Space combat is primitive?

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
336
I completely agree with Nevo, and i just came up with a brilliant idea to both keep the dog fight elements and enchance larger ship functions.
Take a look at my suggestion, it is exactly in relation to this subject:
https://forum.starbasegame.com/threads/the-space-combat-solution-radiation-based-auto-turrets.2013/
i read your post earlier today, while i did not post on it because @XenoCow pretty much summed it up. this is not a fix since your just basically swapping skills for auto killing devices which require no skill. you want to be able to take out other ships without even knowing they are there through auto-cannons on blind spots. how does something like this even the playing field at all, like Xeno said, it still a game and still needs to have some degree of fairness. killing players you didn't even know were there is beneficial to the game how?
 

Aha

Well-known endo
Joined
Jun 22, 2021
Messages
77
i read your post earlier today, while i did not post on it because @XenoCow pretty much summed it up. this is not a fix since your just basically swapping skills for auto killing devices which require no skill. you want to be able to take out other ships without even knowing they are there through auto-cannons on blind spots. how does something like this even the playing field at all, like Xeno said, it still a game and still needs to have some degree of fairness. killing players you didn't even know were there is beneficial to the game how?
I advise you to read it again. Just like XenoCow you too focus on fighter vs fighter situation of which my suggestion doesnt touch at all. My suggestion gives power to larger ships while keeping the dog fight element of the game, that is why it is so beautiful!
Are we really want to stay at the first person shooter level? Why space ships at all? Why all the depth of modularity if you cant capitalize on it. My suggestion right away creates at least 3 different types of effective ships classes. The Fighter, that is effective manouvering and harrassing with great effect large ships. The "heavy" fighter (current meta) that isnt overpowerly effective anymore againts large ships but very effective hunting down light fighters and still a threat to large ships if the pilot is skillful. The medium sized cruisers, those still have enough manouveribility to effectively destroy heavy fighters with their auto turrets and even have chance againts light fighters. and we have a nice rock paper sciccor. Plus larger battleships those are very vulnerable to light fighters. I really think that this is brilliant. Give it a deeper thought and read it again with my reply to XenoCow as well! :) Skill isnt replaced, just more diverse!
 

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
336
no i read your post just fine, no need to go back. and you are advocating on auto turrets who attack and destroy anything with a radiation signature, ya we understood what you said. and it is replacing skill with auto features, and thus rendering the capabilities of needing larger crews for larger ships. why need a crew on a large ship to man guns if you the guns don't need to be man, turning larger ships into smaller man crews destroying the feature that bigger ships need bigger crews. or even worse put this same feature on smaller fast ships so what they can fly around at high speeds landing hits that can't be dodged and attacks can't be landed on them? any time you replace player needed functions with auto function is stripping the skill in those areas, doesn't take skill to sit idle by or fly by and allow the machine to do all the attacking for you. that is not fixing what you guys call "primitive" thats removing the need for more players which I dont understand how that improves a game like this where the game is given all control into the hands of the players.

EDIT: btw if you guys were actually in closed alpha, and participated in actual ship combat and controls, you wouldn't be calling this primitive and boring. i've yet to meet any alpha testers who actually used primitive or boring for the so far ship combat, it could use more mechanics and polished controls, but to say primitive and boring is extremely undercutting what is in the game so far, very unjustly and quite frankly used by those who lack any actual game play to prove any comparison in a fair matter.
 
Last edited:

mrchip

Active endo
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
32
I'm late to this lmao
Missiles become super-agile and only the most agile fighters can evade them. But they do little damage.
So you just went from "aim at your target and shoot" to "look in the general direction of your target, fire and forget".
Cannons become very heavy
what the hecc is a cannon

As a result - there's no optimal meta build
this is just not true. this just shifts the balance around. creates a different meta.
The only way to reduce the meta, is if a player recieves randomized tools, to face randomized problems. So they'll just take what they get and make it work. Here, you can literally build your spaceship down to the single bolt. That is the polar opposite of randomized tools.
Now that we know we have capital ships, and station sieges, that however does a lot in adding diversity. There are multiple metas. Multiple jobs, each having a different tool. And a battlefield that combines multiple of these jobs together. That works. You just have to pick what role you want to play as.

