Jump to content

Cairo1

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Cairo1

  • Birthday 01/26/1990
  1. You have a Pay-pal link so i can throw you a few Euros for some beers? you guys deserve it. Great work.
  2. Loads of Content +1 I agree game option for DPS or Omicron
  3. What makes players feel so entitled to shit on the devs on such a regular business, Its fine to be critical, but express it in a constructive way. I am honestly disgusted by how often people on this forum cry, whine and insult the devs on all manner of things. Show some dignity and self-respect for heavens sake. Thank you for the nice new feature I am sure everyone will enjoy it. Keep up the great work!
  4. I would Suppose If you don't think ships should go over a certain speed, then it would reason to not build a ship that can go over the speed you desire. Like wise there are ways to giver ships over 1,000,000 Omicron but if you you don't want to nuke a target then use lesser weapons. The nice thing about creativity games is you are free to limit yourself.
  5. If A block of 0.5 thickness or greater covers the engine it should prevent the engine effect from coming through. Also you can turn off glow in game settings by un-checking Bloom. What is your Native Language, If my Explanation dose not translate well I may have better luck doing it myself.
  6. To my knowledge Rails guns, having strong electromagnetic application to the shot component meaning that any computerized bits would be fried, in addition to that my understanding of the explosive aspect of rail guns is the mere transfer of kinetic energy causes an explosion in that Rail guns shots in reality, and most sci-fy are solid Plugs of material. I would agree with the assessment that Lightning would have to have its damage nerfed if it were to function in the way i previously expressed. In Defense of my rail gun re-balance concept, it is reasonable overall to reduce rate of fire, and dps of railguns, but i think not in per shot damage. In addition by vastly reducing rate of gun traverse, or only having some types appear as Coaxial forms this i think would be a fair trade for an artillery grade weapon. That is something that should be kept in mind that is what Rail guns are. they are not for close in knife fighting, but specialized for 15k-25k manual fire at least in my book. Other weapon systems are for the most part optimized to be used in ranges under 10k and if we all agree that Larger ships should have a reduced maneuvering and acceleration value and that small ships the opposite these proposals may be quite balanced. As it stands right now are not some other weapon systems over shadowed as of now? Who uses Chain guns? Are Lasers a practical offense weapon in any degree? Are Launchers even capable of catching something other then a fighter, or intercepting a torpedo? Overall many weapons have issues, but i think to decry one that performs well while others are lack luster as needing to be nerfed i think is counter productive. I think rather weapons could use a buff as well as armor. But lest we forget The game is the devs to pursue their vision, so in a way I think our cries will go unheard.
  7. Because I don't know how other players rather then my friends and I lay out weapons I cannot truthfully judge what is "op" or what other players consider excessive damage in regards to rail guns. My ships tend to have 6 forward facing and 4 independent targeting to each broad side unable to fire forward, In such a lay out 8-14 salvos of the forward guns will destroy a smaller ship, while large enemy ships may take several dozen volleys up up to a hundred to scratch some dreadnoughts unless they have Physical shield polarizers then it is not feasible and i need to use torpedoes to crack the shields. To me this kind of game play is fun, and interesting having a ships that deals volleys from range. Most of the fire is eaten up by shields and after they drop even large ships are destroyed in a small number of salvos. I can see that if lightning were used as well this could just quickly wash away enemies making it a mere point and click adventure game. So i would give the following balancing ideas after hearing all that has been said here. Pt.1 Lightning, A simple damage drop off at range added to reduced accuracy with increased close range damage could be a reasonable means to negate the long range shield cracking abilities of lightning, while still allowing it to be relevant at long range, but devastating at close range to shields at least. It could also cause (providing it can be programmed) system failures causing short disabling of upgrade tokens engines, or shield recharging abilities as if it were shorting out systems rather then merely burning the hull of an enemy. This would make players not want to close with lightning ships, or feel the sting of one ambushing you. Pt.2 Rail Guns, Alot of words are being thrown around and lots of neat ideas about ship health mechanics and questions about how damage is applied I give the following approach. A number of different systems under the lexicon Accelerators multiple damage types would be available and each one would have differing mechanics. Kinetic- much like our current rail gun in that damages is a result of a high velocity pellet transferring its energy into a target. The most ineffective against shields this type would be best at causing deep damaging shots that would harm internal blocks but all blocks along the way while dissipating its energy. +Pen -low shield damage. Antimatter-Rather then penetrating deeply it would have 1/3 the penetration but deal explosive damage as the material is being annihilated Still ineffective against shields as they are a field of energy, not matter. but doing greater damage to fewer blocks. Has power drain to hold the ammo. +Hull Damage bonus -less pen -low shield damage -less power generation. Energy-Rather then accelerating a slug of material this would launch a blast of charged electrons or some other particle that deal greater stress to shield but reduced comparable damage to hull. Small damage drop off at range (10k, 10%-20k, 20%) loss as the particles dissipate, no pen. Draws Battery power when firing (minimal) +shield damage -no pen -small damage drop off - battery draw. Plasma- a slug that is heated to plasma as it is leaving the weapon, Dealing damage to shields and hull to good degree, however with lesser range (66% of average) due to cooling. Lesser pen (1/5th of average) but no damage bonus like antimatter would have. +shield damage +better hull damage then energy -less range -low pen This would turn rail guns into a weapon system whit some neat perks and quirks and can be balanced with rarity and availability, I would also recommend removing the possibility for rail guns to have Burst fire. Also the reaction with armor could also be taken into account. for example for all types when hitting an armor block instead of anything else damage could be increased by 1.5, but pen reduced by half. Those are some Ideas i had floating around. And to the eventual response that "THAT WOULD MAKE THE GAME LAME AND THE SAMEY I WOULD JUMP SHIP F- THIS" the best answer to this and to all "meta" damage means is then don't use them if you don't like that game play fashion. its a creativity game do what you want, but don't try to force everything to conform to what you want.
