First off i would just like to say that this game is everything i hoped for and that i admire the level of customization this game has. I offer my insight into things that in my opinion dont work well , so to make the game better and more interesting.
This thread might seem a bit complicated or long for some because its explained in detail, i would like you to say if you are gonna repply something how well did you understood it.
If you dont want to bother reading all this, just read the summary.
The issue starts with the difference betwen cruiser laser and cruiser quantum blaster, but what i aim to show are deeper issues in balancing modules.
Does anyone actually use quantum blasters? No? Why? They are slightly cheaper (85 vs 113 cost) , their main advantage is low energy (3) versus (11) of cruiser laser, its has slightly lower range then cruiser laser but slightly higher tracking speed so there they are even. They also have compareable armor and shield penetration. They are inferior to cruiser lasers in their damage pher second or DPS:
8/0.6 sec= 13.33 DPS
20/0.43 sec= 46.5 DPS.
So the DPS of a quantum blaster is around 3.5 times less then cruiser laser. But they are also around 3.5 time less expensive in energy.
It makes sense right? Less energy, less DPS, its balance right?
Well it would be balance if energy consumption was the central resource in which you actually determine how much a module is worth. But its not, its the price of the module.
Well ok: the price of the module is 85 (13.33 DPS) versus 113 (46.5DPS). This is 0.16 DPS pher unit of money, versus 0.41 DPS pher unit of money. The second weapon ( cruiser laser) is around 2.5 times more effective money wise, and efficiency of a module or a ship is measured only through money, so this means 2.5 times effective.
Wait ,what about the energy cost? I mean cruiser lasers cost more energy right? And more energy cost more money right? So the 0.41 DPS is actually lower since energy cost money.
Ok, im sure the adittional energy cost will make things even,and to make it even we can expect that total cost of a weapon + the energy cost you have to pay to operate that weapon should be proportional to its weapons DPS. So if DPS ratio is 3.5 so should be its cost. The current cost ratio is 113/85 = 1.33
To be 3.5 ratio we expect something like 350/100. 350-113= 237, so around 273 of the total cost should be its energy, which is almost 200% of the cost of the weapon.
So how much does 11 energy actually cost? We have power generator III that cost 229 and produces 66 energy. This is 0.29 pher point of money. So 11 energy costs 0.29*11=3.2 money? WHAT ? so energy cost of a weapon is 3% of its original value, instead of 200%?
my point is , so what if some weapons need alot of energy , you just add stronger generator for basically insignificant cost. ENERGY GENERATORS SHOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE. like 30 times more expensive.
Wait , but isnt adittional generator gonna cost you aditional slot?
Yes and so what ,I can have 6 weapon slots that have 3.5 times more DPS and use 2 generators , or use 7 weapon slots that have 1 times DPS and use 1 generator.
3.5* 6= 19.5 damage
7*1 =7 damage
which is still around 3 times more damage for almost the same amount of money. Adittional generator is 229 instead of 85 cost weapon, and difference between other 6 weapons is 113-85= 28.
Total difference in cost is 229 - 85 + 28*6= 312
A cruiser size ship will cost around 3000 and 312 less money is around 10% of its total cost.
So basically you get 3 times more damage for 10% more cost.
7 cruiser lasers
4 multiphasic shields
1 reflective shield
2 lightweight crusier engines
2 power generator III
1 free slot
7 Cruiser blasters
4 multiphacis shields
1 reflective shield
2 lightweight crusier engines
2 basic power generators
1 free slot
and the difference is 3.5 times more damage.
this is real design and you can test it.
even if the quantum blasters were FREE the ship would still cost like 1700.
1700 versus 2700 but 3.5 times less damage.
You can get more ships that cost 1700 and thus more shields or defenses, but the difference in damage still makes things unbalanced.
aaaah you get the point.
The same conclusions could be taken for crew resource.
THE IMPORTANT STUFF
Weapons that have high DPS like cruiser laser cost more energy or crew but still have simmilar cost of money with the weapons that are low DPS like quantum blaster but cheap in energy and crew… are way better and imbalanced towards second type of weapons. For the sole reason that we pay energy and crew very very cheap. The true and only price you pay for a weapon is the one where it says “COST” and the only eficiency you should look at is the one that says DPS pher cost of money.
Which brings me to my next point. ARMOUR
Someone would say armour uses no crew or energy so its effectively cheaper since it does not need large crew compartements or energy generators, and thus its high module price. Yes , only thing ,CHEAP energy generators and cheap crew compartements make this feature non existant.
The best armour cost like 260 pher module , where shields i use cost 160. Shields have alot more total HP includindg shield strength, and regeneration ,and resistance that does not decay as they get damaged. I think you all know how ineffective armour is as a main source of defence, even with armour regenerators. The only use for it as i can tell are armour tanks and even those can be bypased with “retaliate” order. Putting small amounts of armour on cruisers to protect from fighters is also ineffective because its to damn expensive for a module that will eventually give to "critical " hits. I never use armor on my cruisers , which makes them cheaper so i have the money to use for something that will actually protect my cruiser better like AA fighters, or simply more cruisers.
But i dont have to tell you this:
Armour is used as i can tell only with armour tanks in large amounts, medim amount of armour is ineffective since it offers low protection that burns quickly for to much money. Minimum armor against fighters is questionable since it raises the cost of a cruiser significantly. Its better to use no armour on cruisers but with some AA for that price.
And to talk about armour on frigates… -.- , simply ineffective , to expensive. My best frigate cost around 700 , and its the main reason why its the best, because i can have shit load of them, and ofcourse it has no armour.
I would really like to have armour as an option for basic defence.
Quick fix for these issues in my book is :
1 make energy and crew compartements alot more expensive
2 reduce the cost of armour
2 Increase the points of armour can absorb by double but reduce its stacking efficiency to like 0.9 so that armour tanks still have same armour but medium armour ships have higher armour then now.