Poll: Are the Changes to Ship design good?

[Emperor0Akim]

I am not that far yet as to have a broad selection of weapons, but I can say It would be useful to sub-categorize weapons research into related paths, like Energy, Kinetic, Non-Lethal( Ion & Tractor ), Ballistic

Due to new orbital mechanics ultra giant bases don't make sense anymore. , still colonies giving bonuses to possible construction sizes would be nice

[zgrssd]

It is realy hard to make a discussion if the argument of the other side boils down to "I want it becasue I want it".

If there was at least a instrumental goal in any of that, we might have a basis for a discussion. Even better if there was a terminal goal.

I want it, so my ship design can go a bit faster than the same design of everyone else at the same tech-level
So I can escape if I have to.

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?


I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

[Almora]

Yeah, lets test the fun this non restrictive system in DW:2 has.

Given the great choice between one Ion drive or two Ion drives.

Who of you removes one drive to improve other aspects of the ship ?

Spoiler -The following is an asshole comment, which does not add to the current discussion, but I could not help myself. So read at your own peril --
Maybe sub-light speed is just less important in DW:2 because ships don't have to catch up to fast moving moons anymore.

1. According to your example, it depends on if the player cares more about other stats, or fitting an extra weapon/shield generator on, or maybe another reactor and a cargo bay

2. Engines were but an example Noone is complaining JUST about the engines

[Emperor0Akim]

Reminder : I mostly speak from Early Game Experience and Tactics,
I know that Late-Game most of this tactics can be substitutet by having the better tech-level.

2. Engines were but an example Noone is complaining JUST about the engines

I know, but they are such a good and prominent example

But to personal time constraints I am not far enough in the game yet, that I had the luxury to try different weapon types or sizes.

1. According to your example, it depends on if the player cares more about other stats, or fitting an extra weapon/shield generator on, or maybe another reactor and a cargo bay

Yes, but is this not the core of this whole discussion ?

Hardcoded restrictions on Component Numbers and Sizes in additional conflict with overall size

vs.

Soft restrictions on Components through interlocking requirements and limited by overall size.

and how this influences personal design choices and playstyle ?

I just pushed the favorite example of this discussion into the extreme to highlight that this hard restriction actually removes choice from the player by making those choices only dependent on techlevel instead of
Min-Maxing your current techlevel to overcome an obstacle by being clever.

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Not if you account for hyper-block

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?

hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

[Emperor0Akim]

Trolling aside, it's actually a fair and important question, and the issue of fleet formation came up during the Beta. There have been significant improvements in that area, but, yeah, we're not there yet, although I am certain this will get better in later builds.

Until then, I'm afraid there is mostly just micro-management left, and the obvious - harmonizing speed across designs.

I just found this one, another fine point of how free ship design could save a lot of trouble.

[Almora]

Reminder : I mostly speak from Early Game Experience and Tactics,
I know that Late-Game most of this tactics can be substitutet by having the better tech-level.

2. Engines were but an example Noone is complaining JUST about the engines

I know, but they are such a good and prominent example

But to personal time constraints I am not far enough in the game yet, that I had the luxury to try different weapon types or sizes.

1. According to your example, it depends on if the player cares more about other stats, or fitting an extra weapon/shield generator on, or maybe another reactor and a cargo bay

Yes, but is this not the core of this whole discussion ?

Hardcoded restrictions on Component Numbers and Sizes in additional conflict with overall size

vs.

Soft restrictions on Components through interlocking requirements and limited by overall size.

and how this influences personal design choices and playstyle ?

I just pushed the favorite example of this discussion into the extreme to highlight that this hard restriction actually removes choice from the player by making those choices only dependent on techlevel instead of
Min-Maxing your current techlevel to overcome an obstacle by being clever.

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Not if you account for hyper-block

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?

hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

I think we agree with eachother lol, I also want the soft restrictions to allow for more interesting use of current technology, rather than just being forced to tech up. Researching higher tech will always be a good options, but effectively using what you have is both more engaging, and has better story potential, especially early game

[Emperor0Akim]

I think we agree with eachother lol, I also want the soft restrictions to allow for more interesting use of current technology, rather than just being forced to tech up. Researching higher tech will always be a good options, but effectively using what you have is both more engaging, and has better story potential, especially early game

Thank you,
The problem I see is, that it might be impossible to change DW2 back to softer component restrictions, due to the way ships are implemented now.

A possible solution could be to have components in different sizes, similiar to weapons.

