![]() The more combat power a ship has, the more supplies it will cost to keep the ship in shape. Every ship consumes supplies to keep itself in top shape and ready for combat. Ships require a very small amount of upkeep in order to not degrade in combat ability and eventually risk malfunctions.Namely, the economic ramifications of having big metal monstrosities of war that fly through space: StarSector has a bunch of game mechanics that struck me as solutions that would mesh perfectly into Starmade. Yes, i played Starsector and it all became painfully clear what Starmade needs to make the combat more interesting. NOTE: The following set of suggestions may appear as if though they were ripped straight from StarSector. There's no disadvantage to fielding a much larger fleet than what is strictly necessary, and no reason to ever hold back reinforcements.There's no way for Fleet A with 50% of the strength of Fleet B to inflict even 5% of the economic damage that Fleet B would deal to Fleet A.There's no economic drawback for having a single, near indestructible ship.There's no economic drawback for drawing the fight out and trying to stall.There's no economic drawback for going out of line and being reckless in a fight.There are few economical considerations other than "if we fight we will lose ships". Winning and losing in Starmade is extremely binary you either lose ships and take massive armor damage or you don't. Generally, commanding a fleet is much the same, just figure out which enemy is likely to deal a lot of damage to you and order everyone to take it out first. There's not much else you could do, maybe make sure you fire your missiles when they cool down and so on, but typically a battle in Starmade is simply down to positioning and numbers/resource advantage, and whoever has the numbers/resource advantage is usually the one who wins because positioning isn't very hard. Make sure you're within range of the target and in the best position to help your allies in your fleet.Let's make a list of all the things you have to do in a typical fleet vs fleet fight. But, i think something about the current combat system is flawed. It is likely still broadly correct but not verified for the most up to date data yet.A lot of the discussion revolving around "gigantism", the issue of balancing shields vs armor and what not often boils down to comparing numbers and trying to figure out an algorithm that provides the best balance. EMP arcs now deal 100% of base non-EMP damage instead of 25%.This makes dropping shields against an Ion Cannon particularly risky. When hitting hull or armor an EMP arc will form in addition to the Ion Cannon direct damage, potentially striking weapons or engines far from the impact point. It is notably very flux efficient, but its range is quite short and it is more expensive to equip than other small energy weapons. The Ion Cannon is a small energy weapon that deals most of its damage as electromagnetic pulse ( EMP) damage, which can disable surface systems of ships such as weapons and engines. ![]() Rarely the only weapon type fitted on ships. The weapon also fuses certain circuits, and can mildly strain shield generators, thus it does negligible amount of permanent damage. When the ion bolt impacts the target it creates a localized magnetic field which plays havoc with all manner of electronics, including sensors, fuel igniters, targeting modules, computers, etc. The Ion Cannon's nonstandard gain medium projects highly ionized baryonic matter in a coherent bolt. A medium range energy cannon that delivers an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) and can quickly disable enemy systems/engines.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |