Search results

There is a heat capacity to generators and weapons currently. Generators seem to have a very small but noticeable buffer before shutting down. Weapons on the other hand literally have the data field StoredHeat in them. So yes devices do have heat capacity right now. About heat transfer, I may...

If anything, for gameplay's sake, we should make heat sinks the stealthy option. A pilot can choose to turn off radiators (which I propose to be responsible for detection) and use a finite heat capacity (heatsinks) to get close or run away. This way there's also no need to force heat sinks either.

If we were to go with heat based detection, heat sinks should not be the only thing that is detected. Other things like radiators should also have detection, which removes the need to force heat sinks onto all ships. One, for most ships most of the time, you are not accumulating heat. If you are...

I was talking about the heat capacity and transfer rate limits, which are robbing those attributes from existing parts. It's literally in the progress notes. Your description of a heat sink is precisely what I and most people (I guess) expected. Just a pool of heat, a temporary storage device...

The attachment plate case is understandable because the whole point is to remove them. You may argue APs may or may not need to be removed in the first place, but if they decided to remove APs, then they have to break some older ships. Even some changes like changing power requirements for...

The problem here is that the new mechanics didn't have to mess with the existing designs. Remove the entire sentence about heat transfer rate and the new heat sinks will still work as heat storage devices, which is exactly what the name heat sink means. If anything, the current description means...

"All devices can transfer heat to radiators at a very limited rate and have a small heat storage. " Why is this part necessary? The heatsinks will work just fine without you deliberately ruining old designs and existing ships that players have already spent hundreds of hours on. I'm all for...

"Blocked custom items from backpacks" why? this makes transporting workbenches harder than they need to be plus just think about things like salvage

Yeah but even in combat there are roles for larger ships. Plus combat alone doesn't mean much, Starbase is a game with many other game loops and judging at least by the current material consumptions, most ppl will spend most of their time in other game loops dominated by large ships just to mine...

Not true, large ships are necessary for salvage, fighter resupply, repairing, troop transport/respawn. Large ships will be filling critical roles in a combat fleet once you leave CA and have to actually spend precious materials on ships, and when station combat becomes meaningful. Trash at one...

The "more weapon leads to disproportionally more power/heat requirement" approach actually reminds me of ghost heat in Mech Warrior Online, look how well that was received. Functionally, I would say that for a given set of components with given stats (e.g. current status of the game), small...

Honestly why make large ships good combat vessels in the first place? They are better than smaller ones at pretty much every other task. And it's not like there won't be large ships in combat if we keep the current weapons either. You still need ships to resupply/repair fighters, do salvage...

Another potential solution would be to keep track of voxel damage as a part of the overall damage potential of a shot. Both doing HP damage and voxel damage will reduce this overall damage potential until it drops to zero and the shot is stopped. This also solves the small plate issue because...

Some clarification: Pure voxel damage means the penetration (in number of layers) after all plates in the test have had their HP zeroed (by shooting a laser through all of them at a different spot) Then the weapon being tested is shot once at the stack of plates (at a different spot from where...

We are still losing the ability to bolt beams through plates tho. This wouldn't be a problem if large plate meta wasn't a thing, but with the current damage system you more or less have to bolt beams through plates just to keep the plates useful. But otherwise this looks good. Honestly if this...

When I actually thought about it, I couldn't think of a time when I win or lose a ship fight just because of "cursed" beams or plates held together by attachment plates. Honestly do these exploits actually matter all that much in the grand scheme of things? Edit: I thought a bit more about...

Plot twist: ducts now have the function of the removed attachment plates jk srsly tho unless there is a new system that completely replaces the function of attachment plates (so both joining beams that are a bit off AND joining parts) there should not be any change at all. And this isn't even...

BP and shipshop are NOT progress. You would still need the same amount of ores to build/buy the same ship as anyone else once EA hits. If BP and/or shipshops are wiped, everyone will just be stuck in SSC for days after EA hits and that defeats the purpose of letting many players in at the same time.

oh yea in alpha it's totally expected, this is what it's for.

I do agree with that. All I'm trying to say is, there are a lot of ways to nerf/buff something and when possible, preserve old designs by leaving things like power draw alone and changing other parameters. If there are no other alternatives then sure, balance first, but I don't think these cases...