  8. I agree With the vast sum of your statements frankly, but in finding OP turrets that has come and gone again after the recent update, we did find another size 1 bolter turret with 15k dps, and we still make rail guns with the highest just under 9k dps so far none of us use lighting but that is because we thing the effect looks stupid, some people may like it, it just doesn't suit any of our aesthetics. A like experience occurred in from the depths where a weapon system was eventually found to be fairly more potent then others, and some abused it making is so those of us who were responsible could no longer have combat in the way we preferred having been "balanced" into irrelevance. I agree wit the changes made to the turret factory generator in that 16k damage turrets in the Xanion region outside the barrier is far too powerful. we came to that conclusion and reckoned that inside the barrier opponents must be that much more powerful. It was at that point we started to use Rail guns to not be as "OP" as the power of the bolters was frankly making the game "boring" however the turret factory change also made it that no point defense laser dose over 4 dps or has range over 5 this i thought was the most painful loss as I like laser point defense. In beta at the core is it impossible to find weapons with over 8k dps? If not then i don't see how much will change for us atleast, but i guess all we can do is wait and see. Truth be told though we like having old turrets from before the update, it gives them this lost technology mystique where we regard them with great value and sadness when lost. My pal sold 4 of my point defense lasers i was keeping for later left int the alliance inventory, I will never have more of those so it is a greater loss then loosing 100 fighters or and amount of money or goods and that is cool to me. I hope there are still the "op hyper turrets" here and there as i think that making crafting turrets fun. It feels good to provide for the community by searching out and making a run of good turrets and doling them out. There is a almost gambling effect when looking for new turrets as we all obviously want eh most "OP" weapon we can get, that much is natural for a player base. I don't want every nation to have available one of each turret type be OP as I think the search itself is quite fun. I agree overall Small/large ships speed mechanics need attention, but i don't think massive flat reduction to max speed or acceleration is a suitable answer. I think to some degree simply bigger ships should be better all around as they are simply put bigger and more suitable. It is not that small ships are just plain worse, but rather that different roles are fulfilled better by differing sizes within reason. a 5 slot fast small ship is a great escort or patrol ship, while larger hulks can tank and have the mass to fire rail guns in all directions. That seems fair to me. Think about it in comparable naval terms, in what way is a destroyer to be compared to a battleship? while certainly destroyers are faster, that can be achieved as is simply with the velocity bypass chip, beyond that a smaller naval vessel cannot be compared to a much larger ship the only drawback to a is ship is cost and price and that is what i see in the game now, and also fine by me. I don't disagree with your ideas about armor that sounds pretty cool, TBH moving away from hull hit points would be neat in itself where a ship could be destroyed via systems loss rather then arbitrary damage values. My only counter is that having to put armor on the outside limits creative ability to some degree, I plate my ships in hull blocks to make them look sleeker rather then have the nasty camo which i don't care for visible. You could have Integrity fields also boost armor strength drawing from ship power instead of just helping reduce damage from collisions.