Also, about fighter maneuvers, DCS, whatever: do you seriously expect the average player to learn that? That's literally like learning a martial art. I personally find that stuff incredibly cool. But cool =/= fun. That doesn't mean it can't be, but it also doesn't mean it is implicitly good for the game.

Starbase space combat is more like Call Of Duty, but with no obstacles or cover.
That, i 100% agree with. FPS combat works due to the nuanced interactions between players and the map they're in. How to solve that in empty space, is a huge question.
There's maneuvering complexity: in Elite Dangerous, your ship has strong roll, medium pitch, and weak yaw, forcing you to reorientate constantly, and a "Boost" that briefly accelerates your speed and maneuverability, eating from one of 3 power capacitors. So that works pretty decently. With planes, well, you have to deal with their limited movement capabilities, having to stay above stall speed, not being able to move in any direction, which creates the whole set of basic fighter maneuvers. But that's a bit too complex to learn for the average player.
Then there's positioning... FPS can rely on this heavily, since you're just walking. A big chunk of metal traveling several hundreds of km/h, however, is naturally less able to move closely and precisely around obstacles. In Elite or that new EA star wars spaceship pvp game, you could count flying behind obstacles as some sort of positioning, even if very temporary. In plane combat, there's mountains you can get behind to hide yourself from radar, loose lock, hide and maneuver in the direction they don't expect you from. But that relies on radar, locks and missiles, whatever, to have sense.

So really, i have no idea. I always thought it would be nice if we had different environments with different flying characteristics, so people can go to the one they prefer: empty space, being what we have now, and atmospheres / gas clouds, with some amount of simple aerodynamics... but yeah that's not being developed in the next 10 years.
Maybe some sort of limited "boost" could work. I heard at some point Star Citizen had an "afterburner", that would accelerate you but limit your maneuvering. That sounds interesting. But then how do you actually implement it, when people can build the ships however they like? No idea.

Edit: also yeah current combat isn't a tragedy. It's just fine. It could be fancier, but the game won't die or whatever if it stays like this.
edit2: I should also make it clear that "space combat is more like Call Of Duty, but with no obstacles" is only partially true: remember piloting a ship is much more mechanically challenging than WASD walking with instantaneous response and moving a mouse to look, again with instantaneous and 1:1 response.
 
Last edited:

quantin

Well-known endo
Joined
Oct 17, 2019
Messages
89
Do I? I'd be glad to see that there's some kind of combat overhaul is planned. But I see no sign of it. Actually, quite the opposite - no cameras, no sensors that would allow auto targeting, no proper missiles, etc. etc.
Yeha, I get your point that they have a lot of other stuff to do. But how does it make you belive that they'll do something with combat after that? They might not.
you're right,so much waiting gamers want to know how FB will change the ship battle system,but these players who get it to CA test,they don't think about it anyway.
 

mrchip

Active endo
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
32
the ship battle system will change with the addition of tripods, radiation tech, and the shift of meta(s) when real combat scenarios become a thing thanks to capitals and player stations.
we need to wait for that to make a judgement of the current system.
and in my opinion - it's headed in the right direction. missiles exist but require aiming, everything requires manual input. less cheese, more player interaction.
 

Aha

Well-known endo
Joined
Jun 22, 2021
Messages
77
auto turrets who attack and destroy anything with a radiation signature, ya we understood what you said.
No, my suggestion is nothing like you understood. I guess i need to do a way better presentation than i did.

and it is replacing skill with auto features, and thus rendering the capabilities of needing larger crews for larger ships. why need a crew on a large ship to man guns if you the guns don't need to be man
No it doesnt replace skill with auto features at all, it adds a extra depth to the game while keeping the current ways too.
I totaly explained that an only auto turret ship is inferior to the one that has manned turrets because of light fighters and boarding troops. Again exactly the opposite how you understood. I realize now that i failed to express my vision properly.

