Return to “General”

Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#16
Although I should mention that I DO like it as it applies to new mission types. Anything that enables more types of missions is a plus..and this could make for some cool jobs, having to go tow big ships :)
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#17
I like the idea of towing, especially with player structures. Gives you a way to move bases and ships that don't have pilots, or as you said moving big ships.

I can see being a tug boat captain using some sort of tractor beam/stabilization field to bring a massive freighter into dock around a station. Now that would be a fun way to test your piloting skills!
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#18
JoshParnell wrote:While it sounds cool from a realism/immersion perspective, I'm not sure towing is something that many players would care for...I mean, I can't see myself wanting to go through with it either, reminds me a bit of the go-to-jail mechanic in Elder Scrolls games...I would always just reload instead.
Any game mechanic that turns the player into a spectator is to be avoided.
Stun-locking in an MMO is fun if you are the one doing it but being on the receiving end, you get to do nothing but watch your health bar run out.

That's why quite a while ago I suggested that the player should be able to immediately switch direct control to any ship he owns.
If "your" ship is dead in space with it's engines trashed, you switch to another ship and tow it back home - provided it is still there.

It also makes the expected lack of carriers sting less because you can still switch to different ships in space because you don't physically transfer between them - only your control switches to another ship.

The only way to "die" would then be to run out of ships and / or the means to acquire them.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#19
Any game mechanic that turns the player into a spectator is to be avoided.
I'd agree 100% with that, however, I imagine that having regenerative repairs over time would have a similar problem with sitting around doing nothing.

Has the method of swapping ships without a carrier been addressed? Would it have to happen at a station or a planet? I think I may have read the answer at some stage and not committed it to memory.

In terms of spectatorship, that may be countered slightly by the need to negotiate with an NPC to come tow you. If you have limited credits or bargaining power then you may be stuck and it comes down to the initiative of the player to find a solution. (e.g. calling in favours, promising favours, calling on debts, hailing a passing ship and hoping they're decent people.) I wouldn't consider that spectatorship, as you are having a great deal of interaction to get yourself out of this mess. Of course, that is a lot more fun than just calling another one of your ships to come pick you up.

Though, I will concede that if you are unable to get a lift, it would be very frustrating. And as I mentioned before, being able to speed up the game while waiting for the other ship to get there would minimise the 'spectatorship'.

Not sure if being unable to organise a tow should be a 'end game' situation or make it so you can call out a Lube Mobile and charge it to credit on your gold plated American Express.
“The impact of space activities is nothing less than the galvanizing of hope and imagination for human life continuum into a future of infinite possibility.”
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#20
jawdan wrote:I'd agree 100% with that, however, I imagine that having regenerative repairs over time would have a similar problem with sitting around doing nothing.
Please, please, please don't put in regenerative repairs out in space, or if so, limit it to only a small bit. You have shields, those regenerate. Let that be the extent of it. I don't want something like "How, just survived a massive attack from an enemy carrier's torpedos. Let me hide for a few moments. Ah, much better.
Gazz wrote:Any game mechanic that turns the player into a spectator is to be avoided.
I agree with this completely. The only caveat to it would be if there is a way to break the stun lock. However, that brings with it a whole mess of other issues to take care of; how many x number of stun breaks over y time, does it come with other undesirable effects, etc.
Image
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#23
Also, this is a scenario that would hopefully not happen to you a massive amount of times. Unless you're a bit of a monkey pilot :P
“The impact of space activities is nothing less than the galvanizing of hope and imagination for human life continuum into a future of infinite possibility.”
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#24
I would put regenerative repairs on the table. =)

With a twist.
In my X3 script MARS, I allowed the ship's drones to use the repair laser to repair some damage.
If your hull was down to 30%, the drones would slowly repair 66% of the damage taken, so back up to 76%.
If you then take more damage and go down to 30% again, they repair only 66% of the damage but 76 was the max, so they only repair up to 60%.
This models "battlefield repairs", not a yard job.

It's enough to keep your ship in one piece but you really want to schedule a visit in the shipyard of your choice... soonest.
The repair speed was also slow enough to not be of any use in a battle. It would never "outregen" any damage you took.

I'm okay with "out of combat regen" because it simply sucks to be floating around in a dead hulk. It's also a feature problem because you have to model all the "realism" stuff like towing, offering tows, requesting tows, not getting a tow... big headache for very little fun.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#25
Hi Gazz,

Nice to see a fellow X'er.

Repairs could be carried out by crew. Presumably this is going to be included at some point as most of the ships we are likely to be piloting will be too big for a single person. This would include other aspects such as life support at hiring staff to perform different functions.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#26
Memnoch wrote:Hi Gazz,

Nice to see a fellow X'er.

