StarMade 0.1836 New Tutorial and loads of fixes

[DivineEvil]

I like them but they do look very similar I would want to see what you can do with a longer looking ship. My faction could use someone like yourself that can get to the numbers and knows how to build.

They look similar because 1.They made by the same alien race. 2.They use the same dimension values (34x21x13 and 34x55x21 respectively) 3.They use same symmetry, which is now scrapped.

I also annoyed how they look like broad-afts turned on a side, which is primary reason for scrapping Y-symmetry for future designs. I'm not gonna do longer ships becuase that is against my race's design philosophy, and everybody else already does those in excess. Sintet ships are always biased towards vertical ships, while length/width ratio depends solely on length always being the even number of Fibonacci sequence. Sintet Frigates use long 144x89x55 "blade" bias, Cruisers has high "fish" 144x233x89 dimensions, while Battleships are broad "mask" 144x377x233 ships. Human's long-wide "boat" designs are cliche, and aplenty without my contributions.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

That ratio is completely useless in this discussion. How many people actually set up a 1:2:1 weapon setup? You're better off using a more realistic ratio, like 1000:1000:1000 and 1000:2000:1000. And that does matter. It's wasted space on a 'fix' that has no right nor need to exist.

No, it's just stupid and unnecessary. It won't fix a goddamn thing. It isn't fair because it's a needless change that makes no sense and makes the already tedious task of calibrating power output, usage, weapon effectiveness, shield strength, etc even more complicated and taxing, and it's unbalanced because there was never an issue to begin with.

It's honestly a silly and vain attempt to 'bug fix' something that didn't need fixing instead some actual issues.

You apparently don't know that when comparing ratios 1:2:1 is the same thing as 1000:2000:1000. Ratios are supposed to be reduced by the highest common divisor.

 

[Incap]

You apparently don't know that when comparing ratios 1:2:1 is the same thing as 1000:2000:1000. Ratios are supposed to be reduced by the highest common divisor.

Don't be a smartarse with me boy.

 

[Tassyr]

So uh. Can someone explain what happened to explosives? They still read as having a nice radius that'd do a huge deal of damage, but when I check, it's STILL only 1 block. It says resolved and yet the problem is exactly the same as it always was.

Without wanting to be a smartass or a whiner- is that what resolved means, 'shelved?'

 

[Ithirahad]

So uh. Can someone explain what happened to explosives? They still read as having a nice radius that'd do a huge deal of damage, but when I check, it's STILL only 1 block. It says resolved and yet the problem is exactly the same as it always was.

Without wanting to be a smartass or a whiner- is that what resolved means, 'shelved?'

In this case, when Schema 'resolved' it, he added a message saying that he's shelving it. Why? I don't f**ing know. It had better be a good reason.

 

[NuclearFun]

*Sigh* The amount of butthurtness in this thread is epic.

You don't say!

That's why clever people keep separate systems spatially divided.

That's exactly why my titan is still as hollow as many poster's arguments. Your job as alpha tester is to report bugs, give feedback, make suggestions. If you aren't willing to refit your ships from time to time you're pretty wrong here. Get a gameboy and play Pokémon, no significant changes there in 18 years.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the overpowered stop effect and the broken momentum protection from passive explosive effects were fixed as well.

I have a hard time finding any critisism here, all I see is whining. Cheese?

Hollow words, unless you come up with a better idea.

Schema wants each combination to be viable. The way it was before combinations without effects were discouraged. There's no reason why effects should practically be mandatory.

Can we please get an "Epic Agree" button in addition to the normal one?

Afaik the thrust mechanics will be changed again soon. Note to self: Buy more cheese.

Why is that so? Perhaps because people like you prefer whining to wrtiting a proper suggestion post?

Just because it's common it doesn't mean it's intelligent. According to my experience the opposite is true horrifyingly often.

Slave and effect systems were never meant to give an absolute DPS boost. They are modifications, not upgrades. Their advantages come with disadvantages. If you don't understand the benefits of higher fire rates or greater ranges you better play Battleship.

Weapons with secondary and tertiary systems have less DPS now, since they had a too high damage bonus before. But they also need less energy now.

No it wasn't a balance change, it was a BUGFIX.

You seem to be unwilling to read or understand any concerns voiced here. All you do is belittling people that are against this change ...

 

[FunnyBunny14]

1º All "paint capsules" can not be crafting on her factory module

The recipes for paint should be there... Somehwere. I'm not sure what factory it's in, but be sure to check them all. It will maat likely just be in the basic factory though.[DOUBLEPOST=1416699545,1416699235][/DOUBLEPOST]

Yes, a ratio of 1:1:1 would really be more intuitive.

