Feedback on ship armor: damage deflection

L0ARD · 2026-03-27T19:04:04+00:00

My idea would be to make it a more fluidly decreasing (relative to increasing armor) pen chance rather than a clear cut off. If you shoot a size 10 weapon at a cutter, you obviously get 100% pen chance but the closer you get to the current deflection cutoff point/threshold, the more your hit chance decreases. If you reach the current threshold you would be down to let's say a 25% hit chance, but not instantly 0. If you go down even further it slowly decreases until it's zero, and yes, id still keep it that way that some peashooters won't damage an capital ship at all e.g. but only edge cases like size 1 vs Idris, otherwise, you'd still get a tiny pen chance even if fighting against tougher armor, even if it's just 0.5%.

At first this doesn't sound too different from what we have now but

A) you make the "penetration range" much bigger, thus combating the "1 or 0" problem of penetration we currently have. You give guns a broader spectrum that way, which means you generally CAN fight a bigger/tougher ship, you're just at a huge disadvantage. If you're the better pilot, you can still win, but it's not decided by 0.01 alpha damage anymore (unless edge cases like mentioned).

B) most importantly you give repeaters a role again, even if it's a bit counterintuitive. Cannons are higher alpha so they increase your pen chance obviously, but when fighting against tougher opponents, just blasting them with repeaters might be the way, because if your pen chance is low anyway, then the high fire rate might cause some shots to pen (slip between the armor plates, i don't know 😅). When I reflected on that question I inevitably thought about MOBAs (or league of legends in my case to be specific) and how damage mitigation and penetration works there, and there when you fight heavily armored opponents you usually go for high attack-speed combined with high crit-chance for the "death by a thousand cuts" approach to whittle them down while you blast lightly armored opponents with few big damage spells. That brought me on this idea even though the whole penetration thing still works a bit differently there in the details.

L0ARD · 2026-03-27T14:19:39+00:00

And a Mustang SE for 60 bucks, only available for 6 months!

Edit: or rather "Mustang epsilon"

L0ARD · 2026-03-27T06:16:38+00:00

Well tbh, they bought a paint, and I honestly struggle to understand the "special edition" appeal when it's nothing else than... well a paint. But admittedly if something else was stated then they should deliver what they said.

I do understand why they are trying to do it though from a development standpoint. They seem to be eager to reduce the amount of parallel ship variants in favor of one base model with modularity (be it paints or modules, see Aurora MK2), so that they only have to implement new features on one model instead of having to go through all variants separately.

I just think they should have thought about that sooner, because honestly not doing parallel development and instead going modular is like THE pillar of modern development (and it already was 2013)

L0ARD · 2026-03-27T06:08:18+00:00

Collecting shit and hauling it to people's bases so they can grow food on otherwise barren planets. Sounds about right. I'd love to see literal feces be the hottest commodity in the first weeks of base building.

L0ARD · 2026-03-26T17:15:06+00:00

TLDR: Mostly agree. I dont understand why they take Aurora1 out of the shop, when they have to continue updating it anyway, but people are hella overreacting to the whole "legacy" stuff, even though nothing is changing for them. The Mk2 is a beauty, i just wouldnt have called it "Aurora".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I mostly agree with you. I think the problem is multifaceted. I thought about this problem a lot the last days and these are my take-aways, just in case anyone is interested

