none of you are getting what I'm saying. I'm asking why do I have to take more damage than a ship half my size if I have X2 firepower, X2 mobility, and X3 cannons?

because your bigger and thusly its harder to miss so more of the laser simply hits, and because once the laser has penetrated the first layer theres more layers to go through. "bigger they are the harder they fall" concept. as for why it was introduced, some people were complaining about crew not being worth anything..........

What are the chances that everytime I fire I miss with half of my laser.

Lets put this in World War II navy perspective. If I put a Battleship next to a clemson destroyer youre saying that I cant blow up that DD in one hit? The battleship has 20 inch shells that explode and are armor peircing and go 1300 feet per second while the Clemson has 5 inch shells that go 700 ft per second. The battleship has FEET of armor while the clemson maybe has, 3 inches. Battleship wins. Your saying the battleship takes more damage then the Clemson because, its bigger.

Yes but the battle ship has much more armor and was much easier to hit, and in most cases a destroyer could survive a few hits, depending on the armor that it had on. The point is that if you have no armor on your ship then you are a large cruse ship with lots of weapons, you can hit hard but will sink when hit because you can not absorb an impact.

Additionally a destroyer would likely fire several salvos for each fired by the battleship.

Well if the whole point of this new battle mechanic is to be realistic then why not make it so that more armor= less damage taken? And why not make so that more guns=greater chance of 100% dmg?

Armor is the ability to absorb damage, a battleship took as much damage from being hit by a shell, but it has more armor so it must be hit more to be destroyed. Think of the battle as a series of shots back and forth for each attack. Defense makes it harder to hit as you are moving faster, your weapons allow your hits to do more damage and your shields and armor tell you how much damage you can absorb.

ok i think we just got to leave the whole sciency part behind at this point and just admit that this change is needed to make crew more valuable and if your taking to much damage get more/better hull.

Here's a less science-y and more logical approach to size vs. armor:

Ship 'A' has 500 decks and 500 armor. This means that ship 'A' has 1 armor per deck.
Ship 'B' has 50 decks and 250 armor. This means that ship 'B' has 5 armor per deck.

If you shoot each one with 4 autocannons (1 damage each), which ship suffers a hull breach first? Ship 'A' has four (!) hull breaches, and ship 'B' has none.

Add armor, and you'll be fine.

As a better example of what I said:
Ship 'A' has 500 decks and 100 armor. This means that ship 'A' has 1/5 armor per deck. Also has 500 attack and 100 defense
Ship 'B' has 50 decks and 50 armor. This means that ship 'B' has 1 armor per deck. Also has 100 attack and 100 defense

Why cant I blow them out of the water if I have 10 times more firepower than they have armor? And why can't I win when I still have more armor than them?

It's because you're shooting at the same time. Since your armor is thinner (even though there's more value), it's much easier for you to become disabled first. Of course, in that example, I think you'd probably win.

I personally have a very large ship (level 55, 244 decks), and I had to install armor as soon as the change happened. But I only had to install ONE hull module (+120 armor, 5 spaces) to even things back out.

From this change, a few problems was fixed
BEFORE ----- AFTER
1. Useless crew -> More useful
2. Useless shields/hulls -> Usable shields/hull


Noticeable problems:
High level with super stats dealing too low damage to low level.

BUT, before this, the following could happen (useless hull/shield problem)
Player1: Decks 1000 Att 2000, def 100, 2000 hull, 2000 shields
Player2: Decks 250 att 500, def 100, 50 hull, 50 shields
Whoever attacks who, the result should be something like this:
Player1 loses 800 shields, Player2 loses 20 shields.

With the recent combat change, Player1 one will completely destroy Player2 while Player1 would only be hit perhaps less than 100 damage.




I think the main issue arises here is a lot of medium to high rank players have ridiculously high attack in comparison to the hull+shields+defense they have installed. Once this grace period is over (once everyone has sufficient protection), then this debate will subside. ( I recommend something like 2 defense and 2 hull per deck if possible)

It is true hitting super small ships yield low damage, but if they are dealing way more damage back at you, it is time to re-look your defenses and pump them up to a decent range. (or perhaps stop hitting those tiny ships??)
IF those small ships could be one-shotted due to extreme attack stat, traps won't protect them and they would have no form of protection against one-shotters. (instant death)

Try to think of the helpless small ships too. Not everyone has a big ship out there.

