Jump to content

Welcome to the Forum!

The best place to exchange builds and ideas! Vote for the best ideas and suggestions here.

Join the Avorion Discord!

Connect with other passionate players and talk about the latest news.
Discord

DLC Avorion Into the Rift Out Now!

Now available on Steam!
Steam
  • 0

Limit one module per a type.


LordMaddog
 Share

Suggestion

As it stands right now you can.

 

Be invincible: stack any 4 shield modules with 25% regain shield when shields fall and boom you CAN't die.

 

Instant hyperdrive cool down: stack any 4 -25% CD hyperdrive and boom instant CD.

 

Jump half of the galaxy map in one jump: just stack hyperdrive modules. I have made 107 sector jumps none stop before.

 

Infinite scanner range:

 

Infinite mass scanner range:

 

And the list goes on and on.

 

If my suggestion for turrets was implanted

 

 

1 Make all turrets need power and make engines have there own limited after burner pool(not reliant on battery).

2 Make all turrets scale able increasing or decreasing there DPS and power draw.

3 Make all turrets independent targeting once they are past a certain scale

4 Make turning and aiming speed relative to turret size; the larger they are the slower they are. Thus making them effective against larger slower targets and quite ineffective against fast agile ones.

 

There should also be no arbitrary limit placed on them other than the need of gunners and energy. If this was done it would also be nice to see the plus more turrets module completely removed from the game along with the plus energy generated modules or they will be all the player will ever use.Maybe replace them with Accuracy/ range modifiers and energy efficiency.

 

This will make balancing easier in the long run as well as making all ship sizes more viable and the game funner as a whole because while we would still enjoy new loot as you say; we would also still have some say in the matter. If you dint know the hate for the RNG god is real and this would help elevate some of it giving the best of both worlds.

 

 

This would work quite well to kill the Bigger is better meta and fix a lot of the over powered problems.

 

It also means scout ships with low mass would be usefull to jump from sector to sector looking for viable trade roots then the player would switch back to His/hers Behemoth and jump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 answers to this suggestion

Recommended Posts

  • 0

As it stands right now you can.

 

Be invincible: stack any 4 shield modules with 25% regain shield when shields fall and boom you CAN't die.

 

Instant hyperdrive cool down: stack any 4 -25% CD hyperdrive and boom instant CD.

 

Jump half of the galaxy map in one jump: just stack hyperdrive modules. I have made 107 sector jumps none stop before.

 

Infinite scanner range:

 

Infinite mass scanner range:

-100% regen shields just means 2x faster regen, doesn't mean you can't die.

-No cooldown is great, but it still takes time to calculate the jump. Far jumps still take forever.

-Infinite scanner/mass scanner range doesn't really provide an advantage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

What would you do with a 15 slot ship?  I've never used more than 10 different types of module.  Sure I could throw in a thruster upgrade or something I don't normally.  But, this means every large ship would be slotted the exact same way.  Kind of defeats the purpose of having the slots in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

What would you do with a 15 slot ship?  I've never used more than 10 different types of module.  Sure I could throw in a thruster upgrade or something I don't normally.  But, this means every large ship would be slotted the exact same way.  Kind of defeats the purpose of having the slots in the first place.

 

Not to mention that this completely restricts the number of turrets you can mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

seems more like a change is needed to change how modules stack.

rather than flatly limiting the number of x module, why not have each new bonus get a penalty.

i cant remember the maths since school was a decade ago, or id just post equasions, so il just post examples

if each reduction% modult worked sequentially

soo... 100 - 25%= 75 - 25% = 56 - 25% = 42 etc etc

with a power usage multiplier that increased power usage of each module of the same type.

power usage = X

number of = Y

Z = multiple

X + (YxZ)=

 

if that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Whats funny about this discussion, is that it's based on fixing the wrong problem.

 

The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost...  so, crippling other aspects of the game just to fix that broken thing does not make a whole lot of sense...

 

The same holds true for other mechanics that can currently be abused.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

 

The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost... 

 

Wrong they do have an upkeep a massive amount of permanent energy drawl but energy means nothing atm lol.

just plop more gens down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

 

The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost... 

 

Wrong they do have an upkeep a massive amount of permanent energy drawl but energy means nothing atm lol.

just plop more gens down.

 

"Wrong"

 

That is a foundation cost.  Maintenance cost is upkeep... Putting down those generators is part of what I meant by "Once you install them".

 

After that allotment of generators and the shields are in place... there is no cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

After that allotment of generators and the shields are in place... there is no cost.

You have to pay the engineers/mechanics to keep the generators functioning, would you not consider that an "upkeep" cost?

