well, as to the original topic: I dont want more stuff tied to a menu. I hated that they did it to thrusters really bad, so i dont want to shields have the same thing happen to them. It wouldnt be bad if they where tied to the new system, but i do not think this is the way to do it.
I prefer and argued for, the method lancake mentioned, when they announced theyd be changing them, where placing them a certain way would have done something. Obviously thats way more difficult to build, but id still prefer it.
Could in theory compare it to building Space Engineer thrusters then, but just on a much much larger scale here as some ships could have 500 000 thruster blocks or more.
To be honest im discounting the thrust curve you added with that change, so it would have needed less thrust to move a ship
And if you count in that curve, *Welp* good luck xD
Let's use a smaller example then, 10 000 thrust blocks and also ignore the thrust curve entirely. Now let's say that each thrust block's orientation results in prioritizing thrust for that direction.To be honest im discounting the thrust curve you added with that change, so it would have needed less thrust to move a ship
But yes its way more complicated to build that way on the scale starmade allows, than the current system
Edit: also 500000 blocks? Jesus, the amount of power regen youd need to even use that alone would be incredible, Most of mine cap out at just enough to provide 50-60k thrust depending on the ship size because theres just to much drain O_O
Oh i know, i did say itd be way harder to build with that system than what you all implemented ^^; i would have just preferred the extra depth that having to fudge with the blocks would have been(the annoyance on the other hand), over clicking a few buttons and waiting. Its a balancing act, and thrusters are right in the middle, where i can see both sides, and agree that the better option was taken for the masses. I dont see that with this suggestion.
There's a clear difference between hard and annoying, which is why we opted for this GUI menu first. I like to think we'll eventually do a block based system to tweak directional movement system, but it would most likely be a small scale separate system that does not adjust your thrust at all if you remove or adjust it. That does mean it would be a bit harder if not impossible to fit it on a small ship, but as not having it would just result in 25% 25% 25% + 25% rot priotization, it would just be A-Ok as those small ships already reach a large thrust to mass ratio early on.
Yes i agree fully, but does the current shield system qualify as either?
If shields aren't 100% damage blockers, there's no need for shield capacity to drain as fast as it does currently...
same
there may be a difference, but its really not clear. some people prefer one way some prefer the other, either wouldve worked, and the one you chose is fine.
I wasn't implying we just nerf shields to 60% with no additional adjustments. there are other number to tweak that make the game more balance-able. shield regen can be improved dramatically and even armor hp could be boosted to compensate. Once the chamber system comes out there's gong to be a lot more free space in larger ships for shield
The only problem with warheads is that they don't deal enough damage. How could you change them for the better and still leave the damage and radius as is?
They already do it much more efficently. It's a lot better than naked corvettes in stellaris but 50 1k mass fighters can totally beat a 100k ship or more.
obviously thats the change i am referring to. Being what they are they should do more damage. should they not? or is making them stronger a major balance concern? because with their default settings i dont see the problem in buffing them!
What else would you mean? Fighters are already like twice as effective for mass as anything big. So you mean what, 3 times? 4 times? They are already balanced.
Doesn't defensive ion (ion computer + modules not attached to a weapon) already do this at the cost of energy?