Yeah, it would.

@schema and @Calbiri , would this work?

I do understand why people are complaining. Something like this would have been better:
Damage multiplier = 1 + slave/master + effect/master
Total damage = damage master x damage multiplier

And slave, master and effect both are the amount of modules of the slave, master and effect.

That should be a simple (?) way of fixing it. And if I'm not mistaken, that's how it was meant to be.

Edit:
And: Damage per shot = total damage x slave value.

I'm not an expert of coding (I don't anything), but I really hope that it can go back to the way it was. It is, as has already been stated, counter-intuitive, and it is probably best if the old way of 1:1:1 came back without the more damage than 3:0:0.

 

[Malacodor]

1º All "paint capsules" can not be crafting on her factory module

I can't confirm this, tested with purple and orange and it worked.

You seem to be unwilling to read or understand any concerns voiced here. All you do is belittling people that are against this change ...

I'm not the one who doesn't understand.

 

[NuclearFun]

I can't confirm this, tested with purple and orange and it worked.

I'm not the one who doesn't understand.

I think this is completely counter intuitive, you lose so much (changing between different effect systems with different sizes, using effect systems both as defensive and offensive...) and gain nothing except for a small "bugfix" (which certainly can be fixed differently).
There will be a lot of changes in the future (as there should be, alpha state and all) but i will criticize every change which i see as negative and this is one of them.

i am trying to stay as polite as i can here, something you may want to consider for yourself.

 

[Malacodor]

i am trying to stay as polite as i can here, something you may want to consider for yourself.

What do you want? I already agreed that the 1:2:1 ratio is counter-intuitive. I would have preferred another solution as well, but "I have to refit everything!!!!!1111" isn't a valid argument in an alpha game. Why do most people just whine? Why don't they try to understand what exactly the bug was and figure out a better solution?

And I try to to stay polite as well, it just isn't easy.

 

[Ithirahad]

Why do most people just whine? Why don't they try to understand what exactly the bug was and figure out a better solution?

Because honestly, right now it looks like the best solution is just to flat-out revert the system. It made sense before; doesn't make as much immediately-evident sense now (Though I suppose that technically it's a bit more logical) and the "fix" also requires refitting, which, while not the end of the world, is really annoying for people who don't have tons of foresight when it comes to systems placement (me :| ) and shouldn't be needed, even in alpha, without a sufficiently good reason.

 

[Andir]

What I don't understand is why, if I need a solid beam weapon, I need twice as many cannon barrels as I do beam modules. That's my gripe with the change. The ratio of making the slave system require twice as much for an effect seems wrong and counterintuitive.

 

[Crashmaster]

Speaking of beams, beam slave systems in a 1:2:1 setup now suffer a 50% DPS penalty vs. a weapon of the same mass and physical space to pay for their increased range. The previous DPS penalty of 33% was already too much for me to even consider ever using them at 100% but that's just me.

Were long range weapons OP before? Will any of you ever use this now 'balanced' setup in a ship for serious faction or PVP use? Is the DPS cost just too damn high?

I think if we are stuck with this new implementation as the only way to correct for 2+2+2 > 6+0+0 there will need to be some changes to the implementation of beam slaves, probably requiring a refit.

Also negative feedback about an alpha game should be as important as positive feedback to a developer. The fanboys in this thread that make a point of marginalizing others' complaints with blanket statements like, "it's an alpha," and, "you play for free," should realize this and present a real point if they even have one.

 

[GDPR 302420]

Nerf Definition:
In video gaming, a nerf is a change to a game that makes something less effective or desirable. The word can be used as a verb to describe that change. The opposite of nerf is buff. Taken from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf_(video_gaming)

Bugfix Definition:
Video games receive bugfixes to fix compatibility problems after their initial release just like any other software, but they can also be applied to change game rules or algorithms. These patches may be prompted by the discovery of exploits in the multiplayer game experience that can be used to gain unfair advantages over other players. Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_(computing)

As i see it this "bug fix" makes every weapon in starmade less effective and desirable, as far as i am concerned this "bug" did not give any advantage to players either since anyone and everyone could do it.

SO this "bug fix" is actually a nerf, because it perfectly fits the definition of Nerf AND it makes players have to do the following things to do one (or more) of the following things to make their ships combat worthy.

