THE space combat solution: radiation based "auto turrets" This thread is obsolete and to be ignored.

Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
110
#61
Btw another thing. WARINGIN! RANT!
I know that im not everyone here so i can only say how i percive this but...
This sounds all like sacasm to me:
"Ya... this isn't insulting at all..." "know that i have no hard feelings. :)" (thanks to that smily)
(I started ranting here so this is mostly no longer sacasm): "facts" (Not really sacasm, just wrong, since you dont define what you mean. You just say that we are wrong, but then dont describe why, neither what those "facts" are nor where you got them from) "that isnt my suggestion" (then please elaborate how this isnt your suggestion?) "i designed the whole thing not to replace a player." (but this is exactly what you are trying to do... to replace the role of a gunner with autoturrets. Ik that that ISNT WHAT YOU WANT to do, BUT this is how YOU DEFINE IT to be!)
"That is just how the psyche works. Once your emotions, prejudices and ego dictate your reasoning, you are capable of close to zero rationality, that is because, your intelligence is locked up behind the bars of emotions, prejudices and ego. We are all like that more or less, even the wisest people fail." (Now... 1. Please dont just talk about your personal theorie and oppinion as if it was the only truth. 2. dont just say that everyone is like person A. I know that this can happen, yet you say it as if WE ARE ALL STUPID. So please dont insult us like this. I know that was probably not your intention but you would probably not like it so much when i would say that your intelegence when your angry is lower than that of a worm.
3. ... Do you know how arrogant you sound? "how foolish you possibly were""saying that he used his intelligence in his arguments" (Implying that we and him usually dont use intelligence) "I am doing my part" (Wut? Wdym? What part? for what reason? you were the person that started this, do you expect US to justify YOUR opinion we dont stand behind?) "because of technology" (where in SB is there technology that has not been developed by the players? and to that:" Engineering is also a core gameplay of Starbase!" ... Where is there Engineering in autoturrets? Dont you contradict yourself once again? Like i said bevore, if you have engineering on autoturrets, you can make any turret an autoturret with yolol and then you would once again have autoturrets on small fighters!!!)))

Sry that this turned into a rant but there was so much that i lost track of this post. There are still so many inconsistencese between what you, from my point of view, want and what you say you want, but im now no longer in the mood to rant even more.

TLDR: Many inconsistencies between what you say and want, and how you could or would implement them. Some more stuff that you can think of as insults and that Aha is dodging most contra opinions and questions and only citing pro opinions.
@Aha Please answer our questions with more than just "No, your wrong, now let me tell you about my opinion".
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
110
#62
@Venombrew Idk about autoturrets, but im for station guns. Maybe only on planets so that we have a reason as to why not use ships on planets but this would be pretty far into the future anyways and who know where this game will go in that time. Since wars/ Station siges have to be announced bevorehand (idk, wasnt it like 3 days bevore?) and with that much time you could start preparing and not be suprised about the attack.
You could also place these guns on ships, but they are so big and hevy that they either wouldnt fit, wouldnt let a ship speed up or even turn. As such you would most likly want a big, heavy anchorpoint like many astroids or well... a station. Those guns would be used against capital ships, that way you would need to take those guns out with either agile ships or drop pods (i really want drop pods tbh).
I would rather have something like AA guns. Longer guns that let you customise when the normal bullet explodes into shrapnel that deals little dmg in an AOE. You could use a rangefinder and Yolol to explode shrapnel right bevore it hits a ship or quite a distance away from it, so it hits a smaller or bigger area.
These AA guns would be perfect to destroy Thrusters and valnuable parts in a Ship that usually are hard to hit. Becourse of their nature of low dmg becourse of the low mass of the shrapnel it wouldnt be able to destroy armor but rather the glass and the pilot in a cockpit, fuel lines, thrusters or generators when there are small holes in the armor. A skilled gunner would even be able to shoot INTO a ship, letting the AA bullet explode inside the ship, causing imense destruction to the very delicate maschinery. While such a setting would be able to destroy a lot, it wouldnt be able to do anything to thrusters or others if you miss, since the bullet wouldnt explode fast enough.
Btw @Venombrew ... Your thing at the bottom is pretty sexist. I dont mind but people could think so, so please remove the "a" form "a man".
 
