most people dont like this idea as base game
#Weapon turrets
proud yacht
i think it could be cool
but i feel like it takes away the whole point of having the weapons mounted where they are now
u could technically nerf them
but at that point you would be better off having new designs altogether, rather than top mounted versions of vanilla weapons
tender crater
true I just love the idea of roof designs.
Not that they are realistic but could be, however, it's more on the lines of idealistic
soft tinsel
balance is always the issue, also makes desing too easy and spammy
tender crater
balance is always the issue, also makes desing too easy and spammy
true but that's with mods lol. So far I think there needs to be more faction ships.
Or have an AI create them simultaneously (Not bad, not good idea)
Also, Imperium has ingenious designs like the nuke spammer
I hate their nuke ships
lol
as far as balancing goes, I use the proper nukes mod.
That mod actually adds balance to the game as far as I can see.
storm rock
Nukes are very balanced already though
Unless your ship is like, standing completely still you can just avoid being hit by nukes
Also, I do not see how " same thing, just it's deck now" would benefit the game, why use the regular surface weapons over the deck versions that are essentially the exact same
tender crater
Also, I do not see how " same thing, just it's deck now" would benefit the game,...
more rotation would benefit and so you can have more armor or shields on the sides rather than weapons.
if anything just look at the 'vanilla turret mod'
It actually helped me make more durable ships to fight the imperium with than what I had for side weapons
hallow osprey
That's the problem, it'd make non deck weapons completely obsolete
Walt has mentioned the problem with deck weapons is you can just put them behind/inside a wall of armor and it makes designs less inventive without proper balancing
tender crater
I had no balance issues with the mod thus far, therefore blown out of proportion. Innovation is the problem? Yes I agree, because without creativity we'd have mediocre ships like the Venator from Star Wars. As far as looks go I'd still prefer turret weaponry.
storm rock
Basically, all ships become armour bricks
tender crater
which would allow more dexterity and strength and if you wanna talk balance the imperium could still kick my plebian bottom
storm rock
Just have an armour brick railfan
soft tinsel
Just because you haven't found balance issues dose not mean there are none
^ all ships would boil down to who has more amrour
storm rock
which would allow more dexterity and strength and if you wanna talk balance the ...
The imeprium ships are mainly comprised of ships with nukes, I recommend using a faster ship and piloting it yourself so that you have it avoid being hit by nukes, the main weakness to nukes is dodging after all
tender crater
The imeprium ships are mainly comprised of ships with nukes, I recommend using a...
I know that, I've been building ships with fast turn speed other than the PHX ships (Azur Lane siren ships on drugs)
tender crater
some also house both nukes and HE
storm rock
A ship like this used right is the perfect anti nuke ship
tender crater
especially the Monolith Arbiter
storm rock
It can also dodge missiles during orbit
Missile AI lags behind ship movements, so you can dodge at a radius from the enemy ship as you orbit it
And if you aren't able to dodge missiles, put around 20 Pd on one side of your ship and most Career ships should not have enough missiles to pass
tender crater
Already knew that, I'd prefer building smaller ships instead of big targets
tender crater
not using it, I make my own stuff.
storm rock
i know
i make my own stuff too, i just recommend taking inspiration from what already exists
tender crater
Creativity comes from nothing, or something with a ignite in change. Yes I get that.
I have strategies of my own.
storm rock
the easiest way to kill career ships is to have the bigger ship, as you have unlimited budget
tender crater
I don't cheat, not possible
tender crater
I took from your statement: 'unlimited budget.' To be defined as if I would cheat to make a big ship.
storm rock
no?
unlimited just means you have no strict limit on how much budget you can dump onto your ship, for example: in PvP you have the exact same budget as the opponant, and so the budget is limited, But in career your ship can be as big as it needs to be, t okill that enemy ship
I.e, you can use a 5m costing ship to kill an enemy ship costing 300k
tender crater
mmm. Either way, I think the balance wouldn't be an issue. I can most definitely prove this by building a couple ships and testing them on other ships.
Ex: Laser turrets or disruptor turrets (I personally think the flak turret is more useful)
things like nuke silos would cause imbalance
Flak turret also just looks cooler too
storm rock
As someone who has played PvP for multiple years, I can say for certain that if a Deck version of all guns existed,
No one will use the surface versions, and the meta would shift from high skill, intense and fun battles to, watching 2 slow bricks attack eachother until one that has less armour dies
tender crater
This is why competitions have rules
limitations, if better said.
And I'm talking about career
storm rock
to what? '' you cannot use half the vanilla stuff ''?
hallow osprey
Here's a simple balance question where I think you can see the issue
If there are deck heavy lasers, why use surface heavy lasers?
storm rock
there is no reason to
hallow osprey
Is there any pro other than aesthetic choice?
