I am a bit skeptical about the volatility system.
On the one hand, it will of course help curb zerging and just general close-proximity formations.
On the other hand, it will also negatively affect tactical depth and fleet compositions:
- Having a mixed fleet of say a dread and 5 small ships won't be as viable anymore - as a unit they may be strong, but if spread too far apart could be off easily. With volatility, they would be forced to be spread apart, lest they get blown up/severely damaged from the dread being killed.
- Facing an enemy with primarily longer max range weapons and a corresponding longer min range, gives the option to attempt to punish such a player by getting into the the min range with your own short range weapons, preferably in numbers. With volatility, this option's viability is decreased, as your ships will not only incur the damage they normally would in trying to position themselves within the min range, but more damage would be incurred as some of your ships blow up en-route, damaging the rest of your squadron, damage incurred by your own ships as they get hit and destroyed by other ships whilst in min range of a few targets and your ships damaged by the explosion of the enemy ships.
- I'm not a huge fan of every ship potentially being a suicide ship.
A lot of my skepticism depends on how it all turns out to be implemented in the game - how often ships blown up, whether all races will have this feature, the final damage/radius numbers etc, but I would personally prefer for AoE weapons to be a deterrent to tight formations as opposed to volatility, as in that way, tight formations would sometimes be the most viable tactic, meaning greater tactical depth.