1. Make their ships bigger so they can fit enough systems to get the buff they deserve (makes ships have bigger hitboxes and is very bad for fighters)

2. Sacrifice Shields, Engines and other non-combat systems to make room (makes ships slower, less defensive and more vulnerable bad for every ship)

3. completely remove any slave systems and rely on default unmodified weapons for DPS (makes ships have less customisation oppurtunities and is extremeley bad for every ship)

All of these things make ships less powerful overall making ships less effective and desirable, THIS is not a bug fix this is a NERF

 

[NuclearFun]

What do you want? I already agreed that the 1:2:1 ratio is counter-intuitive. I would have preferred another solution as well, but "I have to refit everything!!!!!1111" isn't a valid argument in an alpha game. Why do most people just whine? Why don't they try to understand what exactly the bug was and figure out a better solution?

And I try to to stay polite as well, it just isn't easy.

I want you to shut up and stop insulting people here, especially if you like this game as much as i do.
"People who think different are stupid!!!11111" is not a constructive response.

As for now the only upside i see for the new system is one little bugfix, i still insist this could have been solved otherwise.

 

[Drakkart]

It should be
Sum of system modules * multiplier = damage per second 6/0/0 = 2/2/2 10/8/6 = 24 blocks *5 dps (AMC) = 120 dps
(slave : master) * 100 = slave effect %-age 10/8/6 = 80% slave effect
(effect : master) *100 = effect effect %-age 10/8/6 = 60% effect effect

60% ion means these 120 dps have a penetration bonus of 60% against shields and a damage malus of 60% against blocks
60% overdrive means these 120 dps will pull 60% more energy than the master system would and transform this additional energy into additional damage. most likely on a different ratio than the normal 10 energy = 1 damage to keep it in place

This would be a system everybody could grasp easily. Dear schema for the love of being friendly to new players please balance but keep it intuitive.

 

[FunnyBunny14]

It should be
Sum of system modules * multiplier = damage per second 6/0/0 = 2/2/2 10/8/6 = 24 blocks *5 dps (AMC) = 120 dps
(slave : master) * 100 = slave effect %-age 10/8/6 = 80% slave effect
(effect : master) *100 = effect effect %-age 10/8/6 = 60% effect effect

60% ion means these 120 dps have a penetration bonus of 60% against shields and a damage malus of 60% against blocks
60% overdrive means these 120 dps will pull 60% more energy than the master system would and transform this additional energy into additional damage. most likely on a different ratio than the normal 10 energy = 1 damage to keep it in place

This would be a system everybody could grasp easily. Dear schema for the love of being friendly to new players please balance but keep it intuitive.

No, please no! Leave the effects as they are, and rather just have the bug fixed in a different way. This is a lot better:

I do understand why people are complaining. Something like this would have been better:
Damage multiplier = 1 + slave/master + effect/master
Total damage = damage master x damage multiplier

And slave, master and effect both are the amount of modules of the slave, master and effect.

That should be a simple (?) way of fixing it. And if I'm not mistaken, that's how it was meant to be.

Edit:
And: Damage per shot = total damage x slave value.

 

[Malacodor]

I'm clearly not a fanboy. I criticise what I don't like, for example the useless potato generator.

As i see it this "bug fix" makes every weapon in starmade less effective and desirable, as far as i am concerned this "bug" did not give any advantage to players either since anyone and everyone could do it.

SO this "bug fix" is actually a nerf, because it perfectly fits the definition of Nerf AND it makes players have to do the following things to do one (or more) of the following things to make their ships combat worthy.

If a game designer reduces the intended DPS of a weapon it's a nerf. If they fix a bug which gave a weapon more DPS than intended it's a fix. Weapons with slaves and effects now do as much damage as intended, before they didn't.

1. Make their ships bigger so they can fit enough systems to get the buff they deserve (makes ships have bigger hitboxes and is very bad for fighters)

2. Sacrifice Shields, Engines and other non-combat systems to make room (makes ships slower, less defensive and more vulnerable bad for every ship)

3. completely remove any slave systems and rely on default unmodified weapons for DPS (makes ships have less customisation oppurtunities and is extremeley bad for every ship)

All of these things make ships less powerful overall making ships less effective and desirable, THIS is not a bug fix this is a NERF

This is simply not true, the only thing you have to sacrifice for more slave systems is primary and tertiary system blocks. You will do less damage than before, but so will everyone else.

I want you to shut up and stop insulting people here, especially if you like this game as much as i do.
"People who think different are stupid!!!11111" is not a constructive response.

Lol, I never said that, learn to read. And unlike @xlBlackhawklx I don't call people asshats for reporting a bug.

As for now the only upside i see for the new system is one little bugfix, i still insist this could have been solved otherwise.

Possibly. But if schema changes it again more people, who just refitted their ships to the 1:2:1 ratio, will start complaining. So I don't think he's very motivated.