You are right that i lack the actual experience of the game, my intentions are to make the game better because i like i very much. I can just hope for an alpha invite.
 

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
336
No, my suggestion is nothing like you understood. I guess i need to do a way better presentation than i did.
again i totally understood what you said, and yet twice you haven't explained how I don't understand. the posters on your topic seem to have the same issue it appears.
https://forum.starbasegame.com/threads/the-space-combat-solution-radiation-based-auto-turrets.2013/
So, you want more advanced and skillfull combat, but also automated turrets? I don't get it. Yes, the initial development phase of tracking systems would be fun for the ship designers and yolol programmers, but everyone else doesn't care about that.
they are using satire in the opening line of the quote.
 

Aha

Well-known endo
Joined
Jun 22, 2021
Messages
77
again i totally understood what you said, and yet twice you haven't explained how I don't understand. the posters on your topic seem to have the same issue it appears.
https://forum.starbasegame.com/threads/the-space-combat-solution-radiation-based-auto-turrets.2013/

they are using satire in the opening line of the quote.
No you didnt, you stated opposites of what i even actually wrote down.
I will make a much more in depth presentation, all im asking is to be open minded. My goal is to enrich space battle without hurting the piloting skill required fighter dog fights. In fact i totaly want them to be present, they are awesome! Its just they not enough for the scale of the game! Not enough to attract enough people to fill up the universe in the scale you and the developers imagine it to be.
 

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
336
@Aha so now between this topic and your other topic you've told me im wrong and i dont understand 4 times, yet you still have not told me how i am wrong or i have ready it wrong. yet you even said,
I realize now that i failed to express my vision properly.
maybe this is what you should do first before telling other posters how wrong they are and not even explain to them how wrong they are.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
109
@Aha
So... how are you not taking away skill of gunners if you no longer need gunners? you only need 1 person in a capital size ship with a shit ton of autoturrets and just a fighter swarm around that capital ship to defend against other fighters... which in fact increases the amount of gunners you need, just that those gunners are now also pilots.
I kinda see this as pointless since you can destroy most ships that exist rn with around 5 railgun shots to the core. And if autoturrets can destroy just as well then combat will be 5 second long, and noone wants that.
 

Neva

Active endo
Joined
May 11, 2021
Messages
27
The most basic ones that comes to mind is to use a cargo lock frame hidden behind doors and loaded with whatever trash and try to use inertia to hit other ships when you release your cargo.
Or use missiles as mines with 0 or low speed and using the trigger range to detonate when the enemies get close.
Looking at SpaceEngineers and other similar games - this kind of tactics is possible, but not effective.

Also it seems you willfully ignore the intricacies that go into building the ships themselves in Starbase, you may not even get to the aim+shoot phase because your ship falls apart just from somebody looking at it.
I do. But building ships is a completly different story. It does not affect combat experience. And I expcect that most players woun't be building ships at all.

Since you like to call everything primitve, please tell me what combat paradigm the other space combat games that you enjoy playing have,
Elite Dangerous - more focused on maneuvering then shooting.
EVE online - almost no maneuvering, but combat is focused on ships speed, distance to target and proper weapons for that distance.
Children of a Dead Earth - well that's a hardcore space combat simulator with proper orbital mechanics.[/QUOTE]
 