  9. I Agree with some of the points made in this thread, but also disagree with many. I have been playing for a few weeks now and have put in my impressions and feed back. In regards to the 3 main points being spoken of here I would like to give my opinion and throw it into the ether. Speed, and distance from "warp in point/Center of system". I would agree that the speed mechanics could use a change, small ships simply cannot compete with the sheer thrust output from substantially larger ships. I do not know how the Mass to max speed equation works or how it is scaled, but i would say it could use attention. to a degree this can be over come with the velocity bypass circuit and engine boosters but this may not be every mans fix.I have not seen however combat taking place 500k from the center, and if there were enemy ships that ran that far, then why would i be concerned with them? I have fought battles where combat may take me 100k from start, but i don't think that to be that enormous of a range. when many weapons have 20-24 shot distance. Which bring up point No.2 Weapon Balance, And prevalence of certain weapon types. I agree that some weapon systems are under and some over represented by value. I myself use Rails guns ans lasers with anti shield torpedoes for combat, But that is me personally. I am playing with 4 other people all of us bought the game at the same time and all started together, yet we have come to radically different build and combat styles and ship lay-outs. For us the most prized and powerful weapons we have found are bolters with 10 range of Xanion material, Tech 35, 16,000DPS size 0.5. These were patched out of the ability to manufacture and so we only have 30 or so examples, afterward the most used weapon is Rail guns, then Cannons, then launchers. I have built Fast Lightly armored nimle ships, where as my companions have build slow heavy HP Tank ships. What I have observed is that we each have developed a unique combat and weapon preference despite fighting the same enemies, in the same areas and conversing about our exploration of the combat mechanics. I like to fight from far away and snipe with rail guns, another player has large brawlers that use bolters and plasma up close, the third whips around with bolters on the front of his ship making hit and runs, and our 4th has an all purpose ship that is intended to engage many enemies at once with cannon and pulse cannon fire. Simply I cannot agree with your assessment that rail and lightning too OP nerf now or combat will be all the same meta. I think that the problem is that you are unwilling to choose to have combat else-wise. AS for DLC I am rather Ambivalent would I buy, Yes i would, simply because i want to reward the developers with my money for making something great. If great features or mechanics are locked behind a pay wall that are outside the scope of the core game i have no problem with that. If some types of cosmetics are introduced likewise locked behind a pay wall that too i am OK with as i want an excuse to reward the devs with my money. I bought 2 extra copies of the game i am so pleased with it. I do think there is much to be polished and much that needs further development, but i would rater encourage work on this then see them work on another title in hopes of revenue as ultimately they do this as a job first and a passion second. A dedicated player base alone will not buy beer and sausage for 5 hungry game developing Germans. The first two problems could also entirely disappear with re balancing of the system upgrades though in a move away from chip slots based on mass and computer cores to one based on processing power and draw from individual chips. Who knows What i can say for certain is that whenever Devs listen to the loudest most obnoxious few voices they turn away their pleased silent masses. Look at Eugen Systems or From the Depths. We must be constructive not destructive if we want to help. I can see, and understand some of the points being made even the ones i disagree with, but nerveless I personally remain a Happy Customer.
  10. 同感, Many weapons fire before being fully cooled, this problem also occurs with Launchers and bolters. Lasers are by far the most egregious offender though, It is also difficult to find lasers with competitive range and damage out-put Finding a .5 laser turret with over 1000 dps in uncommon and finding one with near 10 range is quite scarce, but finding a over 1000 dps near range 10 laser is most rare. To see Lasers have a mechanism like overheating is one solution, another is using ship battery as power source. this could be a double edge sword if enough lasers were used as it could deplete power banks. Alternatively you could poise power to energy drain as a balance system and have more potent lasers. Also I am a big fan of your Designs Deep, I make ships from 銀河英雄伝説 and your work helped to inspire me. I also use your Walkurie model.
  11. I see, IF i have made a post in an appropriate area, may i ask that this thread be deleted as it is superfluous.
  12. Things I feel are Lacking Tutorial wise are: explanation of the View menu while building, Explanation of the trade overview in terms of the hot cold system. If it is possible we haven't found out yet to cancel the last action of chain commands, such as purchasing goods from the map view. It would also be nice to be told that hiring a captain will allow a ship to perform AI actions. Dose Reporting the glitch send server info from the time it was recorded? if so i will report it next time we replicate it. other wise I only have the following explanation to offer how to reproduce this glitch. Having a ship with a turret equipped, during heavy server lag (possibly near crashing of server) quickly entering the build menu and selecting the said turret and attempting to delete it, If the turret is not removed immediately then selecting the turret again and again attempting to delete it will cause 2 of the turret to enter the player inventory after server has stopped lagging (Survives crashing). In terms of combat AI one thing that would be well received though I imagine would require a deal of work is being able to set combat parameters. for example to be able to select the behavior ships will prefer for combat, Ie. maintain x distance, or close to x distance, enter broad side at range x, retreat if enemy comes within range x, to be able to intend strafing attacks, at range X begin attack run, at range x begin new attack run, If health is at X% retreat to x distance from nearest enemy things of that nature. perhaps differing abilities of different tanked captains or some kind of training skill for development of a ships captain could be neat gimmicks to these functions. Also to be able to instruct your ships to focus on this or that target, rather then attack nearest enemy. I am not a programmer nor do i have any realistic knowledge of how much effort it would take to accomplish features such as these but i believe it is within the small realm of LUA i do know so i think it is not an unreasonable idea. I hope you entertain my suggestion of sound effect options for weapons, I though it was a pretty nifty idea. Edit: The ability to tell AI ships to use Gates, or wormholes would be nice. or If it exists already an explanation how to make them do so. Edit 2 A popup that the F key moves the point of focus in the builder. We did not figure that out for a solid 5 days playing.
