You could suggest a general flight-simulator within SM to test builds before purchasing them with original, adjusted and imported rules.
I'll leave it to you to do it if you like to.
I suggest, that the flight-simulator can also test different scenarios, which the server admin or SM-dock hosts for players, to make overall acceptable ships.
I'll place my answer after the spoiler.
I'll place my answer after the spoiler.
Generally I agree. While 5 Gunships focus-firing on 1/5 enemy Gunship, it may redistribute power for weapon perks/actives to get temporarily more shield perks/actives and die slower while the allied Gunships deal damage.
This would generally buff small ships in battles with big ships involved when they are about 1/5 (variable) the size of a big ship.
Smaller ships don't have time to re-adjust perks/actives and bigger ships would be less flexible with ship-global settings.
Thanks for the idea! I have written my more refined idea above the Spoiler.
EPipes may buff a system, but distributing power over the magnetic field of a ship is nothing too implausible.
Alternatively e-pipes would make systems more power-drain resistent or enable manual e-distribution management - a priority system.
Very nice ideas!
I think about Increase/dec. defenses for PvP systems and rogue/company-leader chars if my idea of a family of characters per player is accepted (using account name as family/-tree name).
I wrote about vector shield below. Every emitter could use different "technology-settings" like being more efficient but let some dmg through or using additional power to mitigate dmg.
They would be additional to global shields, so we would have basic protection against stray attacks, an option to better protect us while we are on the run or for a frontal assault and to survive in a damaged but still valuable ship if the enemy attacks from different directions.
Will you make the list which part of which tutorial needs to be fixed?
Power 2.0 is nice, but something which Carrier-ships can insert into the captains vessel to outfit it for the current mission would not work.
5x5x20 plugins would not take as much hangar space as a hollowed out ship.
Yup. I want a "NeonSturm family/-tree" with a Cyborg-Hitler in place of StarTreks Borgs and he would mindfuck every enemy over the chat (according to RP rules) using the Cyborg-Zombie-Nazis characters as Church-Nazi-Bell-Ship-flying assasins to convert everyone.
At the same time, I could have a "Atlantria NeonSturm" character which acts as the Ambassador of "Deutschluft", "Deutscherde", "Deutschwasser" und "Deutschfeuer", which hate that Cyhit char created by Neonazis and try to add a bounty and kill it again and again and again ... only to see that they only got one of his followers.
So I would have many chars on a server which are named like "Cyhit NeonSturm" or "Cykos NeonSturm" or "Atria NeonSturm"
but still only one account. And you will likely be attacked by Nazi-Bells when you broke the contract with my "Orden der Verteidiger/Assasinen" organisation which acts together as Military supported by "Orden der Wächter/Polizisten".
Stupid SM-Computers because they cannot run Beam/Cannon/Missile software simultanously =P
I hope you have thought through the possibility of 1 heavy turret and 3 antimissile turrets, because it affects which tools for your rules you need to suggest.
A good rule might be to buff Ships while they are in a friendly sector when there is a station around which has a certain upgrade.
Perhaps we could use cannon-modules like cargo-crates?
The server could then auto-adjust the number of weapon blocks which fit inside such a weapon-system, as long as all weapon-modules, which work as cargo-crates for weapon-blocks only, can hold the desired ammount.
The user has then the option to remove some to save mass or spawn cost.
Yup. But I prefer to use the nearest shield-emitter to define how a shield works.
Perhaps you can even apply different rules for a turret depending on the purpose of a turret,
but I don't want to suggest anything which could create massive ammounts of lag.
I have to disagree (at least in parts)!
Yes, bubble shields and integrity is not fun atm.
But how does the community use their veto right? How is it policed? Some may rage about imbalance of power.
You may have a look after my Spoiler where I describe how vector-shields tie into the new rule system.
I'd like a 5-Star rating system. Even if you only give 1 Star, it took you time to give it.
The stars can also be replaced by following to make it easier-to-use:
- Lense+Star (yes, I noticed your post)
- Paper+Star (good enough to post)
- Thumb+Star (Like)
- Heart+Star (Love)
- 3 Hearts+Star (Adore a perfect post)
If you don't like a post/thread at all, don't do anything to boost it's occurence in the thread/forum.
I have written after the spoiler =)
I fully agree to a degree that I want your post in my Spoiler!
They encourage using multiple entities which is usually good to break down massive bricks or buff defending ships around a station.
Vs Bugs, I would make them so that they don't require a beam but use jump-drive-tech to instantly link a target object over your ships magnetic or shield field (plus GFX).
Me too.
Make Systems with something like cargo-crates and fill them with modules - as long as enough fit into that space you can adjust numbers easily and still use conventional blocks to create your energy links.
Yes!
I dunno why. A simple hyperlink to the master-entity to check IDs of attacker and target by comparing the master-entitie's ID would do the trick of preventing friendly fire.
And since nothing undocks anymore when the docker is destroyed, mostly undocking on purpose should trigger the adjustments of hyperlinks of all sub-entities of the newly undocked entity.
I agree, especially with the problem of prediction, but generally you would use modularity to add missile defense to a frighter, add a small annoying combat drone or a you-die-with-me-warhead-launcher depending on server rules.
In case of the missile defense it may need more energy and a small included reactor would do the job, but the 1-reactor-rule forbidds it.
The hope dies last =D