[Almora]

I am not that far yet as to have a broad selection of weapons, but I can say It would be useful to sub-categorize weapons research into related paths, like Energy, Kinetic, Non-Lethal( Ion & Tractor ), Ballistic

Due to new orbital mechanics ultra giant bases don't make sense anymore. , still colonies giving bonuses to possible construction sizes would be nice

I agree, though maybe different categories that are more based on the tech behind them

beam weaponry
Guided munitions
Energy projectiles
Kinetic projectiles

Then have branching paths from there (maybe a few more categories, but I think this covers the bases)

[Almora]

I think we agree with eachother lol, I also want the soft restrictions to allow for more interesting use of current technology, rather than just being forced to tech up. Researching higher tech will always be a good options, but effectively using what you have is both more engaging, and has better story potential, especially early game

Thank you,
The problem I see is, that it might be impossible to change DW2 back to softer component restrictions, due to the way ships are implemented now.

A possible solution could be to have components in different sizes, similiar to weapons.

I've had an idea to solve this in the works for a bit, I'd switch the restrictive hardpoints for "Exterior" hardpoints

-These hardpoints would be the same as we have now, but with no module restriction.

-Weapons and engines would need to go on these

-Shields and sensors would perhaps get a biff from going here, either in functionality, or just reduced size due to being exterior

-Similar functionality could be given to other components, but due to limited slots you can only have so many

-should be easy to convert from current system

[zgrssd]

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Not if you account for hyper-block

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?

hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

When you have to account for Hyper Block, that Frigatte will propably die to one salvo.
Over dozens of deaths, it might save 1 or 2. Not realy worth fuzzing about it.

I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

While you are still approaching, I already varporized you with longrange weapons.
It is barely a offset for having to use smaller guns.

[Almora]

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Not if you account for hyper-block

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?

hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

When you have to account for Hyper Block, that Frigatte will propably die to one salvo.
Over dozens of deaths, it might save 1 or 2. Not realy worth fuzzing about it.

I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

While you are still approaching, I already varporized you with longrange weapons.
It is barely a offset for having to use smaller guns.

I'm glad you have your own play style, but the thing you aren't getting is that People want to play different from you. Noone is sad that they feel underpowered, they don't think they're crippled without these options. They just want these options as they think it would be more fun. Just because you can play how you want within this system doesn't mean everyone can

[zgrssd]

Not if you account for hyper-block



hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

When you have to account for Hyper Block, that Frigatte will propably die to one salvo.
Over dozens of deaths, it might save 1 or 2. Not realy worth fuzzing about it.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

While you are still approaching, I already varporized you with longrange weapons.
It is barely a offset for having to use smaller guns.

I'm glad you have your own play style, but the thing you aren't getting is that People want to play different from you. Noone is sad that they feel underpowered, they don't think they're crippled without these options. They just want these options as they think it would be more fun. Just because you can play how you want within this system doesn't mean everyone can

And the thing you are not getting is that people can play differently from either of us using the existing rules.

As I said before: If you think you know how to do it better, go and mod it in. Then you can show us how it is superior.

[zgrssd]

Also just a reminder, that only 16% of all people voting here want a different approach.

I am sorry, but if such a small minority wants something, the path is clear:
Mod the game to be as you want it.
At worst you got things how you want them to be. At best, you now can show us why your approach is superior.

[Emperor0Akim]

Yesterday I found another example shows the weakness of the Design System

The Resort Station, though civilian in intend, is my best armed station all around.
Because the size of the station it is big enough to support a complete outfit of weapons, armor and shields,
while the basic slots are barely enough to equip the components required for the Resorts Basic Function.

Meaning, Entertainment, Medicine, Tradecenter and actual Passenger Compartments.

[Almora]

Yesterday I found another example shows the weakness of the Design System

The Resort Station, though civilian in intend, is my best armed station all around.
Because the size of the station it is big enough to support a complete outfit of weapons, armor and shields,
while the basic slots are barely enough to equip the components required for the Resorts Basic Function.

Meaning, Entertainment, Medicine, Tradecenter and actual Passenger Compartments.

Lmao, that is certainly telling. The entirety of ship design, from components to hulls, needs to be balanced or tweaked

[Almora]

Also just a reminder, that only 16% of all people voting here want a different approach.

I am sorry, but if such a small minority wants something, the path is clear:
Mod the game to be as you want it.
At worst you got things how you want them to be. At best, you now can show us why your approach is superior.

and 22% of people, including myself, said "I'm not sure" because the system has potential, but lacks proper balancing or nuance. Ultimately this poll was made a bit ago, if we asked this now, or a more specific question than "do you like it?", we'd probably see far more support for change. many on the discord are also having qualms with component research and ship design.

I'm real optimistic about the game, but nearly half the playerbase see's drawbacks with the current implementation of the system. So I think change is a good thing, and healthy for a game, especially when this one wouldn't negatively impact those that DO already like it

[AKicebear]

So I think change is a good thing, and healthy for a game, especially when this one wouldn't negatively impact those that DO already like it

How would changing the game mechanics not negatively impact those that prefer them? They'll just pretend they are still constrained?

We get it - you want it another way. Don't try to tell us we are wrong for liking it the new way, and to just suck it up as you insist abandoning the current game mechanics.