  13. Hello, this is my first post here, I found this game recently and in the last week have ended up dumping all of my free time into it. My friends and myself quickly hosted a server and began playing, Now that we have reached the middle and possess end game equipment I would like to post some thoughts and suggestions in hopes the Development team will take them to heart. First I would like to say I am dazzled by the game over-all the polishing is great, and most systems are intuitive and straight forward. The building system leaves little to be desired with un-restricted shapes and sizes which is liberating when coming from a game like FTD or Space Engineers. Weapons are diverse and for the most part remain valid until game end, the auto generated turrets look good, and what little more could be wanted those too can be customized. Though power creep can become an issue enemies in the core still provide a good ass whooping now and again just to remind you don't be complacent. Thank you for making such a great game, the 5 of us are well pleased with our purchase, and frankly at a bargain less then 20$ well worth every penny, and realistically we think a deal more. Now I will issue some short comings we have all had. Frankly the Tutorials are weak, though they do get the job done for the most part any of them can be explained in a few seconds in person. Many features then lack Tutorials or tool tips that help you understand the builder and various functions. after 2 weeks we have only just found what the view key dose, and again we were impressed with such a convenient tool If only we had known a week earlier while still outside the barrier. There are a number of Glitches and exploits that still need cleaning up the worst of which are duping of ships, and duping of weapons. Though we still haven't figured out how ships get duplicated the event gives addition materials and weapons that are acquired dishonestly, we have found that if you repeatedly delete a turret during a lag spike the game will acknowledge all those delete actions as an additional turret going into the inventory. To be honest we have done this on purpose to duplicate Point defense turrets from before the recent update. (a 32 dps PD chain gun, and a 8.2 dps PD laser) Frankly even with the difficulty turned all the way up the Combat AI is still rather unsophisticated Both Friendly and Enemy combat ai seem to charge violently yet have difficulty with using weapons intended to fire forward, Likewise Broad sides are not something we see from ships that seem to be oriented in such a manner, and most defiantly not from our own that are given orders to patrol, or attack enemies. As for block critiques The Turret lock block dose not also function as a custom turret platform, which would be nice. I feel the Computer core is under powered to a degree, and the System upgrades and small ships suffer for it. Perhaps the system upgrade mechanism could be modified from limited card slots to Processing power, and differing cards taking both reactor power, and processing power, then a computer core could increase processing power as it dose now, but also draw Generator power. Thus a small ship could hold a low power object detector Radar upgrade, and scanner making for a better Survey ship. Finally on to General Suggestions: As stated above It would be nice to have Turret Lock blocks also work for custom turrets. Again as stated above I believe the system upgrades and computer core mechanism could use a rework as it makes small ships inflexible and have diminished non combat potential. Custom Turret Depth, When i learned that custom turrets were an option i was most pleased, then that i could change shot color i was ecstatic as that's pretty awesome but after a time i though you know what, can we have a custom sound option? like you choose a color from the color pallet there could be a small number of Shot sounds that could be unique to each weapon. Turret Conversions at a turret factory Any given weapons save point defense can be converted to coaxial with damage and range modifiers based on base size. [Damage/range X (1+Base Size)] Fore example a 200 DPS laser range 8 size .5 would be 200x1.5 8x1.5 for a 300 dps range 12 laser. And weapon balance suggestions: Smaller Coaxial Weapons would be nice Launchers I believe could do with an overhaul My reasoning being most ships are faster then the shot itself making them easily avoidable Perhaps Launchers could be split into Burst fire mid range (8-14) high shot speed pursuit weapons, and standard fire long range (18-28) high damage bombardment weapons. Fighters Likewise are too slow to keep up with many enemies or the ship carrying them. Having speeds centered around build material with an over all general buff may make them more viable as for now they seem to be best for mining or scrapping. Thank you for reading this long Block of text, It was my intent to not read any other posts so that my opinion may come as fresh perspective on the current state of the game.
×
×
  • Create New...