Cavilier210

Master endo
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
443
I do. But building ships is a completly different story. It does not affect combat experience. And I expcect that most players woun't be building ships at all.
lol, what? Just because most player may not engineer their own ships doesn't mean that you can ignore the ships engineering. Default ships are trash, and even many shop ships are not designed to be very good at their jobs.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
109
Elite Dangerous - more focused on maneuvering then shooting.
Have you ever seen a 1v1 in starbase? You can clearly see that to hit the other fighter you need to be able to turn towards that fighter and then time it right for the projectile to actually hit. You shoot actual projectiles with a certain speed after all.
Also...
But building ships is a completly different story. It does not affect combat experience.
Idk why you think this but... If you fight against someone its pretty important what ship you are fighting against.
Is it a miner? thats easy prey. Is it the same fighter you are using? Well thats a fair fight. Is it a ship you know nothing about? Well thats a pretty hard fight. Is it a ship that you build yourself or know a lot about? You know where the reactor and fuel is, take two shots and explode their ship (if you have enough skill to acuratly aim that is).
Pretty sure its quite important to know where to shoot at your enemy for him to blow up, isnt it?

At the same time, if you have a fast turning ship, that doesnt have fine tuning modes, you cant aim at long range, while a ship that isnt as manouvrable cant turn as fast and cant aim as well in close quarters or cant even shoot back in a dogfight.
Maybe you got a bad ship design and the sights dont actually aim exactly where your weapons shoot. After all, those sights have to be designed by players too. Maybe the ractor is controlled so that it doesnt work on full capacity so it doesnt eat all the fuel, but becourse of that you cant fire your weapons as often as you want. If you know how to build a ship you could fix all those yourself. but you dont. as such you have to live with those inconviniences. Maybe you forgot that you are using a fighter with little fuel capacity and run out mid flight. Now thats embarrassing. Why didnt you just add a single panal that showed you your fuel?
You damage your fighter in one fight and now you dont know how to repair your ship, as such are stranded in deep space and has to kill himself? Now thats embarrassing.

Here you see how horrible it can be to even aim in a fighter. The aim from aim and click is already fairly hard, as your constantly moving (was the first video i found on youtube, so it might just be that the fighters are shit... but i doubt that).

Starbase is (in my eyes and oppinion) first about building spaceships that can actually fly and do what they are supposed to do.
After that its about the community, its a mmo for a reason.
After that its about combat. Combat just for fun, combat for war between factions, combat becourse i see a civilian ship thats very expensive and i want that ship or money.
But for combat i first need two ships and a player to fight against.
 
Last edited:

Orlover

Well-known endo
Joined
Feb 3, 2021
Messages
70
Here you see how horrible it can be to even aim in a fighter. The aim from aim and click is already fairly hard, as your constantly moving (was the first video i found on youtube, so it might just be that the fighters are shit... but i doubt that).
They may have been VERY new in those ships and they were both moving fairly slow for combat. Not sure they have ever flown those ships before.

Most fights I have been in were a bit faster that and a lot more maneuverable. These two were most likely just horsing around. A lot of the times flying by each other like that you are missing each other by a few meters if not feet as you try to land as many shots as possible until the last second. Ramming is not uncommon.

If you are looking for a fight you should be able to find one fairly easily. Just find a sparring partner, bind at robur and ask a dev nicely for vouchers for both of you. Then just beat the hell outa each other over Robur like all of us do. Or, wait for an event. But if possible get some experience under your belt before an event so your not just an easy kill. Honestly for the events I have been having fun the last few times joining a group and going out on a large ship with turrets/tripods. Not as effective as small ships but a lot of fun and more chaotic.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Messages
14
I have to ask this question.
Was there any Flight Combat Simulation that didn't follow the rule of "Hit and don't get hit"?

I mean...you can add system on system to spice it up but in the end it always come this this pattern.
Missile doging, subsystem destruction, energy transfer, everything to keep you busy while doing this.
 

STEALTH

Well-known endo
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
73
I wouldn't mind some weapon systems that have longer reach than render distance in the future but other than that I don't see a major problem with ship combat. Definitely don't want shields coming into play, takes away from combat more than it adds IMO!
 
Top