 

[NuclearFun]

Lol, I never said that, learn to read. And unlike @xlBlackhawklx I don't call people asshats for reporting a bug.


Possibly. But if schema changes it again more people, who just refitted their ships to the 1:2:1 ratio, will start complaining. So I don't think he's very motivated.

No one said "I have to refit everything!!!!!1111" ... so do we both now need reading lessons? Also i thought refitting ships in alpha should be expected?
I will ignore you from now on like i should have from the start.

 

[DivineEvil]

Speaking of beams, beam slave systems in a 1:2:1 setup now suffer a 50% DPS penalty vs. a weapon of the same mass and physical space to pay for their increased range. The previous DPS penalty of 33% was already too much for me to even consider ever using them at 100% but that's just me.

Were long range weapons OP before? Will any of you ever use this now 'balanced' setup in a ship for serious faction or PVP use? Is the DPS cost just too damn high?

Long-range weapons are always OP. I doesn't matter what game you pick for comparison, there's always two types of weapons which can break the balance severely if not enough drawback is provided. These are front-load weapons, that can decimate an opponent before he could react, and long-range weapons, that can offer damage far enough, that opponent just can't reach until getting closer. The problem with range is that it cannot be directly scaled against DPS. In Starmade, long-range weapons has no inherent limitations of potential DPS, thus the only way to balance them is to give a significant DPS ratio reduction, that in return gains an ability to fire onto static objects without recieving return-fire.

Also negative feedback about an alpha game should be as important as positive feedback to a developer. The fanboys in this thread that make a point of marginalizing others' complaints with blanket statements like, "it's an alpha," and, "you play for free," should realize this and present a real point if they even have one.

Negative feedback is something that has to stick with an outline of gameplay, balance and stability, just as positive feedback. Blaming one's inability to adapt to changes on developers, who perform those changes in the interest of game and it's community, is not a negative feedback, and openly stating about abandoning the testing process due to those changes is also not a negative feedback - it's a negative attitude, which undermines the attitude of other players and testers as well as integrity of the community in general, which is obvious.

Bugfix Definition:
Video games receive bugfixes to fix compatibility problems after their initial release just like any other software, but they can also be applied to change game rules or algorithms. These patches may be prompted by the discovery of exploits in the multiplayer game experience that can be used to gain unfair advantages over other players. Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_(computing)

Given definition aplies to "patch", not to "bugfix". That's some lame straw-man. Bugfixes are specifically directed upon fixing an error in come or specific algoritm, which causes game instability or undesirable math outputs.

As i see it this "bug fix" makes every weapon in starmade less effective and desirable, as far as i am concerned this "bug" did not give any advantage to players either since anyone and everyone could do it.

Wrong. This bugfix makes weapon-weapon and weapon-effect identical in combat potential, by reducing the effective amount of effect modules in a maximized weapon system. Bug didn't gave the advantage to particular players, but it gave unintended damage buff to systems with effect modules in comparison to regular weapon systems, which made those regular weapon systems undesirable to use despite the intended viability. Effect modules were initially intended to be used to modify the effect weapon provides (thus the name), without giving any additional benefits aside from regular per-block DPS gain.

1. Make their ships bigger so they can fit enough systems to get the buff they deserve (makes ships have bigger hitboxes and is very bad for fighters)

2. Sacrifice Shields, Engines and other non-combat systems to make room (makes ships slower, less defensive and more vulnerable bad for every ship)

3. completely remove any slave systems and rely on default unmodified weapons for DPS (makes ships have less customisation oppurtunities and is extremeley bad for every ship)

All of these things make ships less powerful overall making ships less effective and desirable, THIS is not a bug fix this is a NERF

1. 'Buff they deserve' has no meaning in this. DPS that were given to effect-enchanced weapons was a math error. Making ships bigger is a straightforward way to achieve the same DPS trough legal means. If it's undesirable then changing ratios of weapons/systems is what supposed to give equal stat modifiers together with legal DPS given.

2. Fine by me. Smaller ships are much easier to modify and optimize and they recieve much less deminishing returns compared to titans. Anything that encourages people to try smaller ships for better performance and easier management is a positive change for me personally.

3. Again, Effect modules were intended to be an addition to the primary weapon aspect to modify it's effect, and not to give it an upper hand over regular weapons! Viably using unmodified weapons for DPS is what Schema was trying to achieve in the first place. Customization towards available effects haven't gone anywhere, it's just that it isn't mandatory to acquire maximum efficiency of a given weapon, but a matter of choice whether you actually need an effect or not.