ZX-2096
- 1000-2000
- 2000-3000
- 3000-4000
- more than 4000
0 voters
ZX-2099
- 1000-2000
- 2000-3000
- 3000-4000
- more than 4000
0 voters
Sorry cuz i don’t know how to put multiple poll in a post ;-;
2 Likes
Nah, not this
I mean that i don’t know how to make 2-3 polls in a post, not multiple choice
2 Likes
To be fair, Think of a special ability to put in this spaceship so it’s worth the cost.
It’s easy. just make each poll command put in different lines.
1 Like
Tried but failed
This is very simple to figure out. All families aside from H&Cs are roughly in the same price range. Around 3.3k to 4.1k depending on the ship.
I don’t really get why you picked the speed values you did (at least in terms of the numbers being weird). I’m also not certain if you intend for these ships to have instant movement in non-massive environments or not.
As for the weapon system… h.
First off, manually implementing so many new volleys for all weapons is not feasible. This is why bombers work the way they do. Unless IA or someone comes up with some crazy algorithm that can create logically sound volleys based just on existing weapon data, this is almost certainly a no-go.
Aside from this, I’d argue that it’s not a particularly good thing for a ship to provide uneven benefits to different weapons. Bombers suffer from this issue to some extent, but fixes to their algorithm and changes to weapons have improved that aspect to the point where it isn’t really much of a problem.
All of the disadvantages you’ve proposed just seem like gimmicks. Especially the arbitrary limitations on modules and the tier requirement. No other ship has such restrictions, so why should these?
5 Likes
Forgive me for saying this as it sounds a bit stupid. I get that you are trying to show disadvantages of some ideas. but it’s not better to assume that he is just slapping any shit to make it get into the game.
No ones starts perfect and obviosuly you will find a lot of mistakes in it. So I hope you consider it if possible.
that Amazing Nice Idea
2 Likes
So what do you think i should do to eliminate these downsides?
Scrap this idea and think of a better one. Sorry if it sounds harsh but the idea is poorly thought-out. It feels like a bomber but it has much less damage output for faster speed. The volleys are hella flawed, for example lightning on model 1 and 2 deals same damage at fp10 compared to a muller. And you’re dealing with 120% higher overheat, slower speed, huge hitbox(I assume equivalent to bomber?). Yet somehow, you get absolutely no benefit? And for whatever reason, model 1 and 2 have identical volleys whereas model 3 has different ones…I don’t understand why you purposefully made models 1 and 2 so weak. Like, okay, bomber also has lower damage than mullers at very specific power levels for very few weapons. But bomber is simply 2 weapons of the same kind combined together, it’s not quite manually balanced and therefore it makes sense for it to be flawed. This ship you’re suggesting has manually made volleys, why would you purposefully make them this flawed?
And obviously manually made volleys will be a hell for IA to make. That’s like 15 weapons, 12 power levels for almost all of them and IA would also have to make two variants, one for model 1 and 2, and one for model 3. You get where I’m going with this. It’s too much effort for what is essentially a slightly different version of the bombers family. The worse overheat just makes the family worse and there is no reason for it to be a thing. The requirements are also totally unreasonable and I don’t see why they exist in the first place.
Overall this is basically what I said earlier but in much more detail. The images you provided are cool and all, but nothing else is done right regarding this suggestion. A ship family that is basically faster bombers with less dps isn’t anything new. If anything, that’s literally the purpose of cheaper bx models - faster but less dps.
5 Likes
Ok. Also thanks for your support!
3 Likes
No one starts Perfect.
of course you can see a lot of mistakes, give him sometime to fix what’s wrong.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.