The *responsible* warhead rebalancing thread.

[nightrune]

Lots of points and things to talk about here.

First I like many of LunaIsBestPony 's ideas, One in particular, partial shield bypass, may make sense.

There is a lot of opportunity for meta game-play to happen if you try to think about the other systems involved. If the warhead is expensive, there should probably be one material that is used mostly in warheads. Then later on you could do espionage on cargo containers/freighters to see if they are hauling those items. Determining who has a lot of warheads and where they are.

Thinking about the numbers, I really like the idea of a big boom warhead that is crazy expensive and time consuming to make. I'm even intensely scared of it as well. I'm thinking the half or a quarter amount of resources to a missile launcher the same size. Since its one time use, and not likely to hit. I ran some numbers on this:

200,000 per hit is roughly 666 missile modules (LOVE IT), according to this Free_StarmadeWeaponSpreadsheet

Right now a missile tube is 50 Threns, and 100 Crystal Composite
At 1/2, 16650 x Threns Capsules, and 33,300 Crystal Composite
At 1/4, 8, 325 x Threns Capsules, and 16650 Crystal Composite

Even at the 1/4 price that's a pretty expensive one time use object. Versus the 166 infinite ammo missile tubes you could build. Somewhere around that price range should put them as a special use case block. Especially if the build time was slow and used an advanced factory.

This would also make threns pretty valuable to pirates that would prefer weapons like that.

 

[JonasWalker]

Adding an additional 'ore' type thats used primarily in Warheads as a key component could be interesting and would make such sources quite valuable. Doubly so if it took a LOT of raw ore to make a small amount of 'core material' or equivalent for a warhead block. It would make faction stockpiles of processed material much less finished warheads VERY high priority targets for raids.

 

[Madman198237]

I prefer them to be less expensive. There is no reason that warheads should become so awfully expensive. Like I said, they're high explosives, not matter/antimatter annihilation devices that require one of the rarest materials in the galaxy. That said, if we DO get a matter-antimatter annihilation device, you know what I'll probably end up building.
By now in history, 99% of everybody's figured out how to manufacture lots of really high explosives. It's almost guaranteed.
Semi-rare is fine, just don't make them extremely costly or impractical. They add an interesting dimension to warfare on SM. Keep it, tweak it, don't get rid of it or make it rare.

Keep the full shield penetration. Partial shield penetration requires the warhead to be so absurdly powerful (To get through, say, a capital ship's shields) that the resources should've just been invested in an ion cannon.

 

[JonasWalker]

I prefer them to be less expensive. There is no reason that warheads should become so awfully expensive. Like I said, they're high explosives, not matter/antimatter annihilation devices that require one of the rarest materials in the galaxy. That said, if we DO get a matter-antimatter annihilation device, you know what I'll probably end up building.
By now in history, 99% of everybody's figured out how to manufacture lots of really high explosives. It's almost guaranteed.
Semi-rare is fine, just don't make them extremely costly or impractical. They add an interesting dimension to warfare on SM. Keep it, tweak it, don't get rid of it or make it rare.

Keep the full shield penetration. Partial shield penetration requires the warhead to be so absurdly powerful (To get through, say, a capital ship's shields) that the resources should've just been invested in an ion cannon.

Thats a valid question. Should warheads remain 'just' HE blocks or be recast as M/aM (or equivalent) devices? I'm leaning more towards them being the latter since otherwise they don't really make any sense personally.

This also has bearing on if useage should be possible by cloakers and/or if detonation should result in automatic DoW notification.

 

[Madman198237]

Instant war-dec for sure, based on the "owner" of the device. Speaking of which, ownership needs to be tracked based on construction as well as piloting and interaction, not just by "who clicked the faction module last". This will allow for instant war declarations.

I want warheads to remain as a mid-level explosive. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing some smaller ordinance (Directed breaching charges that can be placed on an opponent's vessel?) and larger ordinance (Nukes and some antimatter bombs, perhaps).

 

[LunaIsBestPony]

Like someone mentioned earlier, having warheads require a decent amount of Fertikeen doesn't make sense except in terms of game balance.

Having to make a decision between offense and defense would start to lend of a sense of greater strategy with resource management.

Perhaps what would be fair is the warhead block requiring as much Fertikeen as it takes to produce the amount of armor blocks it typically destroys.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Like someone mentioned earlier, having warheads require a decent amount of Fertikeen doesn't make sense except in terms of game balance.

Having to make a decision between offense and defense would start to lend of a sense of greater strategy with resource management.

Perhaps what would be fair is the warhead block requiring as much Fertikeen as it takes to produce the amount of armor blocks it typically destroys.

That was my post actually, and balance was my entire point. It's like a bunch of people said, "screw the numbers, I want to stay invincible." So I tried to cave in a little. Then they complained "But... but... it IGNORES shields!". So I caved in a little more. Then some of them got nasty... (face palms)

This thread had basically become...

Spoiler

In any case, I want to make this a niche weapon that rewards creativity and allows for asymmetric warfare but is too expensive to waste on carelessness or griefing.

I want to thank you, Madman198237 and all the others who are turning this back into a discussion rather than just another flame war.

 

[Madman198237]

It probably helps that I'm on the side of "WHY million-damage swarmers!?!?!!??!" and not "MORE million-damage swarmers!"

Also, I want them to be buffed, and therefore am almost completely in agreement with you, which makes it easy for you to agree with me.

Anyway, yeah, please no flame-war. There's no point to a flame war.

 

[JonasWalker]

Instant war-dec for sure, based on the "owner" of the device. Speaking of which, ownership needs to be tracked based on construction as well as piloting and interaction, not just by "who clicked the faction module last". This will allow for instant war declarations.