Exactly so I want op to think about that
storm rock
deck one has more turret range, can be behind stuff like multiple shield layers and armour, and can be anywhere you want without much need for placement thinking
tender crater
Balance does not make up looks, the turrets will have same damage. Did you take count of the range issue?
storm rock
As far as it's been said, it's the exact same gun, just it's a deck version
soft tinsel
Issue isn't just balance though, it's also a game design issue, having surface mounted weapons makes you think about how you build your ship
tender crater
Issue isn't just balance though, it's also a game design issue, having surface m...
There we go! Could've said that
storm rock
There we go! Could've said that
I did
tender crater
Design is bs to me, I always will do function.
storm rock
Just not as elegantly
tender crater
I mean as much as I like joking about how sexual SpaceX rockets look, at least they have function.
I was gonna say Apollo
but the photos were... lacking logical explanation...
Soviets and Americans were just 2 kids fighting... now it's a terrible marriage fight.
storm rock
This is sounding even more #off-topic to the original post than the design talk earlier
tender crater
I'm only joking of course
As far as anything goes, you always want function over looks. My ships aren't pretty no, but they get the job done.
storm rock
That's generally how PvP ships are designed, but what would this be in relation to Deck mounted Everything
tender crater
Putting it in math terms
one moment
Function? Where?
Ah I see, more survival please!
Strip side weapons = more armor or shield placement = higher chance of survival.
Able to sustain more damage without losing crew (it will happen anyway)
storm rock
there isn't a need for that
it isn't often i say this, But you could just design your ships better
if many other players can kill the ai ships, you can too
tender crater
it was an example. Like I would develop my ships that way
storm rock
perhaps you could provide said ships
tender crater
but what I am saying to can't dodge every shot. You gotta make a sacrifice sometimes
tender crater
true, but I'm talking big ships
storm rock
even with hitscan flak or ions you can avoid taking any damage
storm rock
true, but I'm talking big ships
i did send a ship here that basically defeats any ai career ship
tender crater
gotta get into blind spots too which flak turrets have
storm rock
the classic, ul morbiter
you have to think about what you are designing rather than just big armour square and deck stuff behind armour square
tender crater
I don't make armor squares.
storm rock
it's the best aspect of deck stuff, being behind absurd amounts of armour
it's what you suggested to have more of
tender crater
I don't even put that much because it'll hinder speed
storm rock
you do not need speed with a big armour square in career]
it's a lazy but effective strategy
more deck stuff = more armour bricks
tender crater
I don't build lobotomy squares
storm rock
you do you, but your suggestion is basically telling a lot of players to do just that
'' stop thinking about design and become a deck brick ''
hallow osprey
Issue isn't just balance though, it's also a game design issue, having surface m...
Good point, so elaborating on this note to op, a good design for weapons is where all the different weapon systems are balanced, but also where using different weapon systems leads to different ship styles
storm rock
rather than just 1 weapon system, deck
tender crater
I assume you cannot read nor comprehend. It's an absolute attempt to anger someone with repetitive non sense. I'm done here
hallow osprey
A good example is how missile ships, ion ships, and rail ships are all designed differently and you can't easily take the exact same ship and swap between those weapon systems
storm rock
exactly, you have ion rammers, and you have missile orbiters
same thrusters, way different design philosophy
hallow osprey
I don't make armor squares.
Just because you don't doesn't mean people won't. In the pvp community where people optimize the functionality of their ships to hell and back the deck cannon meta settled on armored bricks
storm rock
one guy had a semi-successful triangle shaped armour cone for a deck brick, there were other bricks that has more square armours
their main issue was being kited by higher ranged weapons like rails, lasers, but if every gun became deck weapons then every design could just become a high range brick
hallow osprey
Function? Where?
Ah I see, more survival please!
Strip side weapons = more ar...
