I'm pretty much exclusively SP or LAN Co-Op ... it just sounded like a hole you could drive a CV through (the "slow" big kind) so I had to ask... 8^)
The idea with the difference in speeds and maneuverability of ships of different types (weight) is beautiful. It would be really wonderful, especially if the NPCs of the factions had SV . As for the range of the main caliber of large ships, it is necessary to take into account not only the ship/ship battle, but also the ship/base battle. So that it would not be possible to shoot bases with impunity with the main caliber from 20 km.
Good one. Indeed bases should not be left out of the equation. I would not allow CVs past a certain class/ size limit on planets, very simply. Since bases can also range from a shack to a cluster of huge bunkers, solutions can not be one-size-fits-all type. In space, bases could have same max range for a big gun as a top CV to make it fair.
Or same range/ damage but just have more than 1 allowed because it can't evade fire and has several faces to defend. And of course I don't see the same top weapon being available equally for a shack and for a level 25 battlestation.
They made RCS completely unusable for CVs lol. It's not that the ships weren't zipping around (even though it took hours to balance some of those PVP designs), it's that it took friggin 15 minutes to turn 30degrees, and i say that with only slight exaggeration. RCS CPU values also went through the roof. In the current documentation and in the Creative lab it straight up now recommends 0-1 RCS. The block is basically useless. My Class 2 light frigate shouldn't be handling like the Death Star, it should handle like the Millennium Falcon.
That is so far different from the type of combat that we have now. Losing the afterburners on CVs was one thing, then trying to eliminate the turning and movement. Fuck it let's just fight with bases. Combat would need to be reworked completely from teh ground up. If that were the case, CVs SHOULD be allowed to fire their guns in atmo, why not? They can barely move anyway, they're practically bases that drift. SVs also need to carry some heavier weapons, and have CPU lowered on almost everything. That change for turning ships made practically every single design in the game useless. In terms of weapon spread, what was on the ship, # and placement of thrusters, firing lines, power required, everything. All this without changing weapon ranges. That's like arming an oil tanker with a slingshot. You can't make a Ferrari into a bulldozer, it's just a different machine Now, if you proposed adding in a NEW class of ship above CV, or made current CVs into Medium Vessels or something and THEN implemented these kinds of restrictions that would be pretty sweet.
No, only started SE to authenticate it when I bought it a few years ago, tried walking/ looking around to see if I could get something going without having to check dozens of youtube videos to learn the basics, then I left it on the shelf. Total time played must amount to 15 minutes. Never been on their forums either. But if what you are inferring is that this is how Space Engineers solved the 250 blocks max grid dimension (if it was a problem to start with) then it shows it can be done somehow.
Perhaps eleon should come up with some base line mechanics for space combat which maybe most agree needs an overhaul. At least those who engage in space combat other than running away from drones for dear life. So the mechanics address certain issues, while making them moddable as usual so people can tweak them, but stick to a base line. I think the idea of different sized guns in terms of their space/power requirements is one such thing. So you extend the range of capital engagements between capital sized ships who have these guns. To defend themselves against fast moving ships which those capital guns cannot track, the capital ship would need smaller guns. It makes it so that all 200 guns you put on, can't be good against ALL size ships. Of course I am talking about balance as it relates to having mass and cpu enabled. Eleon created cpu as a baseline, people modified, it but they still kept it on some servers while some disabled it. I think eleon's baseline for a revamp space combat could continue in the same vein. Unless they make the policy switch and decide to hard code certain elements. I'm not sure how singleplayer modding works, but for games like Starsector, you just unziped a mod in the mod folder, go to settings when launching the game and choose which mods to activate. It's that easy. Empyrion is such a rich experience, it's like star citizen in a way but with way more possibilities but less fidelity and graphics detail. Walking inside ships is a big feature i wish we could have. But understanding how it took sc alot of research and years to implement that I can see its a big deal in programming it. You have to consider that a ship in space has gravity, that's one physics zone, when you step beyond the ship at any more that's another physics zone with micro gravity..as you step back or cross an arbitrary line in the cargo bay shield, gravity is back. So it's like containers. Your ship is a container, and it has one set of rules and it exists in space which has another set of rules. its a tricky thing to program in if you havent considered it from the beginning. thats why they did the easy thing and make it so you have to sit. the problem is how to glue the player to the tile or block they or walking on, while the ship moves, while your're moving, so you don't float away.
I like that. I (and @StyleBBQ ) thought of several different "flavors" of such a system with modular "spinal railguns" like Mass Effect , so the biggest chunks of blocks would engage combat at greater distances and would not rely on their zillion turrets to win a fight against another capital vessel. This would help both rendering/ performance (lower rubberbanding) in multiplayer and allow for more tactical approach of space combat. I think the problem comes from colliders being one-sided, and when the ship moves all blocks become an "external shell" for bullet/ environment collision purposes, but from the "interior" there is no collision. This is how "mesh colliders" work in Unity : https://docs.unity3d.com/2021.2/Documentation/Manual/class-MeshCollider.html The Mesh Collider builds its collision representation from the Mesh attached to the GameObject , and reads the properties of the attached Transform to set its position and scale correctly. The benefit of this is that you can make the shape of the Collider exactly the same as the shape of the visible Mesh for the GameObject, which creates more precise and authentic collisions. However, this precision comes with a higher processing overhead than collisions involving primitive colliders (such as Sphere, Box, and Capsule), so it is best to use Mesh Colliders sparingly. Faces in collision meshes are one-sided. This means GameObjects can pass through them from one direction, but collide with them from the other. Details about underlying algorithms and data structures blablabla... .
ah interesting yes, i guess they are strecthing the limits of UNITY with this type of game. Probably unity needs to catch up. I'm betting they dont have the resources to create a custom engine for what they want, although it would solve these issues. just a matter of time vs money vs goals. so no real opinion there. i saw this in vermillion patch notes come on he must have been reading this thread! im not so sure im a fan of the idea of going back to a weapon that cant be dodged. again my poor frigate trying to keep a high transversal vs the enemy now is gonna be worn down by a beamlaser that doesnt miss. and of course i wont have thick armor. i wish weapon capcitors made it in. like the changes to shields. more options without being complicated. way to go verm and ravien!
Well if we're talking about RE you're getting some new fixed weapons as well which would help out small, fast CVs more than the big tanky ones.
I think they are implying they nerfed the RCS at one point but hadn't fully adjusted thruster torque and the flight model yet. I still find that RCS don't improve handling much but most my CVs are smallish and have what I consider decent thruster placement. Personally I think having ponderous slug fests would be interesting but it would make for a poor player experience. You'd be repairing constantly and full wipes would be more common I think. Really depends on your options configuration and what you're looking to get out of the game.
