Systems and Combat Overhaul

[The Judge]

Hi, I have some suggestions to make to improve immersion and hopefully balance as well as to address some problems currently (and probably make some more).


Bullshit awaits inside.

Spoiler: Nonsense

• Basing maneuverability on the mass of the ship as well as dimensions of the ship in an effort to promote not filling ships completely with systems to reduce block count (Reducing lag but probably becoming more taxing on potato comps.) (Also docked armor.)

• Modifying Thrust to be more akin to current Aircraft and Ships (the ones in the water) with turning circles and other possible nonsense.

• Making Reactors smaller and high mass to be more vulnerable as well as removing power supply beams to make docked reactors (lag reactors) redundant. The same could be done for Thrusters.

• Either A; Modify the Weapons so that all primary, secondary, and effect systems are useful in one form or another (probably impossible) and the weapons mounted on ships aren't almost exactly like their pre-weapons update counterparts.

• or B; completely redo the weapon systems so that most forms of weapon are useful (Cannon, Missile, and Beam) with size of the weapon dictating raw power and sliders used to adjust range (to allow smaller craft to have large payloads at smaller ranges like bombers and torpedo boats),fire rate (large high ROF weapons should not be able to sustain fire for some sort of balance reason.) in exchange for power requirements while still retaining effect computers or something.

• Make Penetration more than 1 block wide (3-4) to actually make it useful in a non CC arrangement

• Extensive redoing of the AI, allowing it to work with more craft than an Isanth Zero.

• Assisted Targeting for long range cannon and beam fighting. (Probably a no-no)

• Allow Weapons to be connected within 1 docked entity and limit the field of fire of cannon and beam barrels to encourage more useful non PD turrets.

Again, half of this is just menial bullshit I came up with after getting bored of holding down right mouse while looking at asteroids for several hours, and then not even having enough resources for a cesspool of lag, exploits, and flaming. I'm probably making a fool of myself but it's not like I have a reputation to defend.

But generally the balance and combat in SM is a little broken, seeing as the weapon update was almost completely redundant. (Compare the weapons used primarily before and after the update.)

 

[NeonSturm]

Basing maneuverability on the mass of the ship as well as dimensions of the ship in an effort to promote not filling ships completely with systems to reduce block count (Reducing lag but probably becoming more taxing on potato comps.) (Also docked armor.)

Like, but how?

Many suggestions tangled this, like suggestions about rotation.

Modifying Thrust to be more akin to current Aircraft and Ships (the ones in the water) with turning circles and other possible nonsense.

Do you mean the racing boats which are just a split-second apart from flipping over?
Are you referring to transport planes or fighters? Space is not Air, Wings do not change your heading!

You should look at fishes and submarine until Schema officially decides to promote stuff like gravity-layer or geo-magnetic wings.

Making Reactors smaller and high mass to be more vulnerable as well as removing power supply beams to make docked reactors (lag reactors) redundant. The same could be done for Thrusters.

Agree.

I think more efficient reactors should also increase the time in which they produce a power-spike to balance for more efficiency with required capacity.
I would limit them by giving ships a basic capacity based on mass (easy) or by _shared_ heat-dissipation requirements based on 2D ship's cross-section.

Either A; Modify the Weapons so that all primary, secondary, and effect systems are useful in one form or another (probably impossible) and the weapons mounted on ships aren't almost exactly like their pre-weapons update counterparts.

Too lazy to describe the problem of pre-weapons update counterparts? If you want your suggestion worth to be read, don't be too lazy while making it.

The slider-weapons have had bad formlas and a bad concept

requiring checker-board, merfed to hell because attributes didn't interact with each other's values correctly​

Now we have a good formula, but still a bad concept

because we still require checker-board salvagers and have under-used weapons
​

I suggest to let shape define function. Make something like a single rail with modules attached to it - like train sections, just without using different entities but touching arrays.

or B; completely redo the weapon systems so that most forms of weapon are useful (Cannon, Missile, and Beam) with size of the weapon dictating raw power and sliders used to adjust range (to allow smaller craft to have large payloads at smaller ranges like bombers and torpedo boats),fire rate (large high ROF weapons should not be able to sustain fire for some sort of balance reason.) in exchange for power requirements while still retaining effect computers or something.

Slaves to alter variables are incompatible with each other which makes them individually bad compared to a group of weapons.

You cannot mix stop and EMP, For higher rof, you need many barrels.
Range sliders would hurt min-maxing, how dare you suggesting this! You cannot min-max on a range but are up against completely random ranges on enemy ships!

Make Penetration more than 1 block wide (3-4) to actually make it useful in a non CC arrangement

LAG
More blocks, more cpu-power needed.

In the current management of block-hp.

Extensive redoing of the AI, allowing it to work with more craft than an Isanth Zero.

AIs are meant to be stupid.

IF AIs weren't stupid, you would have to go to hospital and register an uploaded human as a child of yours.
How would we perceive it if one programmer has 1'000'000 childs enslaved to work for him inside proprietary computer games to vendor-lock his customers?
​

But seriously, read into AI topics and look of what you demand from Schema alone until you can make a detailed suggestion.
It's like saying "Make StarMade better!" - how?.

