Make armour armoured

[OfficialCoding]

X-wings couldn't take out the death star's armour if they shot at it all movie. But an isanth can destroy adv. Armour in two shots WHY?

 

[Nosajimiki]

An X-wing could blast the off the little turrets or put small holes here and there without causing any "meaningful" damage, unless it could plant a shot down deep in a volatile core system like the main reactor. Likewise, a SM fighter can put a tiny hole through a block of adv. armor, but killing 10 blocks at a time on a ship made out of 10 million will not score you any meaningful victories anytime soon.

Also, larger ships can utilize a number of armor building techniques including Spaced Plating , Composite Layering, Obliterative Layering, and internal bulkheads that are only viable on such bigger ships. So, using the same set of blocks, you can make much better armor by adding complexity.

 

[MacThule]

X-wings couldn't take out the death star's armour if they shot at it all movie. But an isanth can destroy adv. Armour in two shots WHY?

What Nosajimiki said and also they are working on hardened armor literally as we speak. Which will be nice, because it could absolutely use an upgrade.

That said, you may notice that in Star Wars, Star Trek, and most contemporary cinematic sci-fi any shot from a vehicle-mount weapon that manages to penetrate shields generally does inflict damage to whatever it's hitting. Probably this is informed by RL ships. RL naval ships - even cruisers, destroyers and huge carriers - are generally lightly armored, and what armor they have is meant to repel small-arms fire and natural collisions and such. Ship-grade weapons and fighter-borne missiles rip right through their hulls and their ideal deployment strategy is usually designed around long-range firepower, picketting tactics, and point defense technology like The Aegis Combat System (a real-life equivalent to a SM point defense turret system that can track and prioritize 100 target missiles at once) to prevent an enemy from ever getting missiles or strike craft within range to make such a direct strike. IRL, heavy armor is nearly useless against heavy weapons - even heavy machine guns that any light vehicle or aircraft can deploy.

Looking at sci-fi productions like Battlestar Galactica and a lot of anime though, proper heavy armor would be a nice option for an engineer (in a science fiction fantasy games such as this) willing to sacrifice heavily in other areas for super-plates of armor that can shrug off massive damage. Looking forward to see what Schine releases for armor next.

 

[Nosajimiki]

I'm actually a bit concerned about the armor update... If he builds it based on "how to make a simple plate of armor viable", then well thought out armor systems will become the next exploit on the chopping block which will lead to more weird game mechanics designed to eliminate what is simply a balancing issue.

 

[MacThule]

I'm actually a bit concerned about the armor update... If he builds it based on "how to make a simple plate of armor viable", then well thought out armor systems will become the next exploit on the chopping block which will lead to more weird game mechanics designed to eliminate what is simply a balancing issue.

Also a bit concerned. The player consensus seems to be that larger ships should get an armor buff, but that will send scale through the roof - the entire meta will become (even more than it is) "I make my ship as large as possible so it will be literally invulnerable to 95% of other players." Then the only choice is following suite and building a 7km-long ship, and everyone does this, and we are right back at ships so over-scaled that they exceed engine performance and jumping two into a sector together causes server crashes.

 

[OfficialCoding]

Also a bit concerned. The player consensus seems to be that larger ships should get an armor buff, but that will send scale through the roof - the entire meta will become (even more than it is) "I make my ship as large as possible so it will be literally invulnerable to 95% of other players." Then the only choice is following suite and building a 7km-long ship, and everyone does this, and we are right back at ships so over-scaled that they exceed engine performance and jumping two into a sector together causes server crashes.

But if you do that, the shield bubble would not be able to cover your ship. You'd need tonnes of bubbles..

 

[MacThule]

But if you do that, the shield bubble would not be able to cover your ship. You'd need tonnes of bubbles..

What's stopping that?

It would be cost of doing business for a "proper" ship then, and if you didn't then whoever did would just own you.

 

[Nosajimiki]

Actually new stab rules makes fitting inside a single bubble at any scale is pretty easy, because you don't need a long needle ship to be a meta. You could easily make a 1-mil mass armor tank ship inside of a 600m bubble with stabs at all 6 extremes of your carision box, and you'd have effectively a 1.8k stab range which can very easily support a bubble that size and a pretty massive reactor. Also, mass scaling is 3 dimensional, so doubling that same design to 1mil mass (if your server even allows that) is not going up to 1200m, it's going up to 756m which again is easy to fit in a bubble that size when you have all that mass to contribute.

 

[kulbolen]

Also a bit concerned. The player consensus seems to be that larger ships should get an armor buff, but that will send scale through the roof - the entire meta will become (even more than it is) "I make my ship as large as possible so it will be literally invulnerable to 95% of other players." Then the only choice is following suite and building a 7km-long ship, and everyone does this, and we are right back at ships so over-scaled that they exceed engine performance and jumping two into a sector together causes server crashes.

could of course punish large ships with other things, like thrust curves or power curves... oh right =D

 

[OfficialCoding]

What's stopping that?

It would be cost of doing business for a "proper" ship then, and if you didn't then whoever did would just own you.

Yeah I just like a single bubble.

 

[MacThule]

could of course punish large ships with other things, like thrust curves or power curves... oh right =D

I don't think they should be punished or buffed at this point, until we see how they fare under the new system. Likely there is already much less incentive to max-size ships or die than there has been for years.

 

[kulbolen]

I don't think they should be punished or buffed at this point, until we see how they fare under the new system. Likely there is already much less incentive to max-size ships or die than there has been for years.

well, that i agree with, its not for right now. just thought we re talking about possible future options. it all depends on what they do w guns and such.

 

[Nosajimiki]

could of course punish large ships with other things, like thrust curves or power curves... oh right =D

Yeah, while we are at it, we should add in a few different reactor types to help balance things out to.

My thought is we can do a small and really efficient, one that requires some sort of intricate design planning and has a low soft cap, so that small ships have enough regen to support better thrusters and higher armor ratios, and maybe the second kind would be like the current reactors, but they only reach optimal regen if they are bigger, but they can't be stabilized so they always explode when hit. That way big ships would have more of a soft spot that could be made vulnerable by flanking etc.

 

[OfficialCoding]

I don't think they should be punished or buffed at this point, until we see how they fare under the new system. Likely there is already much less incentive to max-size ships or die than there has been for years.

Hmm.