[LordMM]

Reminder : I mostly speak from Early Game Experience and Tactics,
I know that Late-Game most of this tactics can be substitutet by having the better tech-level.

2. Engines were but an example Noone is complaining JUST about the engines

I know, but they are such a good and prominent example

But to personal time constraints I am not far enough in the game yet, that I had the luxury to try different weapon types or sizes.

1. According to your example, it depends on if the player cares more about other stats, or fitting an extra weapon/shield generator on, or maybe another reactor and a cargo bay

Yes, but is this not the core of this whole discussion ?

Hardcoded restrictions on Component Numbers and Sizes in additional conflict with overall size

vs.

Soft restrictions on Components through interlocking requirements and limited by overall size.

and how this influences personal design choices and playstyle ?

I just pushed the favorite example of this discussion into the extreme to highlight that this hard restriction actually removes choice from the player by making those choices only dependent on techlevel instead of
Min-Maxing your current techlevel to overcome an obstacle by being clever.

If you are doing any escapes, it is going to be at FTL speeds.
The Initiation time of a Gerax ins 14 seconds.
The cooldown is 20 seconds.

Not if you account for hyper-block

Take the point the ship decided "hey, I have to run".
How much distance will that one extra engine give you over 14 seconds?
How many hits will that bit of extra distance going to avoid?

hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.

I only use a lot of engines on ships with a focus on shorter ranged weapons. So I can quickly engage the enemy.
If they have any decent mid-long range, they never use much more then token engines. Because they got range and can propably fire 360° because they use missiles.

And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

I think we agree with eachother lol, I also want the soft restrictions to allow for more interesting use of current technology, rather than just being forced to tech up. Researching higher tech will always be a good options, but effectively using what you have is both more engaging, and has better story potential, especially early game

Removing hard restrictions will make the game like Distant Worlds Universe were even your escorts' are sized 800. I love the current restrictions. Removing the hard points will make the design system utterly useless as eventually someone will find that one magical design which can fit for all the roles. Sry, but I am highly against going back to the old system.

[LordMM]

So I think change is a good thing, and healthy for a game, especially when this one wouldn't negatively impact those that DO already like it

How would changing the game mechanics not negatively impact those that prefer them? They'll just pretend they are still constrained?

We get it - you want it another way. Don't try to tell us we are wrong for liking it the new way, and to just suck it up as you insist abandoning the current game mechanics.

Judging from the poll, Majority like the current changes or do not have an opinion on it as of yet. Changes will have to remain. The last thing DW2 needs is to behave like Stellaris and make massive changes every 6 months.

However, I am ok with keeping the external hardpoints and making other minor changes based on what people want.

[Almora]

Reminder : I mostly speak from Early Game Experience and Tactics,
I know that Late-Game most of this tactics can be substitutet by having the better tech-level.



I know, but they are such a good and prominent example

But to personal time constraints I am not far enough in the game yet, that I had the luxury to try different weapon types or sizes.



Yes, but is this not the core of this whole discussion ?

Hardcoded restrictions on Component Numbers and Sizes in additional conflict with overall size

vs.

Soft restrictions on Components through interlocking requirements and limited by overall size.

and how this influences personal design choices and playstyle ?

I just pushed the favorite example of this discussion into the extreme to highlight that this hard restriction actually removes choice from the player by making those choices only dependent on techlevel instead of
Min-Maxing your current techlevel to overcome an obstacle by being clever.



Not if you account for hyper-block



hopefully the one hit that otherwise destroyed my hyperdrive.
also distance decreases damage and to-hit ratio so every bit of distance avoids more hits.



And finally you got to where you are making my point for me.
Long Range is worthless if my bigger and stronger enemy is actually able to close in with me.

I think we agree with eachother lol, I also want the soft restrictions to allow for more interesting use of current technology, rather than just being forced to tech up. Researching higher tech will always be a good options, but effectively using what you have is both more engaging, and has better story potential, especially early game

Removing hard restrictions will make the game like Distant Worlds Universe were even your escorts' are sized 800. I love the current restrictions. Removing the hard points will make the design system utterly useless as eventually someone will find that one magical design which can fit for all the roles. Sry, but I am highly against going back to the old system.

No not at all, the only hard restrictions we want gone are the limits to which type of module can go in each slot. Size would stay the exact same, I like the size limits.

The problem is that you can't currently specialize your ships for specific roles, I can't have a frigate with 3 shield generators, 2 armor and some point defense at the cost of size and energy availability in order to be my tanks.. meanwhile equipping my escorts with 3 missile batteries/railguns to make them mini artillery isn't an option either.

Thus we get stuck in a "bigger is better" design system where bigger ships Trump fleet cohesion because more module allowances and size.

I still want to keep a hard limit on size, and keep energy requirements strict, and we'll still need to balance crew and supplies as well. I just think the module type restrictions are stupid.