What do you consider a balanced ship

[willvette]

If I give you 100 blocks for core systems, how much of each would you use?
You may use: Power Reactor, Power Storage, Shield Generator, Shield Storage, and Thrusters. DON'T include weapons, support, or effect systems!
This is not a ship class thread! I'm looking for the average of core systems ratios of each category.

Something I can scale up and still maintain a relatively balanced ship.​

Please display it like this for the convince of others: [PowerGen] : [PowerSto] : [ShieldGen] : [ShieldSto] : [Thrust] = 100

 

[Jaaskinal]

Ideal ratios break the art and science of shipbuilding. The five systems balance changes between ship size and role, finding a ratio to make all sizes of ships relevant is basically impossible.

 

[kiraen]

It completely depends on what you are making. If it's heavily armored, you will need more thrust. More shields means more power. Alpha weapons, more power cap. Dps weapons, more power gen. Unarmed merchant, power not so important. Courier ship, thrust thrust and thrust.

In other words, there is no formula that you can use for every ship.

If you want a general formula:

20:20:20:20:20= equally bad for everything.

 

[Winterhome]

Not including weapons or effects means that you're missing out on the entire point of a ship.

You can't make an "ideal" or "balanced" ship without balancing it based on its weapons and effects.

 

[willvette]

Sigh, I guess I'm not going to get some basic numbers to start off with here. The thing I was looking for was some basic numbers I can later tweak to suit my need. But I guess I'll have to turn to experimentation for a decent starting ratio.

 

[kiraen]

Welcome to StarMade :D

Seriously, tell us what you want your ship to do. THEN we can give you an idea of what sort of ratios you can start with.

StarMade == TheoryCraft

 

[willvette]

Welcome to StarMade :D

I'm not new, I've been here a while, thanks anyway. :D However all my ships came out crappy in one of two ways; looks nice but plays crappy, plays nice but looks crappy so the reason I'm looking for a basic starting point.

 

[Blaza612]

Sigh, I guess I'm not going to get some basic numbers to start off with here. The thing I was looking for was some basic numbers I can later tweak to suit my need. But I guess I'll have to turn to experimentation for a decent starting ratio.

The thing is, there is no base ration to start off of with. The size of ships changes so dramatically that any set ratios would be both way too small and way too big for a large amount of ships. Just make a good looking hull, then fill it with systems/interior to fit your need. And don't just make a giant noob-cube. :p

EDIT: Looks do tend to sacrifice systems, thats why you make a big ship so you don't notice it. That's literally my strategy to balance between looks and systems. :p

 

[Tunk]

100 reactors, slap 50 either size of the core.
Tada, you can now balance the ship on its core.

 

[hzzzln]

I agree with the general vibe in this thread, but wanted to give some examples:

I'm currently building a medium sized ship to go around, explore, prospect for asteroids and the like. It should be able to handle everything Isanth-sized and smaller. Thats why I'm going for a lot of shield regenerators here, so I can counter the constant but small dps by this kind of ship. I don't need so much shield caps because small ships do not have that much alpha damage (I hope my pds can handle the nukes.)

On the other hand, I was thinking about building a torpedo bomber or the like to go against capital ships turrets. This one will probably have mostly shield capacitors, because we have to survive that initial run on the ship, drop the load and get out of there. It may even have no regenerators at all and rather be charged by a supply beam before the battle.

 

[Mork2]

Depends on the intent of your design. A high performance ship build functions then decorate around. A good looking ship build the hull then plan out the systems to fit around it. For either way plan the general layout before hand.