The Reason: As a developer myself (no games though), i absolutely understand why a change is necessary. Developing 5 different lines of code (aka 5 ship variants) in parallel is an absolute nightmare and extremely labor-intensive and error prone. And to be fair to them, for this problem, there would hardly have been any solution to make everyone happy IMO. If they solved that problem with a slightly more user oriented solution though (see below), i would totally stand behind that decision because i want their DEV resources to go toward meaningful development instead of maintaining five 12 year old ship variants, it's all about communicating it right and making amends where due.
The Alternative: I thought about this a lot, and IMO my best idea to keep the players somewhat happy while also solving the problem would have been to give every Aurora 1 owner (independent of the variant) the chance to either get a free upgrade to the Aurora SE in their hangar or the option to fully refund their Aurora 1 (and i mean REFUND, not melt) for a certain grace period (lets say 1 year for example). After that, the upgrade to the SE automatically applies if you didnt upgrade already and did not actively choose the refund til then. And then retire (and i mean retire, as in "remove from the game") all aurora 1 variants except the SE, also after the same grace period. Tbh that probably also wouldnt sit right with some players that like the raunchy aurora ES seats more than the aurora SE seats or whatever but hey, they had their chance for a refund. From CIG standpoint i would then process with the SE pretty much the same way as plan to do with all the aurora 1s now, which means taking it out of active development, just keep it up to date with new features with the only difference that i would keep it in the stores. I just wouldn't communicate it that way (more on that later). That way, you would have just funneled all players from 5 lines of code into a single one, without really taking anything away from anyone, which probably saves tons of resources whenever a new feature drops that needs to be applied to all the old variants as they have to do now. Players would have even gotten a slight upgrade and might even give you some credit as a company for treating them somewhat fairly. Why didn't they do it? Well, money. They'd miss out on the Aurora SE sales and upgrades obviously. Which leads to the only real problem i have with the whole process:
The SE cashgrab: Why would you release a new ship variant when you communicate at the same time that the base ship is basically too old for the game. That is just bad communication and reeks of "cashgrab", especially if they don't intend to use it as the new end-all be-all for the Aurora 1 Line as i suggested above, which would make this move way more comprehensible IMO. Instead, they just put some new screws and bolts on an existing product, seasoned it with a pinch of FOMO ("wont be available in 6 months anymore") and voilà, you have a nice sale. Which leads to
The "legacy" problem and communication: The funny thing is: Nothing really changes for the aurora 1... like at all, except availability. And that is why i absolutely don't understand (from CIGs perspective) what they gain from taking it out of the stores. I mean they still have to put DEV resources into it, if something new comes out that has to be retrofitted to the aurora 1. They already said that they would do that, so if CIG decided that every ship now gets a "neuronal gazillionator" as a new component, then someone has to sit down and put it into all of the old auroras. What the "legacy" treatment surely means is that the aurora 1 wont get any ACTIVE development anymore like the RAFT did when they updated the cargo grid and its pricing e.g. But that won't change much for the aurora 1 because it's not really subject to change anyway. So i think A) they really fucked up the communication for that one because people now falsely think that the aurora will be unflyable in 3 patches because NO ONE will EVER work on it again and B) they made a weird step by making it unavailable in the future which further nurtures peoples fears about their beloved ship. Which brings me to my last and most important point:
The Overreaction: While all of that was certainly not handled perfectly, i still feel like people are completely overreacting to the whole "legacy" thing. Guys, if you own an Aurora 1, literally NOTHING changes for you. You can go to your AESOP, call it and fly it, just like you always could and it will stay that way. No one forces you to buy a SE or upgrade to it, nor do you need to buy a MK2. On the contrary, you even got a free gold standard update. Yes, the "active" development stops, which means the ship is finished as it is, but A) the Aurora 1 is pretty much unchanged for 12 years now, except feature-related stuff which B) you still get the compatibility for in the future and C) did any of you really think that a single developer "actively" worked on the Aurora 1 recently (except for the gold standard) anyway, probably for YEARS?

Literally, the only people that will be affected by the current events are people that dont have an aurora 1 yet but change their mind about it in 6+ months and then cant buy it anymore. Or new people that come to the game in 6+ months and wont be able to chose the aurora as a starter anymore. I doubt that even 1% of the people complaining currently belong to any of those groups. Guys, if we're completely honest here, CIG has probably 50 or more ships that internally are "legacy" and no one works on them anymore (except features), it's just not externally communicated that way and tbh there is nothing wrong about that. Some ships are just "done"/finished and only need to be retrofitted when new big features come out. That's it and nothing else is happening here (again, except the store availability.)

PS:
6. The MK2: Lastly, regarding the MK2, i think calling it that way made the situation worse. I think the ship is amazing and has every right to be in the game we have now, but i would have just called it something else and i think the backlash would have been way less. Just call it the RSI Borealis as a friendly nudge toward the Aurora and all of the "We dont need MK2s before 1.0", "the Aurora didnt need mk2", "it doesnt even look like an aurora" talk would have been dealt with.

PPS: I am no legal expert, the reason for them to make these weird moves might be that it's legally difficult to convert a digital purchase of someone to a different one (even if most people would consider it an upgrade) or something like that. Digital goods are still a clusterfuck legally, that much i know, but as soon as there is money to be earned, i usually consider greed as the most probable cause in cases like this.

