the same TWR.
On that note though it would be far more balanced if thrusters did not get more efficient with size. That way a capital ship would have to invest the same % of blocks as a fighter in thrusters to get the same TWR.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 405
- Reaction score
- 47
Proportionatly to its size, the firework gose faster. The shuttle only achieves its 13,000MPH+ thanks to its huge rockets and only when it is in the upper reaches of the atmosphere where there is little resistance. A missile/rocket in space would be able to achieve near instant top speed because of its lighter mass and a dedicated booster with one purpose. To make the projectile move very very fast.
A simple understanding of physics would explain the rest.
A simple understanding of physics would explain the rest.