Incoming pvp changes

[GraXXoR]

4 hours ago, Underhook said:

I dont see anything in the changes that would prevent the cube remaining as the best design

agreed, it worked so well for the borg and they had 1000s of races' technology to choose from... ?

[CptLoRes]

13 hours ago, Underhook said:

I dont see anything in the changes that would prevent the cube remaining as the best design

That is why I am pushing for cross section affecting radar detection range, and relative speed between ships and not just distance alone also affecting hit ratio.

A slim lightweight ship with higher acceleration and maneuverability, should be MUCH harder to hit then it is today.

 

But all this aside, there is no arguing the fact that a cube/sphere is a very valid design in friction less space..

[HellToupee]

5 hours ago, CptLoRes said:

That is why I am pushing for cross section affecting radar detection range, and relative speed between ships and not just distance alone also affecting hit ratio.

A slim lightweight ship with higher acceleration and maneuverability, should be MUCH harder to hit then it is today.

 

But all this aside, there is no arguing the fact that a cube/sphere is a very valid design in friction less space..

Angular velocity also affects hit ratio, the hardest part is the lack of information tho you have no info on vectors, closure rate or angular veclocity you can only eye ball it

[Underhook]

14 hours ago, CptLoRes said:

That is why I am pushing for cross section affecting radar detection range, and relative speed between ships and not just distance alone also affecting hit ratio.

A slim lightweight ship with higher acceleration and maneuverability, should be MUCH harder to hit then it is today.

 

But all this aside, there is no arguing the fact that a cube/sphere is a very valid design in friction less space..

Hmm, the shape of the ship should not affect acceleration, braking or handling at all in space.

However weight should affect it (although not top speed)

As far as rotation goes.  A lighter weight would be easier to rotate but having the adjusters further out would also help ..... but keeping the majority of the weight near the centre would also help.

Soooooooo, I think the most maneuverable ship would have a very large cross section but have the majority of its weight at the centre.  Like your slim ship with long arms extending out with adjustors on the end.

Since the aiming is done by computer, they really should never miss, unless we change speed or maneuver whilst the enemy projectiles are in flight.  I really thought this was going to be the benefit of lasers.

[Novean-71071]

On 10/30/2020 at 1:46 PM, JohnnyTazer said:

Spreezy just did an interview with entropy. YouTube video will be up tomorrow he said. Some notes to incoming pvp changes..

 

- Radar lock range won't be tied to cores. A L radar will lock all cores equal distance as base.

- Cross section will take into account hit chance. To what degree we do not know.

- Choices on what elements you put on will matter. Entropy said "L weapons wont go on xs cores anymore, but to what degree we dont know, as in If you can use them still on a S or M core, but definitely not on XS core.

 

Elements limit on Core size also will be the biggest change to the meta cube.

[Zamiel7]

The first posted concept of not limiting lock distance to size is, for my money, the absolute best and most necessary change. It is an absolutely overwhelming advantage that XS ships can hit S, M, and L ships from outside of a range that the S, M, and L can even lock the XS. It's such a massive advantage that you really don't even need to worry about preventing XS ships from using large guns because that was never honestly the root of the XS meta problem: the lock distances were. For the sake of balance, lock speed is the only factor that should be affected by the size of a ship.

[Danaus]

I still want them to institute a change to the regular Command Chair to allow it to have BOTH Radar types linked to it. The Command Chair cannot link to ANY weapons - its a pilot seat only. Even the Hoverseat can have SOME weapons linked to it, but the Command Chair? Zero. Allow the Command Chair to have both Atmospheric & Space Radar tied to it so that the pilot can - surprise - navigate around potential obstacles ahead. Or even be able to acknowledge when those on weapon seats say "Turn us towards XYZ ship to attack". As it sits, the pilot at times might go "Who? Where? My radar is jammed at the moment! I got the wrong one linked!" For a non-combat seat, that's a restriction that should definitely go.

[Novean-71071]

The biggest Challenge for NQ is not to make the Meta of CubeXS to meta CubeM or CubeL

How should they do it ? Limit Voxel m3, Limit Elements, Limit everything and make the players not pay with their cargo for this problems again.

[CptLoRes]

12 hours ago, Underhook said:

Hmm, the shape of the ship should not affect acceleration, braking or handling at all in space.