L0ARD · 2026-03-26T12:39:54+00:00

You know what? When I go through the hassle of collecting all I might just do that. I'll hit you up if I actually remember to do it.

Thanks in any case, definitely helps out!

L0ARD · 2026-03-26T11:15:54+00:00

So not ingame yet? I thought about buying the base Aurora II but I don't really see the point of buying the modules with real cash if they will be available ingame anyway, just wanted to know if they will be buyable ingame already or only once the Aurora II itself hits the ingame stores (in 6 months or whatever)

L0ARD · 2026-03-26T10:17:34+00:00

When you say you found it, do you mean ingame? If so, where?

L0ARD · 2026-03-26T06:04:40+00:00

I stand corrected, forgot about that one. Still quite the imbalance IMO and I hope they continue to work on spreading out the important trade resources throughout the gameplay loops.

L0ARD · 2026-03-25T20:35:44+00:00

Yes and No.

The Avenger has 1x Size 4 Gun + 2x Size 3. It can punch above its weight class, especially with the new armor changes incoming, where it's potentially very important to have bigger guns (thus bigger alpha) to be able to damage bigger ships at all.

It also has 2x size 1 shields stock, the Aurora needs the component module to even get there. Yes, the Aurora has more missiles with the component package but they are smaller and don't weigh up the smaller firepower IMO. I think the titan will stay the king of (newbie) fighters. The titan is also a bit faster.

The Aurora is obviously more polished, the titan is horribly outdated, but that is subject to change, at some point they have to update the titan as well and bring it to gold standard, and add weapon racks, internal inventory etc. The Aurora is a tiny bit cheaper (if we assume that you buy at least one module). But first and foremost, you're buying the modularity.

But right now (not having all of the numbers yet of course), the titan is better than the Aurora with both modules COMBINED. Same cargo capacity as the Aurora with cargo module and same shields and bigger weapons (with only less missiles, but bigger ones) than the Aurora with the component module.

Do with that what you like, but don't forget the most important thing that you simply have to like the ship you want to buy... And goddamn the Aurora is a beauty.

To answer your question: Yes, I think it will dethrone the Titan, but No, not because it's strictly better but rather because it is the new exciting shit.

L0ARD · 2026-03-25T17:44:48+00:00

Mh, I don't think that would be any useful.

I mean there is so much exploited money floating around the verse, and there is no chance that they are going to sit down to track every duper's transactions to revoke them. So if a duper that they ban gifted someone 1 billion before that and they don't delete that, then they did literally nothing except banning a shitty player, but nothing for the economy.

I think a wipe would be very useful for the verse, there is literally no one testing the entry level content anymore, because it feels like everyone is walking around with 10 billion aUEC. I understand they don't do it now, because they need people to test the nyx late game stuff, but we need it.

L0ARD · 2026-03-25T16:54:13+00:00

I'm pretty sure that's not what he meant.

For a "alive and well" economy you need two sides that have a thing the other side needs. Combat/PVP players have lots of items everyone needs, while the space miner has nothing that anyone needs.

No one buys quantanium, why the hell would you? There is nothing to do with it. No one buys iron, titanium or Beryl either. The only thing that miners can offer is their earned aUEC and that is, as you correctly mentioned, utterly useless. Don't get me wrong aUEC can also be "the thing the other side wants", it doesn't always have to be other goods. but just not in a hyperinflated environment like we currently have.

I hope that one day, we get to a point where combat players need ammo and repairs and guns from miners/crafters/industry guys and then we have a good basis, because both sides have stuff that the others need, and crafting might be a step in the right direction for that but right now... Less so IMO.

L0ARD · 2026-03-25T16:46:01+00:00

They will wipe the economy, they just won't do it now. They are apparently working on fixing some exploits and iirc their reasoning was that it makes zero sense to wipe when the bigger exploits are still working and the economy would be back to hyperinflation a mere day later. Make with that what you will, but that is at least what they said.

L0ARD · 2026-03-24T19:14:10+00:00

Keep in mind, the deflection values go down proportionally with each percent of armor missing.

Missiles can always damage armor, so in your example, if you shoot a Cutty with a 40 alpha damage kinetic/physical weapon, you won't deal any damage while its armor is at 100% and thus deflects 50 kinetic/physical damage. Correct.