Last edited:

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
370
#63
@Lionard Freezer i may be wrong on this, but i think i read something about a warning an hour before it starts or something like that, but a lot of people have been asking is the announcement gonna stand out, or is it going to be announced in small texts on the bottom of the screen like when you move in and out of safe zones. Im hoping a big message to make it easier to see.

capital ships so far from how they stated(someone correct me if im wrong) won't be so close during the sieges for Capital Ships to go all deathstar, but they will act more like starcraft carriers, where the ships from the capital will get deployed to engage in combat. now when other ships get close to the capital, the capital has defenses, but at the start of the siege i dont know if they will even be close to enact capital vs capital engagements.

a for the AA on stations would be great idea simply because it adds a layer to defense for stations, which will probably need it during sieges. gives also great objective during a fight to have to take out AA with ground troops first to help engage in the siege with your ships. they could make them small or do the starcraft approach and make them more of a small building so that there is many methods of taking out a station AA.

@Lionard Freezer that quote at the bottom of my signature, that is from Captain Jack sir. also i would tell anyone if that quote offended you, then your not ready for the world, cause if that bothers someone they need to develope thick skin cause this world eats people alive and it cares nothing for your feelings. but all in all that is from the great CAPTAIN JACK SPARROW.
 
Last edited:

Aha

Veteran endo
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Messages
110
#64
A personal thought of mine is:
Its not such a bad idea. But it just wouldnt work (the way you explain it).
Too little information and definition.
@Aha You still havent answered my question btw. Who do you want to empower? Afaik not the fighters, neither the big ships against fighters, but big ships against big ships? and then the ship with more crew will win even when both sides have autoturrets? Becourse crew is better than Autoturrets. So what changes?
Also as many people have already said... HOW DO YOU WANT TO KEEP AUTOTURRETS OFF SMALL SHIPS?
There is no such thing as size limitation in SB. You could make an autoturret big and heavy... but you could still put it on fighters. You could make it have a high energy consumtion... but you can have a fighter with 3 reactors. And what stops you from throwing armored autoturrets with a generator into the universe, waiting to be instance loaded and automaticly fire at the ship that appears (as long as its a fairly big ship)?
Also dont forget that SB is an mmo. Just like other mmo it shouldnt be ABLE to do everthing as a single player. Just like most mmorpgs need multiple people in a dungen, simply to survive or to solve puzzles. Its just as if you would try to make a nuke in rl. There is way too much to do for a single person to succssed.
Ik this is a game thats supposed to be fun, but how do autoturrets, that basicly dont enhance fighters against fighters, fighters against medium, fighters against big, medium against fighters, medium against medium, big against fighters and big against medium, create more fun?
Autoturrets, the way you defined them in this post, DONT HELP AGAINST THE CURRENT META. THEY ONLY HELP DESTROY BIGGER SHIPS. AND WE CANT BUILD GOOD BIG SHIPS BECOURSE FIGHTERS ARE JUST BETTER. SO HOW ARE AUTOTURRETS SUPPOSED TO HELP WITH THIS? OR WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HELP HERE? Please just answer my question already ;(.
I am sorry if my answers didn't satisfy you so far. I posted a new in-depth presentation, please read that, and then make your questions again if you still have. I promise you I will answer every single question you raise to the best of my ability!

https://forum.starbasegame.com/thre...cs-too-in-depth-presentation.2032/#post-16472

About your rant:
Also as many people have already said... HOW DO YOU WANT TO KEEP AUTOTURRETS OFF SMALL SHIPS?
so you blunder.png


What do you want from me?!
I cant address any issues you or others raise if they never take information in.
After all, it looks like people don't usually use intelligence... :unsure: I guess we humans are beings of emotions and prejudices rather than computers with fact computing.
Realize that, and you have made a huge step.
Put aside the offense you feel even right now. Make this the reason: "He is just a random internet dude, doesn't worth to hold anger and make myself feel bad"
Easier said than done, but works wonder. I wish you good!
State of mind!
 
Last edited:

