Power AMC balance

[infinity123]

Hi i am working on a ship that will have about 2 million energy regeneration.I am trying to make the best AMC system for that power but with all my testing i dont know what to do with my last ship that has 1 million power i put 22 400 dmg AMC will put the link below,but for 2 million i can put about 34 400 dmg AMC wtih little power drain my question is would this be a good setup or would it be batter to make smaller or bigger cannons for the best result.

My last ship with 1 millon power https://star-made.org/node/17664

 

[GROOV3ST3R]

you need to consider the power drain of your thrusters as well. If you shoot and move at the same time, which people tend to do quite a lot, you may end up draining away all your energy and slowing yourself down as well as leaving your ship unarmed.



There isn\'t uch point in reducing the size of your cannons because you might end up with a ship that simply can\'t deliver the punch it needs to overpower other similar ships - or compete. My advice is add more power.

 

[Calbiri]

For shield puncturing, you want to consolidate your cannon blocks into bigger weapon groups
(this costs less power, and increases damage per hit, but reduces the number of projectiles hitting blocks.)

To destroy more blocks in a single volley, use the cannon size you currently have,
as doing more than you currently do is waste full
(damage doesn\'t currently Peirce if you overkill a block). The downside to this setup is the more groups of cannons linked to a single weapon computer, the higher their lower drain becomes (this is a nerf that was added to deter \"shotgunning\" exploits)

 

[NeonSturm]

Since when?

I think now I dock ships with bobbies and amcs to attack selected target...

\"Give them a full broadside bobby!\"



I think there is (currently) no point in shielding your amcs more than with a couple (1/10) of blocks. Basic hulls have just a little bit more hp, amcs lag-die equally (if not more with all the linking code) and are cheaper than hardened.

You can outrun most missiles and can use the smaller guns too. Sure, they might drain more power if they get split, but delivering all Damage in the first 3 seconds and split your oponent\'s guns is a lot better!

 

[25hz]

In other words, what is the mechanism that stops StarMade from being about players and their creativity, and turns it into a game about the person with the most money to spend on the most extreme performance computer?

I made an uber salvage ship for gathering resources that already can shut many players\' computers down to 1FPS when I\'m salvaging a planet/roid in their vicinity. It wasn\'t my intent, but it runs fine on my machine.

What\'s to stop me from making a bunch of high power turrets and main guns that can fire out to 2000m because I can set my draw distance to max and shoot other players long before their computers can even acknowledge my existence on their screens?

What\'s to stop me from building a massive ship that brings other computers to their knees trying to render it, meanwhile I broadside them into oblivion?

There needs to be a game mechnism that injects penalties for ships that are too massive, too big, have guns that fire too far, shields that are too big and too many missiles.

- Ships that are too big should require so many engines and so much power grid that it is impossible to move them. Treat it like the amount of power needed to reach the speed of light. The bigger the ship, the exponentially larger amounts of engines and power grid are needed to move it - to the point that it\'s impractical.

- The bigger the AMC and the further it shoots, the vastly longer it takes to reload and the exponentially larger amount of power it takes to fire it. Additionally, the smaller the benefit increases are for adding weapon blocks. Same goes with missiles.



Right now the only game limit is how bad-ass your hardware is. That\'s broken. The game needs a more definite range envelope where it\'s decided that offensive oriented game play is going to take place.

EDIT: I set the picture properties to 200pixels x 200 pixels, but obviously it isn\'t working. ?

Here\'s my uber-miner:

 

[NeonSturm]

There needs to be a game mechnism that injects penalties for ships that are too massive, too big, have guns that fire too far, shields that are too big and too many missiles.


If everything - each weapon output which fires, etc - would take CPU time and CPU time is dependent on how many cores, players and Computers you have...

I mean \"CPU-Time\" as a ressource, not the actual cpu time on your hardware.



CPU-Time could be distributed by the server 33% to players thus their ships and 33% to the sum of all computers/cores 33% to sectors (which share 50:50 to players/cpus within them).

2-3 players (dependent on their ship size - large/small) would always have more CPU-time than one power gamer with infinite CPUs.

And CPU time could decide the fire rate of your weapons, salvage speed, power regeneration efficiency, sensor range...



Maybe you could distribute it - some kind of micromanagement, that so many peoples want.

 

[25hz]

Yeah, what I am thinking is a dev oriented/originated control.

In the live stream, the devs talked about how the game WOULD lag due to the size of ships, number of blocks and objects, etc. So, if they have a basic minimum requirement for hardware in mind, then they can also establish what a maximum limit is on things like ship size, guns, shields, power grid, etc.

Right now, I build a big-assed ship. You come along and blow it up because your guns outrange mine. I build bigger guns with a much longer range, put them on a bigger ship (to accommodate the extra power the guns use plus the extra power all the engines will need) and I come back and blow up your ship before I get into range of your guns. Rinse and repeat, etc until the ships are so big that it either crashes the client, the server or both. There needs to be a mathematical cap that limits the effectiveness of increased numbers of shields/engines/guns/missiles/power so that (within reason) it doesn\'t matter how awesome your computer is, the vast majority of players will be on eqqual footing with \"real world\" resources, so it boils down more to creativity and gameplay rather than how insane a weapon you can make. Hinging it on CPU resources puts the emphasis on real world hardware, which takes gameplay out of the game and puts it in a person\'s wallet.

 

[Keptick]

Why would you limit a person with a good computer because of someone elses bad hardware? Besides, In multiplayer the server is the decisive factor (and people play on the same server).

And if this \"escalation\" is so present, why isn\'t everyone flying in kilometer long ships? Small ships are fun too you know.

 

[25hz]

Right now, the upper limit of gameplay is based completely on computer hardware. That\'s a fail. That immediately puts CUSTOMERS that don\'t have the latest and greatest at the bottom of the heap. People don\'t play games where they feel they have no chance of \"winning\", especially the current crop of transient gamer mentalities that only play when they can \"win\".

On multiplayer the server ISN\'T the decisive factor, nor the ONLY factor. Regardless of what the server does, the PERSONAL COMPUTER still has to render what is going on in space, on THEIR screen. If I can set draw distance, max segments and beams drawn to maximum, while someone else (or possibly many others) have settings that are much lower, I can see them long before they see me, and I can lay waste to them before they even know what has happened.

It isn\'t about \"kilometer long ships\" either. Who is talking about kilometer long ships besides you?? Anyone can make a ship that can fire 2000m and it isn\'t anywhere close to a km long. It doesn\'t take a km long ship to make other players\' games come to a standstill either. If you don\'t have big ships on your server(s) and no one has problems with frame rates due to current game design or ship sizes, or volume of fire/missiles, good for you. That isn\'t the case on many servers or with many players. Just because you know nothing about it or don\'t see it doesn\'t make the issue magically disappear for many others. It isn\'t about whether YOU can play, it\'s about whether everyone that meets the minimum requirments can play and PAY.

 

[NeonSturm]

Make a virtual machine in your computer and play there.

If it still runs smooth, make a vitual machine inside a virtual machine and play there.

If it still runs smooth, try opening gimp, firefox and other ressource-hungry stuff. You will crash once the game needs more than 3 GB ram...