StarMade Weapons Update Prebuild

    Joined
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages
    49
    Reaction score
    59
    "Several optimizations have been made to the game." -> Makes me really happy to read this every time. Still long ways to go though.

    Unfortunately I'm no longer motivated enough to try out the new systems and play around with it enough to possibly encounter problems which I could report. I have to leave that to the very few whom are still kickin' it. This also means I won't be able to form an opinion on the changes not that I'm one to criticize design choices much anyways...

    Although again I see people whom are very much experts on forming hypothesizes without taking any actual measurements so the newfound "flat earther" vibe of the community is very much there which is unfortunately another very much demotivating point for me -.-

    All that aside, glad to see there's still life in this game. Even if only on a low pulse happy to know it still lives.
     

    Ckeeze

    innovator
    Joined
    Jul 6, 2017
    Messages
    71
    Reaction score
    74
    The overzealous response has a long history on these boards of having been used by some very toxic people for so long it is seen as "You're all stupid, my way is the only right way, the game is going to die if you don't do exactly what I say right now!", no matter what your intentions are.

    I assure you at this point a calm, reasoned response that lays out the facts in, well, a matter of fact tone will garner FAR more attention and positive results than an overzealous "they sky is falling!" presentation.

    Trying to be overzealous at this point is the fastest way to make sure you are ignored.
    Look bashing the developers and calling them idiots wrong, but calling mechanics that you feel makes absolutely no sence retarded is not really,
    You may see me as toxic but all i do is frequently CAPS LOCK a couple words wich i feel is most important in my arguement...
    [doublepost=1529999197,1529999041][/doublepost]
    Maybe I am over reacting, The thing that is getting to me is that people seam to be bashing one thing, but not taking into consideration how that thing ties into other things. So you want them to change X, but what about Y and Z since they will be effected as well.
    I also felt the overemphasis on the weapons range was unfair as they just changed how the weapons range works.
    The old system was based off of the sector range in your server configs. However now it is based off of the default sector size which is 2000 meters. So since the value is 2.0 weapons range will be 4000 meters no mater what you set your sector size to in your server configs.
    One can complain about how short the weapons range is, but you have to understand that the new system is operating under the assumption that the sector size is 2k x 2k x 2k this means that by default the weapons range is travailing two sectors and every time the a weapon or ship crosses sectors that adds the workload of the system. So it is possible that the devs felt extending that range would be detrimental to the games performance. So along with buffing default weapons range we should also be asking for a buff in default sector size.
    The game had no problem when certain missiles and cannon types could travel like 6 km... as i said it would be best to buff certain weapons range wich are meant to be long ranged weapons, and lover others. Of course you need to buff and nerf a few things to make it balanced accordingly.
     
    Joined
    Jul 5, 2013
    Messages
    169
    Reaction score
    112
    • Purchased!
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Legacy Citizen 10
    You may see me as toxic but all i do is frequently CAPS LOCK a couple words wich i feel is most important in my arguement...
    You might use bold, italic, or a mix of it and other options. Anyway, more than 1-2 capslock words (as much as using too much colors / effects) ensure you that your message will not be taken seriously by other guys. Even if I prefer to read a little bit of capslock than a full bunch of useless insults.
     
    Joined
    May 14, 2018
    Messages
    22
    Reaction score
    22
    I get that people want weapons ranges buffed but I like them where they are... sector crossing is one of the biggest problems in combat and by drop weapon ranges so much, it'll help reduce cross-sector combat issues immensely. On top of that, you'll actually be able to see what you're shooting at, unlike on old power where it was a matter of locking missiles/turrets and hoping for the best.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: JinM
    Joined
    Jun 11, 2016
    Messages
    1,170
    Reaction score
    646
    Unfortunately I'm no longer motivated enough to try out the new systems and play around with it enough to possibly encounter problems which I could report.
    Just play the game when its fun for you again.