Assisted Targeting for long range cannon and beam fighting. (Probably a no-no)

I want to agree, but I also want to disagree until AI defence is balanced to protect player-stations vs manual targeting of a single block out of position.

Allow Weapons to be connected within 1 docked entity and limit the field of fire of cannon and beam barrels to encourage more useful non PD turrets.

How?
Currently the only issue with turrets is that the one at the opposite side of your ship does not contribute to combat.​

 

[The Judge]

Yeah as I said this is about 75% nonsense...

 

[NeonSturm]

New Yeah as I said this is about 75% nonsense...

It is a suggestion forum, not a wish-list discussion forum.
If you don't provide an example of how, I think it does not belong here and can be left out.

Or is your point that devs should change their task-priority? :p​

 

[Master_Artificer]

We already have turning circles...

 

[Madman198237]

1. Yes, mass should be the essential part of maneuverability. Stops the limiting of creative freedom.
2. WHY? Welcome to space. There is no air (No lift) no gravity (No sitting in the water) no friction (No need to turn slowly and no way to just let yourself come to a stop) and, most importantly, no water.
3. While docked reactors should be replaced or changed to be less laggy, this is not the solution in my opinion.
4. Yes, all weapons should be useful. Propose a mechanism, please.
5. No, no no, no no no. We have an primary/secondary/effects system so that you can get different effects. Sliders are unnecessary to code.
6. I like the idea of changing the ways that cannons/explosives/penetration in general works, but this is just a poor way to do it. We need projectiles that scale with damage, or that can be scaled.
7. Once again, too vague. Give specific AI changes that will improve it.
8. No. There is no need.
9. Yes, I would like the first improvement, but no need to limit the field of fire at all.

 

[The Judge]

annnd of course Jake rated this funny >_>
nevermind this nonsense suggestion.

 

[Valiant70]

• Basing maneuverability on the mass of the ship as well as dimensions of the ship in an effort to promote not filling ships completely with systems to reduce block count (Reducing lag but probably becoming more taxing on potato comps.) (Also docked armor.)

BS.

Modifying Thrust to be more akin to current Aircraft and Ships (the ones in the water) with turning circles and other possible nonsense.

BS.

Making Reactors smaller and high mass to be more vulnerable

We need this badly.

as well as removing power supply beams to make docked reactors (lag reactors) redundant. The same could be done for Thrusters.

BS.

• Either A; Modify the Weapons so that all primary, secondary, and effect systems are useful in one form or another (probably impossible) and the weapons mounted on ships aren't almost exactly like their pre-weapons update counterparts.

• or B; completely redo the weapon systems so that most forms of weapon are useful (Cannon, Missile, and Beam) with size of the weapon dictating raw power and sliders used to adjust range (to allow smaller craft to have large payloads at smaller ranges like bombers and torpedo boats),fire rate (large high ROF weapons should not be able to sustain fire for some sort of balance reason.) in exchange for power requirements while still retaining effect computers or something.

Eh... Something like this maybe. I never liked weapon linking. Too much screwing around with numbers of blocks. I'd rather have sliders like thrusters.

Make Penetration more than 1 block wide (3-4) to actually make it useful in a non CC arrangement

Need this, too.

Extensive redoing of the AI, allowing it to work with more craft than an Isanth Zero.

Planned.

Assisted Targeting for long range cannon and beam fighting. (Probably a no-no)

GIMME GIMME GIMME GIMME GIMME!!!

Allow Weapons to be connected within 1 docked entity and limit the field of fire of cannon and beam barrels to encourage more useful non PD turrets.

I'm not even sure what you're saying but it sounds like BS.

 

[WeTitans3]

In my mind, I always imagined that building for better turn would simply be being able to orient your thruster blocks to the side, and have them do the sideways pushing themselves. You know, different groups for different directioning, but this is not how it works, unless I've missed something

 

[NeonSturm]

Eh... Something like this maybe. I never liked weapon linking. Too much screwing around with numbers of blocks. I'd rather have sliders like thrusters.

I don't like sliders for being sliders.

I don't like them because you can change your ship's properties on demand without having to visit a shipyard. Small ships or ship with enough crew or AI-modules may be able to do it on the fly.
But today you cannot make many anti-air flak guns out of a single tank-buster gun or vice versa without a factory.

 

[Spoolooni]

I voted this funny out of spite.

 

[The Judge]

I voted this funny out of spite.

What is this necropost? Besides, everyone knows Java isn't capable of handling half of these changes.

 

[Spoolooni]

What is this necropost? Besides, everyone knows Java isn't capable of handling half of these changes.

I tap 4 colorless mana and one swamp. I cast unburial rites.

 

[Malacodor]

• Basing maneuverability on the mass of the ship as well as dimensions of the ship in an effort to promote not filling ships completely with systems to reduce block count (Reducing lag but probably becoming more taxing on potato comps.) (Also docked armor.)

BS.

Lol, maneuverability is already based on mass and dimensions.

 

[Brokengauge]