Fantastic idea and would add more depth to the game.

/signed

But you have to consider that the different weapons have their own "fight styles". A Beam-Weapon is faster and more accurate than the kinect-turrets. A kinect gun have this firepower cause they shot 25 shells during one round- but not everyone hit an enemy. And if you have enought beam firepower to destroy an enemy in the first round you dont have to be afraid for further casulties. Missles hit an enemy after 3 rounds with a hugh explosion so you have good chances to destroy damaged ships in one second.



And you should allways take a look at the defence modules of your enemies. The AI often only use kinect-armor or beam-shields. This means that only one salve of strong beam-guns can destroy a battleship, if this dont have any shild generators.



(And please excuse my english )

I also agree with this. But i think it makes the game to complicated if you have only 3 differnet weapons.

Well speaking of lasers, am the only one who was expecting a continuous beam weapons? To be honest, I really am not a fan of this kind of lasers we can see ingame. Has anyone seen a laser in real? It is a beam that fire really, really fast. Even a pulse laser is, well, made of pulsing beams.

+1 for this

Initially I agree, because the variation of weapons are in my opinion (at the moment) a bit to bland. Instead of division on firingprinciple, a division can be made on technologyprinciple and/or size. But more division would lead to more research fases and a possible unnecessary complication of shipdesign. To be brutally honest: the "vanilla" division is fine, a bit to bland to my taste, but I think a further division on weaponsresearch is something for modding.

Well speaking of lasers, am the only one who was expecting a continuous beam weapons? To be honest, I really am not a fan of this kind of lasers we can see ingame. Has anyone seen a laser in real? It is a beam that fire really, really fast. Even a pulse laser is, well, made of pulsing beams.

AngleWyrm wrote:
Weapons are currently very different:







Beam weapons are lousy in the late game, and Kinetics are easily defended against in the early game.

"Very different" is a bit of an overstatement tho... we have 3 types of weapons which dont change via research only by their primary stats. If you would give them different names, effects, maybe mechanics, it would spawn diversity and interesting differences, but the way it is currently.... just no.



Also, your diagram confirms what i've been saying since weeks: Kinetic weapons are god damned op

werewolf_nr wrote:
I totally second this.



Perhaps missiles prefer larger targets and kinetic weapons prefer small ships with beam being the "catch all"

I think that seems backward. Missiles can have guidance systems.

I've always had a problem with "research: Laser" and BAM you have a laser turret. I've always wanted to see "research laser" unlock laser weapons and have the choice of small, medium, large and SUPER LARGE! turrets, all with pros/cons.



A corvette could house 1 large turret or 2 medium or 4 small etc...



It could tie in with your base idea (although it strikes me as over complicating the ship building :S )

Weapons are currently very different:







Beam weapons appear to put out very little damage in the late game, and Kinetics are easily defended against in the early game.

So I had an idea to add an additional level of strategy to the game, to help alleviate the feeling of the old "who gets the biggest, most powerful ships/fleets wins" line of thought.



What if different weapons modules are more or less effective against bigger or smaller ship types? I'm thinking this would be kinda like the difference between a stinger missile and a big honking cruise missile. Obviously the cruise does more damage but it is meant for large targets, it cant hit small ones.



I was thinking that as you progress through a weapon-type tech tree, you get more powerful weapons, but what if they were only powerful against large ships like dreadnaughts and such? You would need smaller weapons to deal with smaller targets like early-game destroyers. Likewise, if you aren't careful, a fleet of small ships armed with heavy-duty weapons could tear a big dreadnaught to shreds if it is only armed with the big guns. It would force you to have to balance your fleet with ships that could handle lighter targets.



Any thoughts on that? Im thinking you wouldnt need to add new weapons, just add multipliers to existing ones.

gunnergoz wrote:
What would make the game more interesting would be if various resources could make different weapons have different effects, e.g. Missiles of the same tech level made with Hyperium might be more effective against small targets while Missiles of the same tech level but made of Antimatter might be more effective against large targets. Another example: Level 4 shields made of Titanium might resist Ruby Phasers better than Level 4 shields made of Strontium, which is optimized for use against Diamond Phasers.



The idea is to stay in the same paradigm (ballistic/energy/missile vs armor/shields/chaff) but to add variety by altering the resources going into the weapon's manufacture.

That is a fantastic idea! The rarer resources, if acquired, can go into making rare, more powerful weapons. It adds another dimension of strategy and makes acquiring scarce resources even more important then before. I likey!

What would make the game more interesting would be if various resources could make different weapons have different effects, e.g. Missiles of the same tech level made with Hyperium might be more effective against small targets while Missiles of the same tech level but made of Antimatter might be more effective against large targets. Another example: Level 4 shields made of Titanium might resist Ruby Phasers better than Level 4 shields made of Strontium, which is optimized for use against Diamond Phasers.



The idea is to stay in the same paradigm (ballistic/energy/missile vs armor/shields/chaff) but to add variety by altering the resources going into the weapon's manufacture.

carlosjuero wrote:
An interesting idea - "realism" wise it would mean that the slower speeds of heavier missiles/weapons cannot track the smaller, faster moving, ships. I don't know quite how this would work with the card based battle system though [sinceyoucan'tchoosespecificweapongroups/typesinabattle,justanoverallstrategy-ofcourseitcouldmeanaddingstrategies[likeLRaDNwoulduseaheavysalvoandchangetoPointDefensecloserin,somethinglikethatatleast]

Well, you should be playing cards based on your strengths. If I have a LR missile based fleet and am facing a mid/short range kinetic fleet; I will be playing offensive, damage boosting cards in the LR phase to maximize my strengths and defensive cards in the MR/SR phases to minimize their strengths.

Fonzerine wrote:
So I had an idea to add an additional level of strategy to the game, to help alleviate the feeling of the old "who gets the biggest, most powerful ships/fleets wins" line of thought.



What if different weapons modules are more or less effective against bigger or smaller ship types? I'm thinking this would be kinda like the difference between a stinger missile and a big honking cruise missile. Obviously the cruise does more damage but it is meant for large targets, it cant hit small ones.



I was thinking that as you progress through a weapon-type tech tree, you get more powerful weapons, but what if they were only powerful against large ships like dreadnaughts and such? You would need smaller weapons to deal with smaller targets like early-game destroyers. Likewise, if you aren't careful, a fleet of small ships armed with heavy-duty weapons could tear a big dreadnaught to shreds if it is only armed with the big guns. It would force you to have to balance your fleet with ships that could handle lighter targets.



Any thoughts on that? Im thinking you wouldnt need to add new weapons, just add multipliers to existing ones.

An interesting idea - "realism" wise it would mean that the slower speeds of heavier missiles/weapons cannot track the smaller, faster moving, ships. I don't know quite how this would work with the card based battle system though [sinceyoucan'tchoosespecificweapongroups/typesinabattle,justanoverallstrategy-ofcourseitcouldmeanaddingstrategies[likeLRaDNwoulduseaheavysalvoandchangetoPointDefensecloserin,somethinglikethatatleast]

KnightHawk wrote:
This is already the be case in many circumstances.

Lol, true.



Bismark

if you aren't careful, a fleet of small ships armed with heavy-duty weapons could tear a big dreadnaught to shreds if it is only armed with the big guns.

This is already the be case in many circumstances.

I totally second this.



Perhaps missiles prefer larger targets and kinetic weapons prefer small ships with beam being the "catch all"