    The people trying out and reporting bugs are enjoying it and for them its fun. It's not anyones duty to test the game, it's just that many people like doing it. But if you don't like to its perfectly fine to wait until its in an appealing state for you again. I do wait as well for the update until I play again.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: happahappa
    Joined
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages
    350
    Reaction score
    776
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    • Likeable
    Just checking in here with people complaining about weapons range. There's a new setting in the server.cfg that defaults to 2000... from my very brief play with it I've changed it to match my sector size though whether this is appropriate I'm not yet sure. If you're playing on a map where your sector size is not default then the weapon range could be off as a result of this new setting... so I'd be checking that before going off the deep end.

    Code:
    WEAPON_RANGE_REFERENCE = 2000.0 //Reference distance for weapon ranges. (what blockBehaviorConfig.xml weapon ranges are multiplied with (usually the sector size)). Set to 1 to interpret weapon ranges in the config in meters
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Majikmonster

    Jarraff

    filthy neutral
    Joined
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages
    111
    Reaction score
    61
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    I may have to try out the new weapons systems
     
    Joined
    Aug 10, 2013
    Messages
    290
    Reaction score
    367
    I don't see how this is a bad thing really. Small ships stay just at the edge of weapon range and pummel bigger ships, using their size and speed to evade returned fire like a very annoying mosquito buzzing just out of your reach. All this achieves is allowing small ships to make use of their smaller profile and agility.
    If you need to swat a fly, don't use other flies - use a fly swatter. Use a missile ship with lock-ons. Small ships can't support good PDs.
    I'd agree with the rest of your complaints but this part does not make sense.

    Battleships and fighters DO NOT have the same range, ever. Be it on Earth, with the planet's gravity and atmosphere interfering with shooting, or be in a science fiction space battle where projectile speed, energy dissipation, missile fuel(for changing directions), and the capacity of your targeting systems is the main concern.

    It has been explained many times over the years.

    One fighter was NOT meant to kite a battleship and duel it as an equal. A SQUADRON of several fighters may take the risk of closing for an attack run, do some damage, take casualties, then retreat. Even then, they probably fly under the support of at least their mothership, if not an entire fleet.

    Quite simply, if fighter scale weapons can be effective at 4 km range, then battleship grade main weapons have to reach a couple times further.
    Mind you, the battleship's small, quick PD turrets capable of actually engaging the small quick fighters on their attack run should naturally have an equal weapons range to said small craft.
     
    Joined
    Jun 11, 2016
    Messages
    1,170
    Reaction score
    646
    I'd agree with the rest of your complaints but this part does not make sense.

    Battleships and fighters DO NOT have the same range, ever. Be it on Earth, with the planet's gravity and atmosphere interfering with shooting, or be in a science fiction space battle where projectile speed, energy dissipation, missile fuel(for changing directions), and the capacity of your targeting systems is the main concern.

    It has been explained many times over the years.

    One fighter was NOT meant to kite a battleship and duel it as an equal. A SQUADRON of several fighters may take the risk of closing for an attack run, do some damage, take casualties, then retreat. Even then, they probably fly under the support of at least their mothership, if not an entire fleet.

    Quite simply, if fighter scale weapons can be effective at 4 km range, then battleship grade main weapons have to reach a couple times further.
    Mind you, the battleship's small, quick PD turrets capable of actually engaging the small quick fighters on their attack run should naturally have an equal weapons range to said small craft.
    The overall problem here is the approach: Any system in a game, has only make sense and be logical within the games universe. Not in the real universe.

    It's a theory from literature, where any aspect of a narrated universe has to make sense within the fictional world, whereas it doesn't matter if same rules would apply in the real world.

    One example is, if the death-spell from Harry Potter would somehow transform people into ogres without any explanation.

    So if there is any argument against or for a certain game mechanic, it can not be explained with examples from the real world, as game mechanics are totally fictional and only have to be reasonable within the fictional game world.
     

    Ckeeze

    innovator
    Joined
    Jul 6, 2017
    Messages
    71
    Reaction score
    74
    Just checking in here with people complaining about weapons range. There's a new setting in the server.cfg that defaults to 2000... from my very brief play with it I've changed it to match my sector size though whether this is appropriate I'm not yet sure. If you're playing on a map where your sector size is not default then the weapon range could be off as a result of this new setting... so I'd be checking that before going off the deep end.