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
370
#65
What do you want from me?!
I cant address any issues you or others raise if they never take information in.
my last post on this in attempt for you to understand.
1. Devs not changing the game so that certain ships can only use certain things, its just not happening. they are not going to, have not, and will not change it. quick example, the new giant thrusters that are the size of dump trucks, people build ships around them, so saying you can't place AT on a fighter is ludacris because the Devs aren't going to prohibit it, NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK. WHY? simply because this is a full craft game, they don't want to hinder the crafting limits on players, seeing how this game fully works off the players, no npcs, no hard linear story, its all what we come up with, thats why people can still add AT to anything they can come up with.
2. Everything you said is based soley off another game you openly admitted to being an extremely flawed idea. not our words, your words. you can't take a bad idea that actually was proven in a simulation, scenario, or in this game an actual mechanic and go. "HEY, THIS WAS A BAD IDEA HERE SO LETS TRANSLATE IT OVER TO ANOTHER GAME AND COMPLAINING THE SAME POINT REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY FLAWS IT SHOWS EVEN KNOW IT WAS DISASTEROUS ELSE WHERE".
3. you have said many, many times in this post that YOU YOURSELF HAS NOT EXPRESSED YOUR IDEA PROPERLY. and you get mad at us, because you keep saying, that your saying it wrong, but its our fault were not understanding you, but you keep saying YOU aren't translating your idea correctly.
4. finally a proper thing to do, was pitch an idea, get some feedback then wait to test your theory, your a fighting this thing as if your 100% right regardless of what actual testers are telling you, and without any kind of data to back it up. instead of freaking out over other peoples opinions and knowledge of the game as it is, you could of came back later and said, "idea was a success, tested it many times, and it works out great!", or, "after many tests and runs on the scenario i come to discover this would not benefit players and the overall game at all." at least you would of had some data to throw back on your theory. until that point, this is just an idea, nothing more, nothing less.

so it really comes down to is, you have no real idea or knowledge of how this game is and where it is heading and maybe let some of your ego go seeing how a theory that can't be tested is nothing more than a conversation piece and a pipe dream. not our fault you lack the knowledge and information of the game. my advice to you, read up, learn what is going on in the game, learn where its heading in idea and mechanics, and don't disregard the information of those that are currently there.
 
Last edited:

Aha

Veteran endo
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Messages
110
#66
my last post on this in attempt for you to understand.
1. Devs not changing the game so that certain ships can only use certain things, its just not happening. they are not going to, have not, and will not change it. quick example, the new giant thrusters that are the size of dump trucks, people build ships around them, so saying you can't place AT on a fighter is ludacris because the Devs aren't going to prohibit it, NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK. WHY? simply because this is a full craft game, they don't want to hinder the crafting limits on players, seeing how this game fully works off the players, no npcs, no hard linear story, its all what we come up with, thats why people can still add AT to anything they can come up with.
2. Everything you said is based soley off another game you openly admitted to being an extremely flawed idea. not our words, your words. you can't take a bad idea that actually was proven in a simulation, scenario, or in this game an actual mechanic and go. "HEY, THIS WAS A BAD IDEA HERE SO LETS TRANSLATE IT OVER TO ANOTHER GAME AND COMPLAINING THE SAME POINT REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY FLAWS IT SHOWS EVEN KNOW IT WAS DISASTEROUS ELSE WHERE".
3. you have said many, many times in this post that YOU YOURSELF HAS NOT EXPRESSED YOUR IDEA PROPERLY. and you get mad at us, because you keep saying, that your saying it wrong, but its our fault were not understanding you, but you keep saying YOU aren't translating your idea correctly.
4. finally a proper thing to do, was pitch an idea, get some feedback then wait to test your theory, your a fighting this thing as if your 100% right regardless of what actual testers are telling you, and without any kind of data to back it up. instead of freaking out over other peoples opinions and knowledge of the game as it is, you could of came back later and said, "idea was a success, tested it many times, and it works out great!", or, "after many tests and runs on the scenario i come to discover this would not benefit players and the overall game at all." at least you would of had some data to throw back on your theory. until that point, this is just an idea, nothing more, nothing less.

so it really comes down to is, you have no real idea or knowledge of how this game is and where it is heading and maybe let some of your ego go seeing how a theory that can't be tested is nothing more than a conversation piece and a pipe dream. not our fault you lack the knowledge and information of the game. my advice to you, read up, learn what is going on in the game, learn where its heading in idea and mechanics, and don't disregard the information of those that are currently there.
Okay, thank you for your effort trying to bring me to your sense, I certainly appreciate that even if I would disagree with you.
 
Last edited:

Aha

Veteran endo
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Messages
110
#69
Not sure if i understood this but i agree.
Bruh
Like i didn't make the other thread? What is to agree here with? :D
Mr. Butthurt is trying to discredit the close-mindedness, nothing good to agree here with. You yourself didn't go into the other thread close minded. ;)
It would be more like:
alright, this thread is a mistake, hang on!
But wait, you are right. :D
Bruh...
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
110
#70
Like i didn't make the other thread? What is to agree here with? :D
Mr. Butthurt is trying to discredit the close-mindedness, nothing good to agree here with. You yourself didn't go into the other thread close minded. ;)
It would be more like:
alright, this thread is a mistake, hang on!
But wait, you are right. :D
Bruh...
Wtf i wasnt talking to you?!?!
Go back to your other post.
Bruh! WTF?!
 
Top