I suspect your suggestion would be to limit the resources a cargo block can hold? I have yet to see how many trade ships are used with the current update, or how full they are per trade. When I do, I am sure to make some adjustments.
Look at the lack of transport ships too; when cargo is this cheap to transport, there's just no point in dedicated transport ships, because you can easily fit most transport loads on a combat ship.
While it may be completely inefficient, how does this differ from other games. I suppose cooldowns are used more often in say EVE, which you referenced. But you are also sure to see many systems online at the same time if you have the capacitor to support them. I do not want every system online at once. I am sure the others agree that having defensive effects, weapons, and overdrive on at the same time is not how we want players playing the game.
It's a relief hearing that from you.
In other games you have limited power available; this is true for every single space combat game i know. One major difference between them and starmade is that thrusters do not consume power. Because thrusters consume power, ships MUST be fitted with extremely high power regen in order to move. It's this excessively high regen that comes at virtually zero cost that's the source of how so few styles can work, along with the lack of a proper battery system. Because of the power generation, even if you're a good guy and stick with auxilliary power, capacitor blocks only handle 20 seconds of generation. Since engagements in starmade last several minutes that timeframe is too small to matter, even the deudliest firearms won't break another ship's shields in 20 seconds, and you're always better off with more generation while keeping capacity to a bare minimum.
At the same time, I see videos from (suposedly) good players drawing too much power for just one item, and rendering them incapable of activating everything at once. I need a general consensus that this is how gameplay operates. Not just from you. People in this thread reading our conversation will have to agree or disagree that what you say happens, is happening. It isn't as easy as tweaking a number. That number affects multiple playestyles and every unique ship out there.
If they're doing that they're either not good players or they're just making mistakes. Effective designs run everything all the time, because systems that aren't active are just dead weight, and they're much more expensive to add than more power. If you have a ship with an ion gun for shields, and an explosive gun for armor, why not simply combine them into an explosive gun that's twice as large, as it can handle shields as well as the old ion gun and is twice as good against armor?
As for general consensus, look how this thread goes. You can piss most of these people in the mouth and they'll ask for seconds, because they're white knights. All games have these scurrying around, they don't operate in terms of what is good or bad for the game, they just defend princess schine from anything that would "attack" the princess, like my insidious hatred.
Then there are roleplayers and cosmetic builders, who don't really care about mechanics, but have a vested interest in keeping the game as it is, so their old builds aren't all rendered obsolete.
Of course you shouldn't just listen to me, or to any random idiot on the forums for that matter, but those of us complaining about these issues are pretty heavily outnumbered by the rest. A lot of us have left, and we have to deal with assholes like Calhoun who has nothing to say other than OMG IT'S ALPHA U GUISE NO MEAN!!!
Please listen to the arguments, the reason these things don't work come down to math, opinion doesn't matter.
So what I am gathering from this as that this type of weapon should not exist? Should we increase the penalty for multi-barrel guns? The requirement of a massive capacitor makes sense to me. It is overkill, but that's how that particular player wants to deal damage. Is it too much damage? Is it too easy to make this weapon? Is this what players gravitate towards?
Players gravitate towards what works. Fast firing weapons categorically outclass slow firing weapons, even if we'd like to see others in use, we're not going to handicap ourselves by using inferior weapons.
What you should be doing is removing the power penalty for waffling and making a better damage model for cannons and beams. And stop trying to handicap beams by making their damage pattern terrible, we'll just circumvent it by waffling them at 150 damage, before the split happens, and they're awesome at slicing through armor. Capacitors are also horribly underpowered, which they need to be, because if they worked reasonably well everyone would be using ships that can kill in one massive alpha attack. This is why the power system needs to be overhauled, regen needs to be scaled back and we need a battery like power system that has extremely high capacity, but limited output speed.
You will have surely noticed that we are now classifying ships into specific roles. For now, it determines what ships spawn for NPC fleets/stations, and nothing else. However, in the future we can push for more individuality between ships. Through either your personal progression in the game, or through NPC crew, or relatively undetermined features such as research we can create a system that gives unique purpose to ships and their roles. This direction is a certainty, it is just a matter of "how?". We could give ships modifiers, but is that fair? We could require NPC crew for ship specializations, but will that work on different scales? Another option is to simply select a role for the ship right then and there, but then we need to avoid exploits. I will admit that we have not got an answer to making ships have specific roles just yet. They AI also wouldn't back any of that at the moment and so it is pointless with regards to PVE as it stands. Hopefully the introduction of those roles with this update is an indication that we do indeed want that diversity.
But those are designations are totally ARBITRARY. There is no FUNCTIONAL distinction, because as i've already pointed out, all combat ships must be fast firing and constantly engaged, or they suck. What makes a transport ship good? Capacity? That's not an issue, because it's so cheap. Speed? They're all small and easy to get to max speed, and there's nothing you can do about cargo transfer rates, and no types of cargo requiring special storage, like irradiated cargo or spoiling food...
For that matter, what makes a good carrier? They're just glorified transports for hauling fighters around, and you might as well just stick a jump drive on the fighters and then the carrier is completely irrelevant.
Same with miners, combat ships... anything really, there isn't any room for making these things work differently.
It's an indication of you wanting diversity, but if this is how you plan on achieving it, then we're not adding that diversity through ship design, you've added it and we just build inside the box.
Sure, but if they agreed with you, they would just state that they agree with you. This is why I am skeptical with regards to your comments. I will listen. But I can't listen to one person alone. You consistently appear on these threads with criticisms. If a large majority or at least a vocal majority are talking against you, your points, or simply not agreeing with what you say, you stand as the odd one out. I hope you understand.
That's because everyone going against these fuckers get yelled into submission, and admins like you always back them up because i'm MEAN.
If you've actually read what i posted, how can you dispute the systems aren't a complete mess? If a weapon is 160 times worse than another weapon you've fucked up massively.
Oh neat i just got a trolling warning; what fucking part of this discussion is trolling??? This is why noone will fucking tell you your game is shit.