    Code:
    WEAPON_RANGE_REFERENCE = 2000.0 //Reference distance for weapon ranges. (what blockBehaviorConfig.xml weapon ranges are multiplied with (usually the sector size)). Set to 1 to interpret weapon ranges in the config in meters
    As i said earlier. It doesn't matter that you can config it... the point is that the standard settings are crap wich means most of the servers will use crap. No matter how great the settings you found, nobody will use them if they aren't standard, and therefore ANY tactics and ships you developed with it will be worthless in multiplayer. We are giving feedback what should the standard be, becouse when the devs fix this problem and set the distances to something most of us agrees with then everyone will be satisfied.
    Yes you can dick around with the configs and whatnot, you can have fun in singleplayer with the wacky settings but as long as you don't own a big ass server it won't help anyone. What you can do however is try out different settings and tell us what worked best and what didn't! That will help everyone in the longrun as we can push for those settings to become standard!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Ithirahad

    Edymnion

    Carebear Extraordinaire!
    Joined
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages
    2,709
    Reaction score
    1,512
    • Purchased!
    • Thinking Positive Gold
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    Look bashing the developers and calling them idiots wrong, but calling mechanics that you feel makes absolutely no sence retarded is not really,
    This day and age, calling anything "retarded" is considered offensive. And it is very easy for someone reading it to make the short jump from reading "your idea is stupid" to hearing "you are stupid" because, again, we went through a long period of that exact thing.
    You may see me as toxic but all i do is frequently CAPS LOCK a couple words wich i feel is most important in my arguement...
    I'm not saying that you are toxic, I'm saying the tactic you are using was greatly favored by some very vocal, extremely toxic people, and as such comes with a lot of baggage you may or may not be aware of.

    I'm not trying to insult or belittle, I'm trying to educate. Everyone who went through the super-toxic period on the forums has more or less conditioned themselves to ignore posts that look like that. I'm saying you could have the meaning of life hidden in a post, but if you frame it that way no one will read it.

    Even the devs stopped reading posts that looked like that.

    So if you want to give feedback that people will read, evaluate fairly, and have a chance of influencing how the game develops, I would highly recommend you try to avoid the hyperbole and THE EXTREME EMPHASIS!!! style entirely.

    You do have a good base point, however. Different ranges for different combinations are definitely a good thing.

    I believe it was limited to 2 sectors previously because of performance issues. 2 sectors would be enough to load the neighboring sector and the one behind it for if you were shooting at an angle. Anything beyond that usually stays unloaded unless there is a player near it to help cut down on the processing load.

    Having some obvious "sniper" configurations that hit hard but take forever to load for some alpha damage, and some short range fast hits for fighters skimming across hulls would also be good. We are getting the start of that kind of thinking, but there will of course be a period of tweaking that is required before it gets zeroed in correctly.

    And please remember, the dev team for this game is like 3 people. When we say "a period of tweaking" we are talking about several months. During those several months it will look like nothing is happening from the outside as they play with settings behind closed doors. Then it will probably be a couple of releases where it fluctuates back and forth between too much and not enough as they try to find the best sweet spot.

    It will be a slow process.
     
    Joined
    Aug 10, 2013
    Messages
    290
    Reaction score
    367
    The overall problem here is the approach: Any system in a game, has only make sense and be logical within the games universe. Not in the real universe.
    In that case, the astronaut could have a third hand sticking out of his forehead, yet it would look equally as silly as static weapon ranges.

    Two tiny 10-mass gun pods fight at 4k range, and they'll never land a hit, and never see any of the action.

    Two gigantic 10.000.000-mass über titans fight at 4k range and they look like they're kissing, and they risk a collision.

    Some loss of realism is always necessary for the sake of fun and balance, but ignore common sense too blatantly and it leads to weird and uncomfortable results at best.

