What new abilities would you like to see?

[Phoenix-D]

"IMHO MC should be smaller anyway, it doesn't sound realistic that even if you need to control a whole starbase your computer will be larger than a house."

It doesn't just have to control the ship; it has to -think- as well. Compared to the sizes of the other components, it's quite reasonable.

Phoenix-D

[Aloofi]

[quote]Originally posted by Graeme Dice:

Warp point defenses are a _good_ thing, and are hardly overpowered as they currently stand. You absolutely need to have some way to defend your territory, and individual planet defense is not possible due to the speeds with which ships have to be able to move to make the game finishable in less than six months.

I always play without defending any warp point, and its far more realistic, cause I have to protect every planet independently and always have a colonial fleet for system defense and counter-strokes. Protecting the warp points is WAY too EASY. And way too cheap.

So yeah, its a problem of taste. Or a diferent concept of realism.

[Aloofi]

Originally posted by orev_saara:
Actually, this is not hard to mod! I've been using this solution to fix the way the same size master computer runs a frigate and a starbase, here's how it works:

1 You make the cloaking device as big as you want for the big ships with appropriate supply usage, etc.

2 You create a series of mounts that make cloaking devices cheaper and smaller and use less supply, but give them all the appropriate maximum size field.

.

That's a great idea. Is it possible to limit the size to a maximum, like say, Cloaking can only be used in ships below 300 kts?

[orev_saara]

Yes. You'd have to make the basic cloaking device take up about 5000kT, or something equally unworkable, then put in a mount that shrinks it down to what you want that cannot be used on anything bigger than 300kT

[Andrés]

IMHO it does not make sense to make large ships unable to cloak but that's you can mod whatever you like.
Using the mount method you can make large ships have to spend a similar % of it's tonnage in the cloaking device.

[Aloofi]

Originally posted by orev_saara:
Yes. You'd have to make the basic cloaking device take up about 5000kT, or something equally unworkable, then put in a mount that shrinks it down to what you want that cannot be used on anything bigger than 300kT

Thanks man, that's a great idea.
Will the AI use it?
Do I have to tinker with AI files to make them use it?
I've never touched an AI file. I'm a newbie, you know.

[Aloofi]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
The thing about it is that it's almost universally true that a bigger ship will be better at the same tech level, simply because you can fit more onboard.

Yes, better, and unproportionaly expensier to build and maintain.

The Nimitz is considerably larger than any of the Battleships floated in WWII. It displaces 97,000 tons, while the Missouri displaces 45,000 tons. Modern ships are nearly twice as large as WWII ships.

You aren't comparing Carriers to Battleships, aren't you?.
No Battleship have been built after WW2. The Last american Battleships comisioned during WW2 were scrapped and the hulls used for Carriers. The largest warship in any fleet today its a Cruiser size.
The Battleship saw battle for the Last time in the Gulf War, and it was obvious that they have just become an ultra expensive platform to launch missiles, something that an AEGYS Cruiser do far better and cheaper.
Now Carriers, are a completely diferent ballgame. They do something nobody else can do, and they are pound by pound the expensiest floating structure ever build. The cost of one single Carrier is higher than the estimated price that NASA have for a permanent scientific colony on planet Mars. The maintainace of carriers is so high that the UK had to settle for the 3 mini Carriers they keep today.
That's why I believe that in SE4 big hulls have to be desproportionaly expensier to build and maintain, thus giving a chance to small ships to remain effective.