Agreed, thats why i hope that the implementation of all base features and system will be done in the next few month, so that the creation of content can start with the main work force behind it, without creating mediocre content that needs to be updated or replaced yet again later.
The reason cores are so big is because of codding difficulties handling the gravity and number of blocks.
In theory I agree with you, but I don't think it would play out as smoothly as this seems. Imagine what would happen if the Dev's published a list and then ran into a snag and learned that they need to re-arrange the list, or remove something, or add something else, etc. People would flip tables over having been 'promised' something that was on the list and then having it re-arranged, re-prioritized, or not implemented due to compatibility.
Well of course small fighters are not as usefull as larger ships, fighters are to be used in groups and squadrons.
The lack of PvP is due to the new blueprint system, which came on the right place, but at the wrong time.
From what I have seen thus far this is true, what I will say I mean in no offence; people are not willing to take on the risks and responsibilities of operating an armed or even unarmed ship in what is hostile space but what I think players should realise is that even if they lose a ship in combat, they will always have the blueprint to build another and improve on it.
I respectfully disagree - in real militaries, fighters perform two roles: A) bombing, to inflict massive damage on a large vessel (possibly rendering it inoperable, or even destroyed), and B) interception, to prevent enemy bombers from doing all the stuff I said in point A. In real life, fighters are a threat to large ships. In StarMade, this is not the case.
I am affraid that you missunderstand me... Yes real Planes are a threat to ships somewhat, but you must understand that they are only a threat in numbers and always have been, in both interception of a force and bombing of ships. One plane can not at all pose a threat to most warships due to point defence CWIS and desensive missiles/countermeasures.
No, I got that part quite clearly. As you said - it takes a squadron of interceptors and bombers to successfully attack a larger ship. The problem with StarMade is, due to how the maths work out, it's pointless. A ship above a certain mass simply can't be harmed by small ships - whether it's one, or a dozen. And, that's without PD turrets.
I agree that large ships should not be impossible to fight, but there isn't really a sollution that can be made that won't also effect smaller ships (Since ships are all made from the same single blocks). Small ships should have a small chance at taking out large ships but the sollution to this problem is to fill the space in the game more with things that will force players to add a level of diversity to how they build ships and how combat is orientated i.e: more desnly packed asteroid fields, worm hole travel, maybe electronic warfare such as shield jamming, sensor jamming and even jamming/hacking that may effect ai (Make these somewhat expensive with ai jamming/hacking being one of the most expensive features in game)
There's another problem too, though. In addition to small ships not being able to generate enough power, there's not enough useful ordinance in the game. Right now, missiles are king - that's all you need to know to play. Laser cannons? Useless. Beams? Useless (though, helpful for lock-on missiles.) Damage Pulse? Worse than useless (unless you're making nukes, in which case load yourself up.) Also, even though it appears that the latest update nerfed shield recharge a good bit (oh happy day!), the fact is large ships still regenerate shields faster than they can be dropped, and there's no way to do anything about shields other than eat through them...which, a smaller ship simply can't do.
IMO the only reason Missiles are better at this point is because only method to spot them is visually , and they home on cores (which should be fixed by hp system hopefully) ... beams are ... great for slave systems, but what makes you say cannons are useless?
They're too weak to do anything.
The same result could be achieved with smaller cores, if some time is spent into creating a scaled version of it. Because, the way I see it, the core is choosing the gravitational ray depending on the position of the player related to the straight line going from the center of the core and through the margins of the core representing the margins of the plate. It can be done, it just requires a bit of time to figure the things out.
And why not simply have a list with the stuff "planed", "Acknowledged", "in development" or "rejected" after being on the list (= removed from the list)?
I completly agree! The game is applying too much accent on the BIG aspect...
Alright, let's say that the mining won't be changed (through I think it would be usefull to scale it up, as well). The possible fix is to simply scale the damage of every weapon type, augument, effect and shield in the game. And maybe reduce the HP of the cores. It's plain absurd that I could easily destroy all the plates of the planet, yet the core just sit there, floating alone through space. This makes no sense! I mean, I get it having quite a lot of HP and some good regen, but unless you have a ship few times the size of the planet, you ain't gonna even scratch it. If you would plain scale the damage dealt by weapons and maybe shields and effects, than building a small, extremly efficiently weaponized ships would actually be worth the time. Because we all know that building big ships takes a lot of time. Why not simply spawn with one cannon barrel which does the same damage as the 15 (I think) barrels you spawn with? And maybe buff the mining 5 times so you only have 5 salvage modules when you spawn. This alone would get the game in a whole new world of gameplay, focusing more on small ships than before, since the same damage can be dealt with virtually one fifteenth of the current systems. And that physicly means ships at least 3 times smaller having the same performance the current ones have. Currently, the 15 barrels barely do 10 damage if they're connected together. Why than have them 15 when you could have one? I mean, any less than that and you would do no damage at all...
To sum it up, the small ships are fighting with nerf guns, while the big ships are fighting with real weapons with live ammunition.
But even so, you still face the problem of having more chunks per plate. Planets are awful when it comes to lag, particularly when mining. There have been some advances in this area, but it is still a problem. If we make planets deeper, we make them more laggy. We can offset the deepness by making them smaller, but then we loose surface area (which I think is more important than depth).
Because, as I stated in the post you quoted, it would be bad for the community as a whole.
Do you recall all the various updates that went into balancing weapon systems? There were quite a number of them, and every time it happened someone got upset. But whether damage-per-module went up or down there was no impact on how big a ship a player would build. If it suddenly turns out that 1-cannon does 3x as much damage, I'm not going to use 1/3 as many cannons. I'm going to use the same number of cannons and do 3x as much damage. This has been the mindset of Starmade players for a long time.
I would pick having both the current and the C.
But what if after a certain ammout the more you have the more efficiency you lose? I mean, you'd have the shields less powerful than the current ratio, so a smaller ship would have a bigger chance of damaging the bigger ships, unless a shitload of turrets. Also, got another idea. Link.