    Example: My fore turrets have engaged the target, but the rearmost ones are out of range.....
     
    Joined
    May 18, 2015
    Messages
    287
    Reaction score
    165
    • Purchased!
    I have been waiting for weapon range to be decoupled from sector size for a long time, so thank you for that.

    Just checking in here with people complaining about weapons range. There's a new setting in the server.cfg that defaults to 2000... from my very brief play with it I've changed it to match my sector size though whether this is appropriate I'm not yet sure. If you're playing on a map where your sector size is not default then the weapon range could be off as a result of this new setting... so I'd be checking that before going off the deep end.
    This reverts weapon range back to the way it was, as a fraction of the sector size. My biggest complaint when increasing the sector size was that the weapon ranges all inexplicably scaled up, reducing ship combat to tiny speck combat.
     
    Joined
    Aug 10, 2013
    Messages
    290
    Reaction score
    367
    Thats hillarious and I stopped reading here.
    Because you tend to conveniently ignore reason, and only apply your very own logic whenever it suits you.

    It's a valid point. How much realism can you lose without making a really dumb game?

    Ps; I know you've read it all. It's short. You just can't admit to being wrong. Given how frequently you are, one would think you'd have learned how to do that by now.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: DrTarDIS

    DrTarDIS

    Eldrich Timelord
    Joined
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages
    1,114
    Reaction score
    310
    Recoil is a rеtarded idea. This isn't a fucking first-person shooter you nitwits, it's a space kinda-sim sandbox.
    Over the huge distances in space tiniest amount of recoil means 9 out of 10 shots will miss the mark.
    For example, a machine gun combo will only hit it's target with it's first shot and miss the rest because LOL RECOIL SO FUN GAIZ!
    We have out-the-ass magical omni-directional thrusters that easily negate inertia. Why can't they compensate (aka remove) the recoil?

    Physics my ass. No one in their right mind would use a weapon that sends you flying in the opposite direction every time you fire it.
    I know, stupidity is apparently contagious and both the playerbase and developer team have been thoroughly infected, but you gotta draw the line somewhere.
    I don't give a rat's ass if it "feels good" to have recoil. Leave it as purely decorative screen shake if you must, just don't fuck with my ships please.
    As I said before, this isn't a first-person shooter - it doesn't need realistic recoil.

    Oh and I'm also pretty damn pissed beams got shafted yet again. Tiny range with damage 60% falloff? Are you shitting me? You might as well have kept Pulse with that range. Space is bigger than your backyard y'know. A lot bigger.
    And dropping your energy shield pants every time you charge the double beam? Well, that's close to recoil-level of stupid.
    Why do you people insist on adding most ridiculous, nonsensical and impractical drawbacks to anything even remotely fun or useful?
    I understand, I really do, masochism is a thing in certain groups of people, especially coders, but I implore you to remember that the playerbase of this eternal beta of a game consists of more than just idiots, roleplayers with special needs and spineless yes-men.
    Some of us want to enjoy things without wading our way through bullshit restrictions and arbitrary rules you oh-so-eagerly impose on us because it's somehow justified in your head, despite you having next to zero actual experience of your own creation, no idea of what it actually needs and absolutely no vision of it's finished form.

    But hey, at least there's now this cool new damage model that simulates shooting hollow-points, volley fire mode, lead indicator and shields regenerating under fire so it can't all be so bad, right? Right?

    P.S. Add a goddamn zoom already. It's kinda hard to hit stuff far away with """""artillery""""" cannons when on screen it's the size of a friggin' pixel.
    I think there is a zoom added. 2x and 4x. Just sayin (could be more, esp for "sniper" I know)
    Rest of it was delicious.
    100% agree recoil needs better scaling (log-floor IMHO). I also agree that weapon range shoulscale in linear with group size, just like the damage value does. I do FKING LOVE range finally being unlinked from sector size though. Fkin LOVE IT. any "space is big" server with 10KM sectors used to have ALL engagements happening from/to a half-pixel at some oblique angle. That should ONLY happen where giant ships-of-the-line are in use. Average sized ships needed decoupled range stats because of lasy server admins.
    Ah, a cluwne. One of Rasinbat's brothers.