That's the problem! If you had deck versions of all the side weapons nobody would use the side weapons and all laser and cannon ships would have the exact same style. Having to defend the side weapons forces you to try to be more creative with ship styles to avoid taking damage
storm rock
(alternatively don't be a broadsider)
imagine this, but it was any weapon instead of the deck cannon
hallow osprey
(Lol, I used the same term op used and assumed side weapon = surface weapon)
So to some cool surface weapon designs
storm rock
also, we have the small cannon, and the large cannon, if those becomd deck cannons, wouldn't the names become '' small deck cannon '' , then '' large deck cannon '', with the deck cannon keeping the original name despite being the biggest of the three
storm rock
hallow osprey
The ship type is referred to as an Avoider and it handles the difficulty of defending surface weapons by using manuevability
storm rock
and also shields
hallow osprey
Good point it also does have shields
storm rock
if you do not have shields with the surface weapons, obviously they'll die
except for a few certain pvp builds that are heavilly speed invested
hallow osprey
Also for other interesting blaster ships, op if you look at late game career ships there's diagonal ships with like a mouth. This diagonal central firing surfaces style allows you to overlap more large shields than is possible on a non diagonal ship and hence offers better tanking defense
Like Atlas (I grabbed this picture from the wiki)
I'll note this shape isn't meta in pvp but we're talking about career ships anyways
storm rock
technically the most shields you can have in 1 location and thus the best single point area defense
diag ion rammers for example use this
although those are uncommon
speaking of ion rammers,
imagine the deck version where the hole at the middle there is covered up because the ions pass over it, and because prisms have 360 degree turning you can easilly aim them at any area of the enemy ship rather than just the one hole
hallow osprey
And then here's a DC Brick made by Kine
Op you'll notice the three ships I posted have drastically different design shapes/philosophies and if you were to go try to switch the laser ships to DC cannons or vice versa they wouldn't work without an extreme overhaul
That's the intent and why there aren't deck versions of the lasers
chilly smelt
I recently got the game and was surprised that most weapons are side mounted/coaxial... I don't get why a lot more of them can't all have top mounted variants... I do get they wanted every weapon to be exposed... but top turrets can be just as exposed with one change:
When targetting top turrets, just have shots pass through armor and rooms because they're passing 'above' the ship to hit those turrets. 'Fake Z-depth' it's been done before in other 2D games... The ability to target subsystems by right clicking on them is already in the game too!
All sides of a ship, especially the top, even bottom (Though outside of this games perspective scope) is important hardpoint space, not just the sides.
storm rock
i guess i'll select target the enemy cr and end the game instantly then
chilly smelt
i guess i'll select target the enemy cr and end the game instantly then
cr?
chilly smelt
Oh... well I wasn't talking about the control room, I was talking about top mounted weapons. If you target them, shots will harmlessly pass over any control room and hit the top turrets because they are higher than the rest of the ship
storm rock
Then why would anyone choose to have deck weapons if they end up practically having less defense than the surface ones
soft tinsel
yea at that rate it will just be a race to whoever can destroy the others roof cannons first wins
and of course surface mounted weapons was intened to make you think more about how you build your ship around them also probably because when Walt first started working on the game it was just easier
chilly smelt
Hmm how would there be a difference in defense though? It's just about flexibility on where to place objects. The top turrets would be identical, only they'll have a much wider firing arc than the side ones, making them more versatile (easier to fire on the move and not just at a specific area in front of the weapon) that's why turrets exist irl like on military tanks. So:
-
360 degree firing arc means being able to still point the turrets towards the enemy no matter the ship orientation when maneuvering which is very useful in ship combat
-
Less restrictive building because you have more options were to place things
-
Sure, side weapons have more 'defense' because they are occluded by the rest of the ship, but that's also a downside. They have a limited firing arc so you have to turn your whole ship to have them face the enemy
-
Being able to target top weapons right away would change combat for the better. I found it really silly that you have to blow through the entire side of a ship just to reach the x/y coordinates of the deck cannon, which is not on the side..... it's on TOP. But when an enemy deck cannon fires it shoots over its own ship just fine...
-
Both side and top weapons can be used on a ship at once, so I don't see how it'd be a race to destroy just top turrets... especially since you can already target exposed side weapons currently and destroy them
-
If you're a sci-fi fan it's just plain more fun because it'll make the game more akin to popular sci-fi franchises where big ships have full turrets on the top like star trek, star wars, battlestar galactica, stargate, homeworld games...
-
I feel you'd still have to think about how to build around them, because you still have to worry about the interior space... so you can't just build them everywhere and anywhere
A bit lengthy but I wanted to be thorough with my point XD
soft tinsel
- thats one of the reasons roof cannons are considerd OP, plus 360 will just encourage box desings
- less restricions isnt always a good thing, again it would just make people build death boxes and again, not think about the over all desing of the ship
- see the end of point 2
4-5. assuming all weapons can only target roof weapons then not only are you going to run into a consistency issue (if you can shoot over ships why wouldn't you be able to shoot anywhere in the middle of a ship) but then as i said run into the issue of having a race to see whoever can takeout the roof weapons first, as theres then seems to be no way to protect them, say unless shields can in which case just spam shields - those are 3D movies/TV shows, not 2D so kinda irrelevant
- look at DC rammers i guess, or any modded ship with roof mounted weapons
more roof weapons can be added i think, but not by making every weapon roof mounted
storm rock
out of all the weapons, deck cannons are the easiest to design with,
chilly smelt
- Remember deck guns still take up interior space... and they could different stats than side mounts if needed... Like needing more resources to build, having more interior footprint size, inverse relationship of turret traversal speed with weapon damage.