 

no.. it's still "Do and Done"

 

Permanent protection with no drawback. This is why there needs to be some sort of balance/depletion of resource tie to the shields.

 

Currently, Shields are like a magic fender on your car. You side-scrape a post and in a few minutes it's back to brand new. No effort needed or cost.

 

Shields should consume energy to refresh, or materials...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

After that allotment of generators and the shields are in place... there is no cost.

You have to pay the engineers/mechanics to keep the generators functioning, would you not consider that an "upkeep" cost?

 

no.. it's still "Do and Done"

 

Permanent protection with no drawback. This is why there needs to be some sort of balance/depletion of resource tie to the shields.

 

Currently, Shields are like a magic fender on your car. You side-scrape a post and in a few minutes it's back to brand new. No effort needed or cost.

 

Shields should consume energy to refresh, or materials...

 

Shields constantly draw energy.  It just that generators constantly produce more energy than shields draw.  Even if you make shields cost more energy all you have to do is use a bigger generator.  How would you change this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

You could make them draw more energy while they replenish, draw even more to get them to restart if they went down. Heck, simply taking a hit could cause a small energy loss.

 

Although, to be honest, I don't think that stacking modules is such an issue nor are the "magic fenders" much of a problem. One thing I can agree with is that shield upgrades can be "too good". The replenish your shields by X amount if they go down once every X seconds is a bit crazy. The fact that some upgrades simply consume an arbitrarily small amount of energy is also a bit nuts when compared to those that give -X% generated energy. I think shield upgrades should cost an amount directly related to how much your ship's shield consume, instead.

 

One balancing element that I'd love to see in the game is different combat AIs and faction preferences for certain ship designs and fighting styles. As such, some factions could mount significant +X% damage to shield weapons as a preference and cause issues for people who use lots of shields and little to no armor. Similarly, weapons with X% chance to penetrate shields could cause problems.

 

Right now, it's just too random and NPCs are not built to exploit anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Currently, Shields are like a magic fender on your car.

Because... that's basically the whole point of shields in every sci-fi setting ever? A layer of defenses that can take damage and be "repaired" with no real cost to the user.

 

Ok, here's some ideas, multiplier values are just placeholders to give an idea:

[*]Shields have double the energy consumption when recharging. This represents the shield having to do "work" to recharge itself.

 

[*]If a shield has to "restart" after being dropped, then energy consumption is tripled for a few seconds before it starts recharging. This would represent something like shields having to go through a degaussing cycle before they can start up again. Also, if you lack the energy capacity to fully supply this "degauss cycle" then it would be lengthened in proportion to the energy deficit.

 

[*]Shield upgrade modules add a multiplier to the energy shields consume. Maybe merge the two shield module types as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

-100% regen shields just means 2x faster regen, doesn't mean you can't die.

 

Regain, not regen. There are modules that restore 25% of your shield on shield depletion on a 5 minute cooldown.

 

Agreed with your other points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

What would you do with a 15 slot ship?  I've never used more than 10 different types of module.  Sure I could throw in a thruster upgrade or something I don't normally.  But, this means every large ship would be slotted the exact same way.  Kind of defeats the purpose of having the slots in the first place.

^^^

This.

 

It would destroy the variation in Avorion.

Sry, but it's all a bit too dumbed down for my tastes and reeks of an EA style "ballance pass".

I may not like digging through hundreds of turrets, but to only have a few, and all of them basically being the same, just scaled to my ship size... uhh, no thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I hope the devs never seriously consider any of the ideas in this thread.

 

lmao I know right! I see so many people making such limiting suggestions. I quite like the current beta build. Avorion Gyro's are actually amazing and so many people said they were totally useless. Yet I got a 1.6MT ship, 12 slots with nearly 1.00 roll / updown rad and 0.4 left right rad all thanks to gyro's and no thrusters! Then again, I don't even know if most of these suggestions are from build 10.5 because its apples and oranges from 10.2 (current non beta).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost... 

 

That's easy to fix. When shields take damage, have it damage the shield block slightly. In turn, the damage reduces the amount of shields generated. So you either have to repair the shield blocks or suffer with reduced shields.

 

Eventually, without repairing the shield block, the cumulative damage will reduce the shield block to scrap and your shields stop working entirely. Voila. Maintenance required and a mechanic to prevent infinite regen.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Maybe the idea would improve the game but you miss the real problem:

 

Its the ability to change modules everytime and everywhere. (so basically a mining ship has the same ability as a scout and can jump all over the map). If the game needs a balance fix in this direction the better solution would be to make modules (and turrets?) only build- and switchable in a shipyard.

 

a fixed setup of moduls encourages the player to build more and dedicated ships.