    Similarly to the actual behavior of cluwnes, you're just screaming.

    Your arguement boils down to 'you don't cater to my toxic sector of the playerbase specifically', and 'i don't like the changes'.

    Hot take: suggest ways to fix the things you don't like. Seems bloody impossible for a lot of people in this community.

    I'd also take you more seriously if you literally didn't have the worst mentality from one of the most toxic communities around, our lovely little spaceman simulator.
    Wake up. You talk shi DIRECTLY AT A PERSON as if that's somehow "better manners" than that person spewing vitrol towards a group in power. Specific single person vs. Group. In Power. Think about that while beating your dead high-horse. Every single barb returned towards you in response was accurate and deserved. Fkn plebians.
     
    Joined
    Jul 17, 2013
    Messages
    97
    Reaction score
    27
    Up to a certain point, the combat and the rendering engine actually breaks down in the old system if you increase the sector sizes too high. You're basically fighting with an enemy's nav marker, not their actual ship, and combat is limited to missiles. Missiles, missiles, missiles. Nothing but missiles. On GenXnova, 100% Beam+Beam didn't even render the beams because the range was too long. The ships aren't even drawn at that distance. I agree, having two 1000-meter-long uberdreadnought titans duking it out with a max weapon range of 4km looks very silly. You have this giant spinal-mount gun that only goes four times the length of the ship, I mean, come on. But many servers also have block limits that limit you to a 100 to 300 meter cruiser maximum, and a shorter weapon range isn't too bad with those.

    It'd be interesting if range scaled with damage, so small bombers have to get closer and find gaps in the enemy's defenses to unleash their weapon payload, but big titans aren't gimped with spinal guns and turrets that only go a few times the length of the ship. Like, have it set up so that the server config file can have range as a sliding scale between a minimum figure and a maximum figure, and there's a curve where it starts off easier and then gets exponentially harder to squeeze more range out of a weapon by increasing damage. Like, maybe set the minimum to 4km and max to 8km on a server with 10km sectors, and have it so that typical fighter weapons and corvette weapons can easily reach out to 4 to 5 kilometers, but a missile boat with some big-ass missiles can go 6 to 7km, etc.

    In "realistic" space combat, all the weapons would have infinite range pretty much, because once you accelerate something in space, it doesn't stop unless something makes it stop. There's no wind resistance, nothing to slow it down. The reason why weapons have range in Starmade is because of engine limitations and gameplay balance reasons. Players don't like having to shoot at one-pixel specks hundreds of kilometers away, even if "real" space combat would have them shooting at things they couldn't even see with the naked eye. If we had real-world combat spacecraft, it wouldn't be out of the question to launch a missile at a target from a good 10,000 to even 100,000 kilometers away. It would simply accelerate at insane, unsurvivable G-forces (being unmanned, obviously), coast to the target for maybe ten minutes to half an hour, and use small maneuvering thrusters for terminal guidance. Starmade's galaxies aren't even big enough to represent the insane scale that real-world interplanetary space combat would take place on. Even the combat in The Expanse, which is about as realistic a space opera as I've seen in recent years, is the space equivalent of a coked-up knife fight.

    A lot of the newer changes to the game's systems are kind of bewildering. However, I think I'm up to the challenge, and I'm very curious to see what I can do under the new system. I think the devs have worked pretty hard on this and given it a lot of thought, and the new damage model creates interesting opportunities. I think a strong loadout for an assault frigate would be to pair heavy armor-piercing cannons with smaller "shredder" volley guns that take advantage of the new volley fire system to help keep the energy consumption manageable under rapid fire. If the AP goes all the way through a lightly-armored target, switch to the shredders and rip them up.

    The ability to set turrets to volley fire could be used to make "flak cannons" that run through multiple barrels in a ripple-fire sequence, or missile turrets that launch relentless salvos that strike one after another. I'm really excited for that.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Ratchet Hundreda