Super heavy armour for capital ships

Burnside

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Messages
308
#41
I haven't tried yet, but yes, you can hypothetically install gun shields on turrets instead of armoring the whole turret assembly into a gunhouse
 

XenoCow

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
134
#42
An idea for the implementation of capital ships is to introduce a super heavy armour. The idea being that this armour is virtually immune to small arms and even light fighter armaments, but is so prohibitively heavy that only large ships can use it.
This could also necessitate the introduction of dedicated cap ship engines, reactors and dedicated anti-capital weapons designed for max armour penetration.
This would address the concern that cap ships will be made useless because a fighter swarm can just chew them up while being too maneuverable to hit.
It also necessitates the use of specialised bombers, cap vs cap fights and breach and board tactics to counter capital ships.

Thoughts on how to implement/balance this?
--- On the Armor Problem ---
One idea I have for the armor would to have types of armor that can handle different types of damage better than others. For example, there could be a "reflective" armor that is strong against lasers, but weak against explosive damage and an "absorbent" armor that is strong against explosives but weak against lasers.

Small fighters would have to choose (because of weight constraints) which type of armor they want depending on what kind of damage they expect to receive. However, since capital ships would already be so huge, they could have a layer of both types of armor, in addition to standard armor.

In this way, small arms, auto-cannons, and lasers would all do negligible damage to capital ships. The only weapons that would be able to get through would be plasma throwers, rail guns, torpedoes, and standard missiles to some extent. Since auto-cannons and lasers are best for combating light craft, light craft would have to choose (again because of weight constraints) whether they would want to be able to fight ships of their own class, or larger ones.

The capital ships could easily have rail batteries and torpedo tubes for anti-capital ship battle, and laser/auto-cannon turrets, along with a fighter escort, to handle light enemies.
 

BadgerBadger

Active member
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
48
#43
I have always been a fan of specialized armour types which is good for one type or damage but not others, ie reflective give good protection against lasers but weak to everything else. So to use effectively you need to layer your armour and still manage weight.

As for ships with heavy armour they always have weak points. Besides things the obvious weak points like cockpits and windows there are also exposed devices like thrusters, take out some of these on one side and they just sit there spinning. Then you can take your time carving them up and lining up for a well placed torpedo to make it's way inside their armour.
 

Ketmo

New member
Joined
May 22, 2020
Messages
1
#44
I don't really see a problem with a small swarm of fighters being able to take out a capital ship. It is rather how I would imagine an epic space battle and quite on point for me.
With a big crew on repair, gun turrets etc it would still take a lot of fighters and time to take the capital ship down...

I m thinking battle star galactica ish.. or starwars for that matter...

The way to defend would be to have a squadron of fighters inside the capital ship that can be launched to aid it in battle together with on board turrets.

Capital ship would be means of traveling great distance producing fuel and repairs on board, maybe in search for a new place to set up a megastation
 

Quinc

Active member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
29
#45
It seems that the OP is asking for a system of "Hard Counters" rather than "Soft Counters," however due to the nature of the game a system of soft counters is almost a requirement. The main feature of the game is that although there is a fine variety of parts they can be arranged in an infinite variety of ways. Not only is there no hard distinction between a small ship and a big ship, that is kinda the point of the whole game. So gameplay that requires a hard distinction is generally a bad idea for Starbase. Though you can still have a lot of that "rock, paper, scissors" kind of thinking with soft counters; it just means that while Bomber usually beats Battleship, not always. A capital ship that has more laser turrets and fewer plasma throwers would be more likely to survive a bomber attack but less likely to win a match with another capital ship. Having different varieties of armor could have a similar affect.

Generally I don't like damage type systems, it often results in some very obvious choices. "These enemies are acid types, better equip anti-acid!" Though it could be better if damage types correspond to how weapons are used. Choosing the right armor type could complement your ability to avoid certain kinds of attacks. Autocannons represent a continuous stream of projectiles but so does the lasercannon. If they existed in the real world there would be major differences but in the game they are pretty similar, at least for the person being shot at. Thus the armor that counters one should counter the other. Meanwhile torpedoes function very differently, they deliver all of their damage at once and avoiding them is different. An armor that absorbs a certain number of hits regardless of damage would counter slow firing weapons, an armor that simply has X hitpoints would counter fast firing weapons. If 'reactive armor' existed in the game it would be the former.

I fully agree that we will need larger versions of various components. I don't think it is important in the short term, but as players start building bigger ships there should be larger components available. You can end up with some weird balance issues when you have massive capital ships that use fighter sized guns and engines. Movement thrust and firepower shouldn't be limited by surface area. There are similar games where late game ships are not only nearly invulnerable to early game ships but nearly invulnerable to each-other, such that it takes 15 minutes of constant firing to breach the enemy's armor. The reason is that their firepower is much more limited than their protection. You can't stack 15 turrets ontop of each other, but you can stack 15 armor blocks. I don't think that is likely in Starbase, if anything Starbase has the opposite problem, but still something to be wary of.
 

Mokkochi

New member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
3
#46
Ships in Gundam had their bridges protected by simply retracting them into the ship itself and covering it up with armor essentially sealing off the bridge from outside and relying on remote feed of the outside
 

XenoCow

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
134
#47
Ships in Gundam had their bridges protected by simply retracting them into the ship itself and covering it up with armor essentially sealing off the bridge from outside and relying on remote feed of the outside
They do something similar to this to the bridge of the large ship in the announcement trailer. For better or for worse, cameras are unlikely to be in the game any time soon.
 

Mokkochi

New member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
3
#48
They do something similar to this to the bridge of the large ship in the announcement trailer. For better or for worse, cameras are unlikely to be in the game any time soon.
Well they could still have maybe like some navigator deck just so that they know where they are or if there is any debris or objects in the way probably. The main pilot would be only piloting the vessel anyway so them not having a camera feed might not be that much of a problem. And gun turrets would either be automated or have like some dome or something probably with the gunner manning the gun so that they could see or something
 
Top