I want warheads to remain as a mid-level explosive. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing some smaller ordinance (Directed breaching charges that can be placed on an opponent's vessel?) and larger ordinance (Nukes and some antimatter bombs, perhaps).

I could get behind there being a range of Boom to pick from. Then again I just want more BOOM in the game period so I might be a little biased. :D

 

[nightrune]

I could get behind there being a range of Boom to pick from. Then again I just want more BOOM in the game period so I might be a little biased. :D

Small charges would make for great personal equipment and could be limited as well.

In terms of meta, AntiMatter/Matter makes more sense to me since we have infinite power and basically only energy weapons.

I'm surprised no ones commented on the numbers more. Once you tag it to something else in the game it already feels way more balanced even with the large numbers.

 

[AtraUnam]

Ok admitedly I only read the first page of this thread before I couldn't take the constant whining on both sides anymore. The way I see it is that warheads are clearly not viable because if they were then people would actually use them, at current no one uses them for real combat in any genuinely effective way. If any of the people who say warheads are already overpowered have an argument against this please state it.

 

[Croquelune]

The way I see it is that warheads are clearly not viable because if they were then people would actually use them, at current no one uses them for real combat in any genuinely effective way.

Either it means what you stated either it means people didn't find yet a way to use it effectively.
From what I've seen, the community is very conformist and not very curious. Just because the majority of people say a "system is superior to another" most players won't even dig this other system and so doesn't even bother to explore other ways.
It's a shame, because I 'm certain that other pathways exist and some are worth some attention but we aren't aware of it yet cause no one really took time on it.

 

[AtraUnam]

Either it means what you stated either it means people didn't find yet a way to use it effectively.
From what I've seen, the community is very conformist and not very curious. Just because the majority of people say a "system is superior to another" most players won't even dig this other system and so doesn't even bother to explore other ways.
It's a shame, because I 'm certain that other pathways exist and some are worth some attention but we aren't aware of it yet cause no one really took time on it.

People have been digging into warheads for years and no one has yet found a system good enough to be adopted by the userbase as a whole. Warheads being an incredibly niche weapon is actually the most viable status they have ever enjoyed.

 

[Endal]

Oh my goodness how did I miss this thread. *flails and scrambles to get research papers*

Ok, first off, Warhead balancing.
Warheads right now are very underpowered. I'll admit, I have worked with them for quite a few months now and have got them to do amazing things

Spoiler: like this

, but I shouldn't need to mess with them (a hell lot) to make them work well. They should be able to damage sufficiently, by themselves.
So, among all these proposals, I shall state mine *flails again and scrambles for more research paper*
1. Warhead Damage (and radius to some extent) should be buffed. By how much? Well, it should do more damage than a missile system of similar material cost. but then they would be unbalanced! Hold on for 3.
2. Change their damage/collision behaviour. Seriously. Sometimes they bounce, sometimes they clip, sometimes they explode at a feather's touch... its unpredictable. With a better collision system, they would be more reliable, and viable weapons on the field.
3. If their damage goes above standard weapon systems, then expensive cost could be an answer, but I also have another solution. The solution is to make warheads unstable in storage. Warheads can only be stored in a "Containment" like block area, but if the area is shot, an explosion similar to if the warhead itself was shot would occur, causing major collateral if a vast quantity is stored. Also have a separate factory to make warheads, and make them take a very long time to produce, so people can't flash ores from storage into warheads immediately.
4. Warheads are made of unstable explosive matter, which detonates when in presence of a shield, as such the shields have to be disabled. Warheads would shut down the shields on all ships in the docking chain if placed. This would not allow huge shielded warhead ships ramming everything to death. This also allows warheads to keep their shield-ignoring trait without being OP.

People have been digging into warheads for years and no one has yet found a system good enough to be adopted by the userbase as a whole.

I am working on that atra :P

 

[Madman198237]

No special blocks for storage or creation, but differing times for production should happen regardless. Warheads should not disable all the shields on the carrying vessel (I'm thinking warhead torpedo bomber) but they SHOULD disable them on any vessel that contains a warhead (Not in storage, as a physical block). And warheads should be targeted by PD.

 

[sayerulz]

I'm fine with SOME buffs to warheads. But this suggestion is just TOO MUCH. If implemented like this, ultra-high alpha warhead torpedo boats would become the new thing.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Nope... I've been hit by an Alpha power before. My torpedo testing never hit anywhere near that hard.

The effort that goes into building these things and effectively getting them to hit a target without some lame kamikaze method makes them far from an ideal primary weapon. It's really not as bad as you think.

 

[Pacific_Jim]

Pretty much all of this is definitely overkill. What Warheads really need is an effective delivery method, so either a buff to shoot out rails or an AI setting that can ram.

 

[Madman198237]

With one minor addition, Pacific_Jim: A single warhead can't even destroy a single advanced armor block. That's simply not powerful enough to be useful. We don't want laggy weapons, yet in order for present warheads to be effective, you need dozens of large warheads designed to use glitches to punch through armor, just to cause superficial damage to any large opponents. It's just not good enough.

Warheads need a buff. We have effective delivery mechanisms as-is (Though a ramming option for AI would be highly useful, especially if it were part of a selection system by which you set the desired range your AI should engage at, also fixing the "AI stand off at max range of their longest-range weapon system" problem....somewhat), there's just no reason to USE warheads, when a missile launcher used with the same amount of resources is more powerful and generally more useful.
Sorry if the thought of shield-piercing weapons scares you....but if you armor your ship properly, they won't be a problem. Bring a fighter screen---if you're lucky they'll ram into the warheads for you.

 

[LunaIsBestPony]

There are some pretty effective logic-based delivery methods that I've seen. One person currently has a system that can shoot multiple torpedoes a second at a velocity of close to 300m/s.

Basically, there are effective delivery methods, you guys just have to find them. :P