 

And if you now argue with the problem of additional annoyances which might occur: Yes, they might be there, but they should and can be solved by design.

For instance it could be made possible that ships without a player and a captain can still get a move order(automated warping) over the map(even with sectors "sleeping"), which might take some time, but would limited the problem of jumping back and forth just to change ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Maybe the idea would improve the game but you miss the real problem:

 

Its the ability to change modules everytime and everywhere. (so basically a mining ship has the same ability as a scout and can jump all over the map). If the game needs a balance fix in this direction the better solution would be to make modules (and turrets?) only build- and switchable in a shipyard.

 

a fixed setup of moduls encourages the player to build more and dedicated ships.

 

And if you now argue with the problem of additional annoyances which might occur: Yes, they might be there, but they should and can be solved by design.

For instance it could be made possible that ships without a player and a captain can still get a move order(automated warping) over the map(even with sectors "sleeping"), which might take some time, but would limited the problem of jumping back and forth just to change ship.

 

Why is having to build more dedicated ships a good thing?  Last time I checked I still spent most of the time using just one ship.  A change like this is just adds needless annoyance.  If I build other ships, ones I don't tend to pilot, then I have to make them specialized anyways because it's too time consuming to be jumping between them changing systems.  That's the beauty of how it works now you can and want to design ships both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

LOL I can't believe this topic is still going.

 

Its a really bad suggestion and I know it because it would just damage the game without fixing the core problems.

 

It would be much better to have randomly generated effects like borderlands dose tho.

The modules are great for instant respeck but they are to rigid and thus make things way to easy to exploit.

 

If all effects were randomly generated from a pool of lets say 50+ possible effects with each tire allowing 1 more effect per a module looting rare+ modules would be EPIC!

 

This of course means Blue and up modules would have to be MUCH more rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

LOL I can't believe this topic is still going.

 

Its a really bad suggestion and I know it because it would just damage the game without fixing the core problems.

I'm sorry, but I disagree that this is a "core problem", as such I also disagree with most of what's being discussed here. As I said before though, I do agree that some modules need to be tweaked because they're just too good right now.

 

It would be much better to have randomly generated effects like borderlands dose tho.

The modules are great for instant respeck but they are to rigid and thus make things way to easy to exploit.

 

If all effects were randomly generated from a pool of lets say 50+ possible effects with each tire allowing 1 more effect per a module looting rare+ modules would be EPIC!

 

This of course means Blue and up modules would have to be MUCH more rare.

I'm not sure how that "fixes" anything. In fact, it would just make bigger ships snowball even more. As you progress you get rarer, exponentially better modules (because of more effects from higher rarity) AND more slots with larger ships.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

nasabot, we are talking about different issues. I addressed the imbalance between armor (which has a "currency cost" in credits and materials to use) vs shields which do not.

 

That said, in what you are talking about you are right. Ship builds (to include changing mods and turrets) should be restricted to shipyards. It would encourage specialized ships for fleets (imho a good thing). But I think two other things are needed to make this really work:

 

First, the mining pod needs an emergency escape back to your home system. If your ship is mostly destroyed, you will not be able to replace destroyed blocks and you need an escape back to build a new ship.

 

OR you need the ability to "call" another ship to join you. This is less ideal because early on you won't have additional ships. Both could be done though.

 

Second, you need to be able to designate your home system. It does no good if you have to go all the way out to the edge each time.

 

I think that these restrictions would probably be more acceptable if they were options set at the server. It sounds like some players prefer to keep the current open-build style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

nasabot, we are talking about different issues. I addressed the imbalance between armor (which has a "currency cost" in credits and materials to use) vs shields which do not.

I know i'm playing devils advocate here but:

I think that any ship that has a currency cost to repair it's armour is a "victim" of aesthetics, with all those tiny detail blocks.

Because you could quite easily make your ship have a giant block of armour mounted on the front protecting the entire ship, backed up by an integrity field, and (in theory) this one block could possibly have more health than the entire ship health bar, thus meaning that you'd die before that block broke under enemy fire.

With such a design you'd never actually have to spend materials to repair, and could just wait for your mechanics to do their job.

 

Now lets see on of my earlier posts:

Because... that's basically the whole point of shields in every sci-fi setting ever? A layer of defenses that can take damage and be "repaired" with no real cost to the user.

Now, how about some alternate ways of making shields less "OP" other than making them cost materials to upkeep:

[*]As suggested earlier, increased energy usage while recharging/etc.

[*]Bump them up to trinium as the first material that gets them, making them closer to being an end-game thing.

[*]Simply cut their regen rate notably, this would put them more on par with mechanic armour repair.

 

Also, why is it a problem that shields have no cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...