Repairs could be carried out by crew. Presumably this is going to be included at some point as most of the ships we are likely to be piloting will be too big for a single person. This would include other aspects such as life support at hiring staff to perform different functions.
This is being currently discussed here viewtopic.php?f=5&t=221
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#27
Gazz wrote:I would put regenerative repairs on the table. =)

With a twist.
In my X3 script MARS, I allowed the ship's drones to use the repair laser to repair some damage.
If your hull was down to 30%, the drones would slowly repair 66% of the damage taken, so back up to 76%.
If you then take more damage and go down to 30% again, they repair only 66% of the damage but 76 was the max, so they only repair up to 60%.
This models "battlefield repairs", not a yard job.

It's enough to keep your ship in one piece but you really want to schedule a visit in the shipyard of your choice... soonest.
The repair speed was also slow enough to not be of any use in a battle. It would never "outregen" any damage you took.

I'm okay with "out of combat regen" because it simply sucks to be floating around in a dead hulk. It's also a feature problem because you have to model all the "realism" stuff like towing, offering tows, requesting tows, not getting a tow... big headache for very little fun.
this is by far the best compromise between station only and 'magic' repair ive seen sugested. (and by the great Gazz himself no less :D :lol: :D ) with the confirmed carriers though i would suggest that they have the option to be outfitted with station level equipment for mobile repair and not just the patchwork of the nanobots. this would allow small/new players some form of independence with out negating the need to return to station side. while also giving higher up players a goal to work for that would allow them more freedom. very solid suggestion.
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#28
JoshParnell wrote:Full Damage -> Big kaboom
Heavy Damage -> You may lose subsystems (turrets, etc) that have to be replaced (i.e., they may be destroyed and not repairable)
Moderate Damage -> Need to repair at a station/planet, will just cost credits, no replacement parts required (again, unless a module gets completely destroyed)
Light Damage -> Presumably this would mean you have a shield and it didn't get penetrated, so of course it regenerates

Now as for all engines getting destroyed...it's still not clear to me how I want to handle it in the case of the player. Indeed, it would seem you would need a tow, but that adds a lot of complexity. I'm not sure how to handle this one elegantly yet...
I personally don't like the idea of self-healing damage like many modern fps games do, regenerating shields are fine but not hardware. An automated repair module would be ok for repairing a set amount of minor damage (maybe make it depend on how much spare parts you have in your cargo hold), but major repairs should require a space station drydock. Carriers of course would be able to mount a fighter repair bay.

As for ships getting disabled i'll add to the possible solutions for this, here's some of my suggestions.

1. Make a distress beacon module available. It should be tied to your life support/ship's black box, so if the life support is destroyed the distress beacon would be moot anyway. In the event of irreparable damage to your engines, the automated beacon will start transmitting. After an amount of time (can be random or depending on whether there's a nearby populated system), AI ships will come to investigate.
If you're lucky they'll be friendly and straight up mount a rescue, towing your ship to a drydock (for a fee of course, depending on your relationship status with that faction). If you're in the middle of pirate/hostile space, you'll be captured and have to pay a ransom (or get your current ship/cargo "repossessed") before you are set free.

2. If your ship is completely destroyed, you are launched from an escape pod/lifeboat (if you installed the appropriate module) which will home in to the nearest populated station/planet, with similar conditions as suggested in the first point. If the player cannot pay a ransom, they will have to run a couple of missions for that faction to clear their debt, or they will be let go on the condition that they owe that faction a favour.

3. Towing can be implemented by having your ship "land" on the rescuer, only you can't control it (and maybe add a tractor beam effect to show who is towing who). As an extension to this mechanic, add a tractor beam module will allow you to tow other ships either as spoils of war, or rescuing NPC/AI ships you come across. Ships that are disabled cannot decide who "rescues" them, so you could turn the tables and ransom captured enemies as well! :mrgreen:

4. Adding this mechanic is probably not easy in terms of the amount of coding needed, but the benefit is not just solving the problem of ships getting critically disabled, but also adds another aspect to missions: bounty hunting. Its a perfect mechanic to add more flavour to missions, as it will require you to apply finesse to your combat. Aside from just search-and-destroy, some missions can be "Wanted Dead or Alive", and some higher paying ones require the target to be captured alive.

Just some ideas you might find useful.
Post

Re: Damage to Ships

#29
Dadalos wrote: with the confirmed carriers though i would suggest that they have the option to be outfitted with station level equipment for mobile repair and not just the patchwork of the nanobots. this would allow small/new players some form of independence with out negating the need to return to station side.
I'd still limit full repairs to the docked ships / fighters on a carrier.
It's reasonable that a carrier stocks the spare parts and repair facilities for them but if you need to replace a reactor on a carrier - IMO that's a yard job, not something you "fix". =)

The independence of owning a carrier is that you can use your fighters (that you can repair fully) instead of risking damage to the mothership. It's what today's naval carriers do. They are practically unarmed themselves.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

cron