More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

[IllMurdaU]

You´re twisting the meanings of critisism and insults. Those are defined terms with a meaning behind them and you should learn them.
Criticism: "I dislike the ship designs in this game, they feel uninspired and lazy and look lame"
Insult: "The person designing this is at the level of a kid from the 90s"

I'm not twisting anything here to make that clear again. I know exactly what the definition of criticism is and if you don't even know it as a forum admin, I just find it sad. When I say to me it looks like a kid from the 90s designed it, that's not an insult but an opinion! It is my personal opinion! And if you as an artist can't deal with criticism then you definitely have the wrong job. But enough of that.

Which is a valuable opinion, all I said is that the change you proposed will not get intergrated because of the reasons I stated.

Your argument was that, from the developer's point of view, editing and designing a new system would be more complex than making improvements to the old one. That goes without saying, only if the old system has been so badly and unrealistically integrated that there is hardly anything to improve it makes no sense. You said that you never had any problems with this system, which I can't believe, because since release (over 2 years) Egosoft has not been able to get the signals (for missions, blueprints and also those of ships that you want to take over) are always displayed correctly on the surface. They are still often under the surface so that there is no way to scan them.

1. Those numbers are bloated, you installed Mk.3 Thrusters on those carriers which inflates the price by 11 Mio which is about the whole hull price of a vanilla carrier. Of course this shifts the numbers in favor of the Raptor, but they´re not useful for the carrier´s performance. This is just number manipulation to suit your argument. From my experience vanilla carrier hulls cost about 12 mio, while Raptor´s cost 40-45 mio credits, with their equipment costing the same per unit.
And we´re still talking about carriers here, their main offensive tool lies in their fighters, not their weapons. Considering this 3 Colossus deploy their fighters 3 times faster (fighter bays oorah), have more of them in total, have way more internal volume for ressuplying (improving missile builds) and deploy M ships at 12 times the speed (which the Raptor just sucks at).

Nothing has been manipulated with the numbers, that's simple math. I don't compare hull to hull, I compare one fully equipped ship with another. And you can get the hull of a raptor sometimes for as little as 32 million. Anyway, that's the cheapest price I've seen so far. In addition, factions (including the player) can build their own ships even cheaper. Of course, you only sell a ship for a profit, so the right price is even lower.

4. This has nothing to do with ship balance. This is faction balance you´re talking about.

Yes, you are right, it is a factional balance problem which also results from the weak ships of the argons.

[PreSpawn]

I'm not twisting anything here to make that clear again. I know exactly what the definition of criticism is and if you don't even know it as a forum admin, I just find it sad. When I say to me it looks like a kid from the 90s designed it, that's not an insult but an opinion! It is my personal opinion! And if you as an artist can't deal with criticism then you definitely have the wrong job. But enough of that.

Well your posts read like they were written by a child from the 18th century
.......

Well and this is NOT my opinion just proofing a point.
And i say it again, the only thing that is critically discussed here, is your "rudeness"(call it whatever you want) and not the inital point(s) you wanted to make... and instead of just letting it go and admit you are wrong(god dammit, you dont even have to mean it), you keep on defending your "opinions". from line one of your post already a lost battle.

[CBJ]

I'm not twisting anything here to make that clear again. I know exactly what the definition of criticism is and if you don't even know it as a forum admin, I just find it sad.

Johnson98 is not a forum admin. I am. You were given some friendly advice, by several people, that your "criticism" would be more likely to be taken notice of if you avoided being rude and insulting, but you have clearly decided that you think you know better. That's your choice, but don't say you haven't been warned. As for insults, they are covered by the forum rules, and it's a moderator's decision whether something is an insult, not yours. If you have an issue with this then you need to take it up with the moderator by PM, not on the public forum. This is also covered by the forum rules.

Now move on. That applies to others replying to this thread as well.