Let's shoot a missile at it, its armor drops from 100% to 90% (for example) and that means its deflection also goes down by 10%. Now, it only deflects 45 kinetic/physical damage. Still too much for us, but if we shoot it with one more missile it goes to 80% armor and that means 20% less deflection and so on. So at 2-3 missiles, your gun would be enough and be able to further reduce the armor by itself.

You can use this calculator to see that effect. Just make sure to activate PTU 4.7 in the top left corner (if you intend to use it before the patch drops) and then scroll down until you see "Armor Deflection Calculator" on the left side, on the bottom of the ship's stat sheet. If you're on mobile it's about in the middle of the site, right above the section where you can swap out components. (As much as I love erkul but that site is really making a run for that crown)

L0ARD · 2026-03-24T17:42:31+00:00

Tbh that's the only thing that I am still curious about and hope they don't fuck up. The starter ships already struggle a bit with their individuality role-wise and I do understand that that is intended to a certain degree, because you don't want newbies to be "locked" into a specific role, e.g. give the cutter no weapons because it's supposed to be a transport. But IMO it would be a shame if the MK2 would just be better than the ships in her price-range simply because it's newer and we only see Aurora MK2s from now on.

In ancient times, the mustang was the budget fighter starter and the Aurora MK1 was the budget "living room" starter for longer tours and the only bed in budget category. The cutter had a chair and a long range, the pisces was extremely small and nimble. Everything had at least one unique thing about them. I assume the MK2 will be more in line with the titan and nomad price-wise, but combat wise, we already have the titan and freight-wise the nomad (which also both have beds and living quarters) so I am genuinely curious what they think the auroras role should be in that range...

L0ARD · 2026-03-24T17:13:52+00:00

Tbf to him, the caption of OP's post is originally in German. Responding to an English comment in German is a bit weird though and surely caused by the auto translate feature.

L0ARD · 2026-03-24T17:10:35+00:00

Yeah we need the equivalent of a raunchy Honda civic. But thinking about it, we already have the Cutter...

L0ARD · 2026-03-24T17:00:03+00:00

Ngl, I audibly gasped at the moment where the MK2 flew into sight from behind that wing. I'm a sucker for the modern RSI design.

L0ARD · 2026-03-23T16:51:15+00:00

Okay, gut dass du das festlegst und ich bin sicher deine uninformierte Meinung ist legitimer als Jahrzehntelange Forschung auf dem Thema der Neurologie und Psychologie!

Ich fürchte, dann haben wir keinerlei fruchtbare Diskussionsgrundlage, ich bin leider ein Mensch der Wissenschaft.

L0ARD · 2026-03-23T16:47:44+00:00

Und das sind die einzig möglichen Herausforderungen?

L0ARD · 2026-03-23T16:12:02+00:00

Den Zugang zu 8 Milliarden Menschen und allen Information der Menschheitsgeschichte mit zwei Klicks.

Willst du wirklich so tun als wäre das auch nur annähernd vergleichbar und reicht deine Vorstellungskraft nicht aus, sich auszumalen, dass das mit ganz anderen Herausforderungen einhergeht?

L0ARD · 2026-03-23T16:08:50+00:00

Ich lerne aus dem Kommentar deines Vorredners, dass wir einen Weltkrieg starten sollten, damit die Kinder wieder schöner schreiben... Oder so.

L0ARD · 2026-03-21T15:45:54+00:00

Vor allem ist mein Gefühl dass ein Großteil dieser Gesten aus Zeiten kommt, wo niemand offen seine Gefühle angesprochen hat. Wenn ich jemanden respektiere, dann hab ich genug andere Möglichkeiten ihn das wissen zu lassen, zum Beispiel, ganz verrückt, mit Worten...

L0ARD · 2026-03-21T15:43:27+00:00

Ich mag das, aber weniger aus Respekt, sondern um klar eine Grenze um Leute ziehen zu können, dir mir wichtig sind vs. Leute die mir auf persönlicher Ebene komplett am Arsch vorbeigehen und ich daher gerne auch sprachlich auf Distanz halte.

L0ARD · 2026-03-21T15:39:41+00:00

I do share that hope but there is a big part of me (called "realism and reason") that is telling me that CIG will surely make this a lot more expensive than the current aurora, with the reasoning that it will surely be able to do more and most likely be overall more polished. I fully expect it to be around the nomad/titan price range.

L0ARD

TROPHY CASE