Most players are familiar with the quirk once they unlock Xanion: a 0.5x0.5x0.5 transporter block (or even smaller!) does everything a bigger block would, so you just throw the block in as a token inclusion and call it done.
2.0 changes make this more of a thing: relative nerfs to hyperspace core improvement make it even *more* likely that you'll just include a single speck of Avorion for rift passage, and the shift of shield boosters to flat bonuses now make it appealing to have single-speck shield blocks in Naonite and perhaps Trinium space to acquire a meaningful shield with no real block or processing investment.
I think it'd be great if building these tiny "on/off" switch blocks weren't a good way to go. To that end, making the behavior of corresponding subsystem upgrades work as "matching function" to blocks would help:
For shield boosters, switch to a capped +% boost rather than a completely flat boost. E.g. "+300% shield (up to 200000)" -- you'll still need some block investment to take full advantage of the booster
For transporters, allow blocks to logarithmically increase range (like hyperspace cores) and have a rarity-decreasing minimum "base range from blocks" requirement for the corresponding transporter subsystem: e.g. uncommon transporter subsystems may require 20-30 cubic blocks of transporter volume before they can start working work, but a legendary one may only require 4-8 thanks to its awesome efficiency (though you could still use bigger ones for better range!)
To complement this, more advantages for increased transporter range would help, e.g. improve r-mining/r-salvaging operation efficiency based on transporter performance (e.g. as an input like the "time to find asteroid" variable)
For hyperspace cores, cap or scale subsystem bonuses based on block investment and scale rift passage with the size of your Avorion core:
Total +range and -cooldown from subsystems should be limited (capped or scaled) -- if my ship has no hyperspace core at all, I shouldn't be able to put in three subsystems and have +20 range, and bigger cores should progressively make these subsystems more valuable
How far you can travel through rifts should be purely based on the size of your Avorion hyperspace core. E.g. a 0.5x0.5x0.5 Avorion hyperspace core shouldn't let you fly through anything, while a bigger one (as scaled by subsystems) should be an advantage for easy travel
This could further be reflected in efficiency bonuses to operations around/across rifts, making it beneficial to have a "big enough" Avorion core to navigate
The end goal would be to make it feel like scaling these blocks up in your ships always had purpose and value and to get rid of the silliness of a massive, 120-fighter r-mining operation being optimally powered by a cargo transporter with a volume of one cubic centimeter.
Suggestion
Nyrin
Most players are familiar with the quirk once they unlock Xanion: a 0.5x0.5x0.5 transporter block (or even smaller!) does everything a bigger block would, so you just throw the block in as a token inclusion and call it done.
2.0 changes make this more of a thing: relative nerfs to hyperspace core improvement make it even *more* likely that you'll just include a single speck of Avorion for rift passage, and the shift of shield boosters to flat bonuses now make it appealing to have single-speck shield blocks in Naonite and perhaps Trinium space to acquire a meaningful shield with no real block or processing investment.
I think it'd be great if building these tiny "on/off" switch blocks weren't a good way to go. To that end, making the behavior of corresponding subsystem upgrades work as "matching function" to blocks would help:
The end goal would be to make it feel like scaling these blocks up in your ships always had purpose and value and to get rid of the silliness of a massive, 120-fighter r-mining operation being optimally powered by a cargo transporter with a volume of one cubic centimeter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
3 answers to this suggestion
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now