I like the battleship analogy. Not every shell has to hit but when you are hitting with an explosive the size of a small car, the small ship should be obliterated. The same in our game. I have never said every shot has to hit but when you shoot 1500 attack power at something with a combined hull and deck of 400, it should be obliterated.

Again, I am not complaining about the amount of damage I take from a smaller ship or how easy my behemoth is to hit. I am complaining because when I hit the little guy it barely seems to count in proportion to the power I am hitting him with. He hits me with 100% of his power and I hit him with 15% of mine. No matter how you look at it, thats ridiculous unless you just want to make it easier on the little guys and don't care about the game treating everyone equally.

Perhaps the following changes may help:

Once someone gets hit capped damage, the other party gets hit much less.
Instead of 50-15 damage (assume 50 is cap),
it should be 50-5 damage (so the player dealing capped damage gets hit less.) It would seem like both party is only firing 30% of their maximum attack strength.
(XX-XX) First XX = damage dealt, second = damage received

OR:
hit cap damage = refund some energy


I am not saying the current system is fair, it is biased towards small ships, but one-shooting people should still be prevented.

Kirk tells Scotty, "Make sure you only fire with one of the 11 phaser banks and make it at 20% power."
Kirk tells Scotty, "Also, lower the intensity of our tier 5 shield so it doesn't absorb damage just takes it."

Scotty tells Kirk, "AYE AYE CAPTAIN! (then he shakes his head and scratches uncontrollably)

Klingon shuttle fires full intensity disruptors and hits the Enterprise for 200 damage (due to the fact that the shields were set to just take damage versus displacing or absorbing the impact). (200 shields remaining)

Enterprise returns fire with 1 of 11 weapons at 20% power. (Hit! The shuttle's shields take 5 damage (45 shields remaining).)

Klingon fires again ... E = 0 shields left

E fires again ... K = 40 shields left

K fires again ... E = 200 points of hull damage (800 left)

E fires again ... K = 35 shields left

K fires again ... E = 600 hull
E ... K 30 shield, K ... E 400 hull
E ... K 25 shield, K ... E 200 hull
E ... K 20 shield, K ... E 0 hull

Klingon sends a comm message, "Today you die because you were fighting my shuttle craft with a Cruiser Class fool!"

Again I bring it up. What are the chances that EVERY SINGLE TIME YOUA FIRE you hit with half a laser. And, even if the laser half hits, dont forget gravity. This is completly, illogical. So, I take my Dreadnought class fited with 4 Heavy Disruptors, 5 microwarp nacells, and I go up against a scout with one heavy mass driver and one Autopilot console mk II, and the scout does more damage to me? Again, illogical. So, because he is small and hard to hit, but if I hit him with one single cannon, it is logical that he would be completly destroyed.

Here is what I believe it is. They know anyone with a big ship has time invested in this game and isn't going to abandon it. The little guys might give up if they got pounded like that. They know we are sticking around so they don't care about what we think. They need to keep the little guys interested so the game grows so they stack the deck in the little guys favor.

I could be wrong but that is certainly the way it seems.

what you are saying is "ridiculous". as i remember it you were the one also crying about the older damage system where hull doesn't matter. well guess what... hull DOES matter now. if you cant adapt to the change you will be extinct. the new system is much more realistic and takes into account everything without any damage modifications other than the damage cap. it is assumed that as you level up and get more decks, you will also put some RP into HULL and DEF. having 200-300 hull at a high level is like paper. if you have that you deserve to die. 200-300 for a low level is high. the cap prevents easy one shotting like the old system, but does NOT unfairly raise your damage taken. since you are a very high level, you are likely reaching that players damage cap... so why cry if you can kill them easily in 4-5 hits or less.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I looked through my old posts and couldn't find myself crying about hull at all. If anything I have always said I preferred hull over shield. For the record my hull is well over 1000.

So your saying its more realistic huh? It is a little more realistic but look at my post above.