This post represents nearly two years of theorycrafting, testing, and executing every aspect that makes capital gameplay what it is. This includes solo and multicrew gameplay with the Polaris and Idris (and by close proxy the Perseus and Tiburon), and the advents of Engineering and Armor, in a full spectrum ranging from organic PU combat, location defense and attack, piracy, and arranged org vs org scrimmages. The current pitfalls we see are that: Multicrew ships are not worth crewing ahead of solo-manning more total ships Ship classes and positions are overstratified and lack positive interaction Engineering and armor frustrate or are irrelevant to gameplay rather than improving it These are our feedback and conclusions on how to improve this experience, framed (hopefully) as best we can in terms of "tweaks" that can be executed now, rather than "features" that require extended development time. MULTICREW LACKS INCENTIVES TURRETS ARE NOT DANGEROUS Players are currently more valuable in separate ships than in turret positions. Turrets are currently not a threat to smaller, nimbler craft within a reasonable screening range (<1km). With simple rolling maneuvers small craft within that range can stay ahead of the turret's projectile speed, while returning fire that can prevent shields from regenerating, or penetrate to turrets/subtargets with impunity. Projectile spread does not properly address this because of the disparity in target sizes. Two things that (in tandem) might help offset this are: Preventing small ships from doing discernible damage from outside a multicrew ship's defensive range (Damage falloff at >1km for weapons size 4 and below) Allowing multicrew turrets to hit smaller vessels more reliably from the same distance (decrease their weapon spread and increase their projectile speed - an existing precedent, G-class missiles, exists for a class of "turret" weapons with these bonuses, if apply bonuses to multicrew turrets themselves is undesirable). ENGINEERING OFFERS NO INCENTIVE FOR CREW TO MAINTAIN THEIR SHIP After an entire year of Org vs Org capital scrims, open world PvP, and internal practice, the number of times we have had to replace a fuse or fight a fire has been ZERO. This represents a total waste of the entire Engineering feature set. There are several missed opportunities that would make ship crew valuable: Start and spread fire even in vented ships. Blow fuses more frequently (maybe ~25% to start). Start fires when fuses blow. In addition to a lost power segment, each blown fuses should directly affect some aspect of ship function (e.g. a single weapon or directional thruster not functioning) until replaced. Fire currently presents little threat because there is no consequence to everyone flying their ship vented/with life support off. Suit oxygen sustains players for extremely long times without a refill, and there is virtually no downside to operating in this way. Although it would take more development time, addressing this and providing an incentive to use life support/pressurization, and thereby expose one's ship to the risk of fire, would be ideal. (cr: Moonfly) LARGE SHIPS REQUIRE NO MAINTENANCE (they should) Even if not under fire, simply operating a large vessel (anything larger than a Constellation/Corsair) should cause its components to gradually lose hitpoints in a way that takes regular maintenance by a player. Doing anything with a ship this size other than making it from Point A to Point B must come with significant maintenance risks. COUNTERMEASURES OVER-PROTECT CAPITAL SHIPS FROM ORDNANCE [With the exception of the >20km launch bug] A capital ship is never under any threat from ordnance (torpedoes) because of the massive amount of decoy and noise onboard. Removing these countermeasures (which don't make sense at capital ship scale anyway) would create anti-ordnance gameplay that begins with PDCs, but requires alert player gunners in turrets to stave off a serious bombardment. This would create huge gameplay opportunities and make many torpedo ships (and the Idris-T kit) valuable again. At the very least, countermeasure systems should require power, and be inoperable when a ship's power has been shut down (cr: xPJx) INSURANCE CLAIMS ARE TOO EASY - THERE MUST BE CONSEQUENCES TO LOSING A SHIP INSURANCE CLAIM TIMERS ARE TOO SHORT It should not be possible to lose a fight and come back in the same ship 5 minutes later. Ultimately this should be a long timer (a day or more for capitals), but even with the current state of the game, a mandatory 1+ hour wait on the largest ship classes is perfectly reasonable, and can scale down from there in ship size. Only "starter" vessels should come with zero claim time. While "losing ships to game bugs" obviously sucks, this is thankfully happening less and less frequently, and it can't continue to be a reason for ship loss having zero impact. INSURANCE CLAIMS COST TOO LITTLE A five-fold or ten-fold increase on the current fees is also not unreasonable given the credits one can easily make in the economy. Losing a ship should come with a cost. Another option here would be ramping the cost up with each claim, based on how many times the ship has been claimed in the past 1-2 days, and reducing the cost to its baseline over time spent without claims. (cr: Moonfly) SHIPS DON'T TAKE DAMAGE AS THEY SHOULD OVERFLOW DAMAGE DOESN'T WORK PROPERLY Currently overflow damage only flows into one powerplant, one time. When a hull reaches zero, all overflow damage should be funneled directly into all components with hitpoints remaining. WE ACTUALLY LIKE HULL BUFFER HP - AT THE RIGHT SHIP SIZES Certain ships should explode instantly when their hull reaches zero HP, regardless of component state (fighters - see current Fighter TTK discussions) while others should allow some time to repair if left alone (mid-size), and some should be recoverable long-term by towing and repair (large/capitals). I would love to test the following hull buffer HP: Size 1-3 Ships: ZERO Buffer HP (see current fighter TTK discussions) Size 4 Ships: x0.2 of base hull HP Size 5 Ships: x0.5 of base hull HP Size 6 Ships: x1.5 of base hull HP (incentivizes boarding action!) Contrary to what we thought at first, a high buffer HP on capital ships is actually awesome - it creates an incentive for our FPS teams to board disabled ships and either commandeer or force their self-destruction, which is incredible gameplay! ARMOR ALPHA GATING IS BAD - NO WEAPON SHOULD BE COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE Not only has armor alpha gating created situations where new players can't interact with content at their own levels, but it's just miserable to have entire swaths of weapon sizes/classes that just aren't worth using. The armor system can achieve its objectives but still allow for everyone to participate. Doubling all ships' Armor HP pools, but allowing weapons under the deflection threshold to chip away at the Armor HP pool anyway, until it is low enough to allow Hull HP damage, would create the same protective effect armor is trying to achieve, without excluding those weapons outright. CAPITAL WEAPONS CAN'T BE ACQUIRED IN-GAME Both Wikelo and the new crafting blueprints are perfect, high-cost candidates to allow players to access the S10 spinal mount weapons and larger turrets (Idris nose).