However weight should affect it (although not top speed)

As far as rotation goes.  A lighter weight would be easier to rotate but having the adjusters further out would also help ..... but keeping the majority of the weight near the centre would also help.

Soooooooo, I think the most maneuverable ship would have a very large cross section but have the majority of its weight at the centre.  Like your slim ship with long arms extending out with adjustors on the end.

Since the aiming is done by computer, they really should never miss, unless we change speed or maneuver whilst the enemy projectiles are in flight.  I really thought this was going to be the benefit of lasers.

That is not what I meant. I was just putting all the factors into one sentence. Slim (smaller hit chance and radar profile), lightweight for acceleration and maneuverability etc.

The inertia matrix shown in the build tools, would suggest that maneuverability is already affected by where the CoM is. But the calculation of the CoM positon leaves much to be desired, and as far as I know there is no proper mass distribution in constructs.

[Zamiel7]

18 minutes ago, Eleete said:

The biggest Challenge for NQ is not to make the Meta of CubeXS to meta CubeM or CubeL

How should they do it ? Limit Voxel m3, Limit Elements, Limit everything and make the players not pay with their cargo for this problems again.

While I agree that NQ should be working against this meta as best they can, suggesting that they broadly "limit" things sort of flies in the face of the game's player-driven, sandbox ethos. Freedom for players to build the ships they want to build and do the things they want to do carries a far higher premium.

[Novean-71071]

1 hour ago, Zamiel7 said:

While I agree that NQ should be working against this meta as best they can, suggesting that they broadly "limit" things sort of flies in the face of the game's player-driven, sandbox ethos. Freedom for players to build the ships they want to build and do the things they want to do carries a far higher premium.

I am not suggesting. They said they will implement it as soon as possible. Its a quote from their last vid.

[Zamiel7]

10 hours ago, Eleete said:

I am not suggesting. They said they will implement it as soon as possible. Its a quote from their last vid.

The only specific limiting factor Entropy mentioned in the video was in regards to weapon sizes, i.e. it won't be possible to put large weapons on an XS core. He also tentatively suggested that weapon sizes might correspond to core sizes, but that is the only specific change he mentioned was coming. He did briefly mention potentially limiting elements, but only briefly and likely in relationship to a larger redesign around construct energy management or something similar. There was no mention of limiting voxels or "everything" as you suggested. 

[Busterguy]

The changes that were said in the interview is a great start to balance out pvp. I'm sure when it gets deployed they can see how it does and make more changes if needed. 
All i can say is better start your trainings for Medium and small weapons
 

[Novean-71071]

2 hours ago, Zamiel7 said:

The only specific limiting factor Entropy mentioned in the video was in regards to weapon sizes, i.e. it won't be possible to put large weapons on an XS core. He also tentatively suggested that weapon sizes might correspond to core sizes, but that is the only specific change he mentioned was coming. He did briefly mention potentially limiting elements, but only briefly and likely in relationship to a larger redesign around construct energy management or something similar. There was no mention of limiting voxels or "everything" as you suggested. 

We already have 1 radar per chair so lets see what the future brings Eve is doing extremely well with the way fitting works. Like energy/items in a relation.

[Zamiel7]

As a veteran of EVE, I can vouch that the energy management system and fitting in that game is reasonably well implemented! That being said, I'm curious how a game with start to finish player ship creation will approach imposing reasonable limits without squashing creativity!

[Anopheles]

Complaining about pvp now is like complaining about the colour of a wall that's not been painted yet.

[Novean-71071]

2 hours ago, Zamiel7 said:

As a veteran of EVE, I can vouch that the energy management system and fitting in that game is reasonably well implemented! That being said, I'm curious how a game with start to finish player ship creation will approach imposing reasonable limits without squashing creativity!

we dont know what we will have but its not ok ship to carry weapons bigger than the ship itself

[Jackblackplays]

On 10/30/2020 at 11:46 AM, JohnnyTazer said:

Spreezy just did an interview with entropy. YouTube video will be up tomorrow he said. Some notes to incoming pvp changes..

 

- Radar lock range won't be tied to cores. A L radar will lock all cores equal distance as base.

- Cross section will take into account hit chance. To what degree we do not know.

- Choices on what elements you put on will matter. Entropy said "L weapons wont go on xs cores anymore, but to what degree we dont know, as in If you can use them still on a S or M core, but definitely not on XS core.

 

Death to XS cube ...

the Rise of the L cube