2-3. People already build death boxes... People already CAN design death boxes with just making death walls of guns... If you want to encourage actual better design then add sloped armor effects. Instantly makes death boxes a bad idea
4-5. Why not let guns target anywhere on a ship? It would add much more to the game, and it isn't hard to do and would encourage better ship design instead of just 'armored death boxes'. It would make people need to think about the "over all design of the ship" more. But anyways even if that's not added, It's not a huge inconsistency. Also you can snipe off turrets, and only being able to do that is a problem but having to cut through half of a ship just to knock out their existing turret is fine?
No way to protect the roof turrets... How is that any different than existing (side) turrets? Except for the existing deck gun which lets you basically cheat by having it ridiculously armored allowing it to fire over everything but enemies can't for some reason?
-
But space is 3D too... so this game irrelevant? lol. The game is obviously supposed to be taking place in a 3D universe, just cause the game itself is a 2D top down perspective doesn't mean anything :P
-
Again that's just a problem because the deck cannon can be hidden in so much armor, also I think it's silly that ramming is a viable tactic like that. They can have ramming as a weapon sure... but it NEEDS to be more realistic and there needs to be collision damage. Either you sacrifice part of your ship or your whole ship to ram someone as a last resort, or have a special reinforced ram 'weapon' on it designed to survive impacts
chrome pilot
1. Remember deck guns still take up interior space... and they could different s...
if you can target anyehere on a ship, this ship's armor is piontless
also the game is supposed to be and is in cannon 2d
storm rock
1. Remember deck guns still take up interior space... and they could different s...
1, deck cannons and stuff are tsill very easy to design ships with even if they would be larger or anything like that, more resource cost does not actually change how you design with them either,
2, death boxes are Way less common at the moment, most railfans when large enough become a deathbox, because rails do the best box shape ships,
4, targetting anywhere on the ship will make all ships a form of fast rail using ship, with the sole purpose is to snipe the enemy Cr for an instant win in battle, because target anywhere and the enemy has 1 module that if destroyed they lose, you target it, it is just a terrible idea to allow fire over the 2d plane, also makes armour completely irrelivent and actually useless, the reason we have no other deck gun than the Dc, is because it's uniqueness in being behind armour while firing, the mining laser does not count and the tb does no damage.
6, the game itself is on a 2d plane, you can imagine your ship as a 3d object, but, that is the imagination, gameplay wise, it is entirely 2d
7, the dc, even with how it can fire over armour is usually never actually used competively that way, Deck bricks died out when speed became way too fast that no thick deck brick shell lasted.
a better rammer is fast not armoured
for example, this is what a 3d cosmoteer ship object actually looks like
chilly smelt
if you can target anyehere on a ship, this ship's armor is piontless
Actually, the fact you bring up this ship gives a good example for me... Should a 'viable' spaceship really be able to look like this? It is just a big brick that violates physics, with armor placed in unrealistic places in ways. The thrusters are also fully encased in a box of armor, which makes no sense
and what do you mean mean by the game being canon in 2D? It's definitely meant to represent a 3D world, it's just the top-down perspective, and the game sprites of the ship parts and such are 2D (in THEORY they of course represent 3D rooms, components and all that)
armor still being useful would easily be fixed by being able to add armor plates on top of the rooms (basically and option giving a room more hitpoints at the cost of making said room heavier) With this added, ships can have more realisticly shaped hulls while still being heavily armored. It'd give the strategy of what rooms and corridors you'd want to reinforce.
chrome pilot
walt has said the game is 2d
i understand that thrusters being encased in armor is unrealistic but that isn't the point of this conversation
also, ships lokking like that isn't too uncommon, space ships, real and fantacy often have large plates on the front for protction from debries and other ships
chilly smelt
YEAH the game is 2D I get that, but 2D game graphics doesn't = the actual universe portrayed in the game being 2 dimensional...
how is it not the point of the conversation?
of course ships could have more protection on the front if they want yes, with my suggestions you could still armor the front if you want, it doesn't change that. I however don't believe that it is common to see ships that are just boxes, unless you're referring to Borg cubes from star trek lol...
hallow osprey
I think you all are thinking too hard about the 2d vs 3d thing
The game is 2d except when 3d gives a convenient explanation as to how something works
And what things work due to some 3d explanation is more about balance than actual physics
The reason there aren't more deck weapons is a balance issue and not a 2d vs 3d issue
And the reason you can't target roof things and fire over armor is also a balance issue (armor doesn't count as roof height since it doesn't interfere with deck cannons)
Balance not physics example: you can fire over allies but not enemies with deck cannons
The universe lore is also like kinda 2d kinda 3d don't overthink it kinda thing imo
hallow osprey
I'll admit that thinking too hard about it is fun for asking Walt fun questions, but I don't think it's productive for actual mechanics ideas for the game