unbekannt1984

Hi, take a look at ~/.steam/steamapps/common/Avorion/data/scripts/entity/merchants/fighterfactory.lua (on Linux), lines 730+: for _, weapon in pairs({turret:getWeapons()}) do weapon.damage = weapon.damage * 0.3 / turret.slots weapon.fireRate = weapon.fireRate * fireRateFactor weapon.reach = math.min(weapon.reach, 350) fighter:addWeapon(weapon) end Range/Reach is set to 3.5 km, if the turret has less range/reach. A Railgun should still give you the range/reach of the turret. Damn, it's 3.5 km maximum now. Guess the Devs didn't like PDC-, Rocket- or Railgun-Fighters. Yes, R-mining lasers... Why don't you try refining lasers? Those should achieve more then 1/6 (due to efficancy) of the old results, but you still save the time for refining (landing mining-fighters and refining took minutes in the old system). Well, choosing between high efficancy and "quick and dirty" might matter even more for salvaging (do you want Resources or do you want Gear?).

Hi, are you playing single-player or on a server on the internet? You can pause the server while you are building a ship (on single-player that shouldn't be an issue). If you are playing on an internet-server and are not allowed to use the "/pause"-command in the chat, you should start a local creative-game, build your ships in that game and simply load those designs while on the real game. If you are playing on a server and can access the save-files, you should take a look at ~/.avorion/galaxies/<GALAXY_NAME>/server.ini (path for Linux-Games, might be ".avorion-server" instead of "avorion"). In Beta 2.0, there is an option "EventsFactor=1", it might help to reduce it. Well, while you are at it, please also check "pausable=true".

Hi, 15% ? Well, which size of turret? It should be based on turret-size, firing-cycle and so on... Take a look at ~/.steam/steamapps/common/Avorion/data/scripts/entity/merchants/fighterfactory.lua (on Linux), lines 730+: for _, weapon in pairs({turret:getWeapons()}) do weapon.damage = weapon.damage * 0.3 / turret.slots weapon.fireRate = weapon.fireRate * fireRateFactor weapon.reach = math.min(weapon.reach, 350) fighter:addWeapon(weapon) end 30% of a 1-Slot turret - in the best case.

Hi, the old system was a mess, but it had its' advantages. Just think about salvaging after a boss-fight, with the new system refining during salvaging becomes a mess - although the old refinement-order is still available (auto-pilot).

Hi, the logfile shows the following: have you tried the game with another graphics-driver? What is the output of (run in terminal): lspci -nnk | grep -A3 "\[03..\]:" ?

We had an insurance for ship some years ago, everytime you changed your ship, you had to check your insurance, too. Well, that insurance gave you just the money for a ship, the materials, the crew and the gear were not replaced. And BTW: That insurance sent you a mail "Insurance Fraud", when you just crashed your ship into an asteroid. I think, the Reconstruction-Tokens are a lot better and save you a lot of work.

Hi, is it live yet? Avorion is set to beta-branch, but it's still showing 1.3.4 for me...

Hi, I can't agree with all points. If you are just using some kind of Interceptor-Fighter (to kill other Fighters), then the costs aren't that high. The other points are correct, Fighters are too slow and (depending on usage) don't survive long enough. That's the quote... Back to those railguns: At about 2.4 km/s, a projectile would need 12 seconds for 30 km -> we would see the projectile travelling to its' target (and we would most likely miss a moving target with such slow railgun-projectiles). What should we assume? 0.1 s for 30 km would be a speed of 300 km/s (still just 0.001 times C0)? Even if those projectiles are just 1 kg each, the resulting forces are much higher then your calculations. BTW: Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 achieve 156 kN with the afterburner (according to the information I found).

Hi Vis, in a galaxy far, far away, where torpedoes are chasing their targets at speeds of 3000 m/s, a railgun isn't as primitive as those of the US-Navy :P In the game even 300m long 5 slot ships are slowed down from the recoil of cannons/railguns, a fighter that has got about 1000 times less mass could be pushed back. EDIT: Hi Fury, When I just loaded up the game and tested with chainguns, their damage was reduced to 10%. I don't know if it reduces the damage by the same amount on all weapons, or if it varies depending on what the weapon is? I think it's 30 or 33% for 1-slot (0.5 size) turrets without any firing-cycles (overheating, burst-firing or energy-weapons on their own battery).

Hi, why? Why would you want reduced range for PDCs/PDLs on fighters? Currently you could simply use a normal Laser for the fighter and get 30% (or was it 33%) of its' damage (in the best case), you'd still get 100% accuracy and use it against fighters and anything else. See above, we've got that limited shot (and something that works against fighters). Well, one could think about a secondary PDC-/PDL-Turret on Bombers... Ever seen something like https://www.wcnews.com/wcpedia/Avenger? But those Bombers shouldn't get down to size 1, in return you get "a lot of HP" and firepower.

Hi Vis, sorry, I had to butcher your post... That's the only point about artillery-weapons on fighters. Imagine big cannons or railguns (if we had those) on real fighters, how far would the recoil push those fighters back?!? Missiles are more realistic, but not in infinite numbers. Energy-Artillery (Lightning Guns) on fighters - would the needed battery (and generator) even fit into a small fighter? I think it's bad enough to have weapons on ships, that can kill enemies while they are still 20 .. 30 km away. Plus, there are Torpedoes, too, but those can be shot down by PDCs/PDLs (just like fighters)...

except there are Interceptor-Fighters (one of my suggestions)... Somehow I think, having artillery-weapons (long range) on fighters is a stupid idea - in terms of gameplay. Just think about NPCs attacking you that way the whole time, wouldn't that annoy you?

Hi Vis, you didn't read the latest announcement on Steam yet? They are going to rebalance stuff before the final release, it would be wrong to give you the ability to clone OP-Turrets and other gear...

Hi, ok, so some way to tell those fighters (and your AI-controlled ships) how they should behave... Problem is: Fighters are currently too slow to keep up with fast ships, that makes them unable to get into/out of range. -> We need better stats on our fighters (especially speed), but the material-costs and production time shouldn't increase even more. ^^ Lazer-Gunz :P Normal Lasers should be good at killing fighters, too, at close range those might have problems to keep up with their target.

Hi, While this is the "suggestion" forum, the game's "feedback" forum is within the beta section, which kind of makes it feel like it should be used for feedback on the current beta and the things they are working on in that beta, not the game in general. That said, the OP did make a suggestion... reduce their costs. "Fighters ain't working..." sounds like a Bug-Report to me... :P And BTW: "unusable"... Would the same fighter be more useful, if it was a little cheaper? I have issues with the current point system they use in part because it's hard to make distinct fighter classes unless you purposely use a lower grade turret or don't spend all of your points. Making distinct fighter classes that adjust the base stats accordingly could be a step in the right direction there, but I don't think it addresses the OPs main concerns. Currently there are point-bonusses depending on the material of the turret, we might be able to get the same for fighter-classes. For example: An Interceptor could get a few bonus-points speed, size, maneuverability and "free dodges". Requirements could be "Used turret: PDC/PDL or Anti-Fighter", so these fighters have got low DPS and the costs are low. A Bomber could have minimum size 2, it gets bonusses to HP (Shields?) and reduced costs. Well, the Allrounders should have a size somewhere beween 1 and 2... Bonusses?