Return to “Suggestions”

Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#76
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Black--Snow wrote: Automatic and free, repair costs shouldn't really be significant anyway imho.
so you want the logistics of repair to be nonexistent?

once you have a carrier your parasite ships come for free.

any defeat thats not complete annihilation means literally nothing because they just go back home and are at 100% again for no cost
leading to all or nothing fights which are ultimately boring because theres no strategising going on, just blob on top of the other and try to destroy as many ships as possible, because damaging ships is meaningless.

no point to repeteadedly attacking a stronger group which has a carrier, because if you dont wipe them out they are back at full strength 20 seconds later.
no point trying to run them out of repair supplies because there are none needed.


repair time and cost both make for much more interesting strategic play, with time being more important because you can take things out of the game for a while without having to destroy them.

without time and cost repairs are a no brainer, with time and cost it becomes a decision to take a ship out of your force for a while for repairs. or if its even worth it to repair that ship instead of just ripping out all of its components and scrapping the hull.

That's not what he's saying Cornflakes. What he is saying is that if you have a fleet of any size, repairing fighters after an attack is a negligible expense that should be solved in the click of one button or done automatically the same way projects are handled.

Things should take time and resources to repair. I believe the amount of time should be based on the type of components damaged or destroyed, including armor and hull which was damaged. These, along with the general size of the ship taken into account, should provide a good estimate for how long something should be docked and being worked on.
Image
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#77
BFett wrote:
Things should take time and resources to repair. I believe the amount of time should be based on the type of components damaged or destroyed, including armor and hull which was damaged. These, along with the general size of the ship taken into account, should provide a good estimate for how long something should be docked and being worked on.
See the issue there is if the player has the only ship they own damage, they have to wait clash of clans style for repairs.
Imho time should not be a factor in a game like LT. Aurora does time for repairs but the whole premise of Aurora is on having hundreds or thousands of ships, while LT is flexible similar to X3, you can have 1 or you can have 1000 ships.

Regarding "All or nothing" fights, look at EVE. Do you see all or nothing? Sure it's annoying to just damage a ship and not kill it, but combined with destroying components you can effectively force a ship to be stuck in the battle until it's dead. Whether or not damage persists doesn't mean much when there are 1000 ships. Realistically you'll just want to kill them.
Logistics of repair do not make for a good player experience imho. I've NEVER* liked them and never found them to be beneficial to my experience.

*Except for in Aurora, but that's because it was interesting enough, coupled with a lack of dependence on small fleets.
I am literally and wholly in love with myself.
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#78
Obviously my thought of time is different from what it may appear I'm arguing for, so let me clarify. When I'm talking about a time mechanic, I'm thinking no more than 10 minutes for the biggest baddest "Station Class Carrier" to go from almost dead to fully repaired in a hanger that can actually support the ship of that scale. On a fighter scale, maybe 5 to 10 seconds in the hanger, assuming that the fighter can survive an encounter and get back to the nearest hanger without being blown out of the "sky".

This means that engagement distances must be calculated to prevent stalemates, or that more effective weapons, such as flack cannons should be used against large numbers of fighters. Also, with these repair time delays it is possible that if too many ships are getting repaired, fewer fighters are fighting the opposition, therefore providing them with an advantage which could sway the direction of the conflict.


In short: You will be punished for flying an expensive large ship without adequate protection or equipment. Just don't do it. If you want to have near instant respawns then just take control of the next available ship when you die and that problem should be solved as well.
Image
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#79
Black--Snow wrote: See the issue there is if the player has the only ship they own damage, they have to wait clash of clans style for repairs.
Oh boo hoo you have to wait for 10-30 seconds to be able to launch again in your fighter!
Oh the unbearable wait!

By the time you have ships big enough for repair times to matter you have enough other ships to do something in while the ship gets repaired.
Black--Snow wrote: Regarding "All or nothing" fights, look at EVE. Do you see all or nothing?
Yes, its worthless to just damage a ship, because after being off grid for 30 seconds they come back in mimt condition.
You have to destroy a ship to get it out of the fight (or enough of its fleetmates to make its destruction likely).
There is no thought about if its worth to keep a ship in hangar because of the repair time&cost from using it may outweigh the advantage of using it.
(And being able to use the ship for the next engagement instead for example)
You always bring the biggest and baddest thing you can bring because theres no point not doing so.

Without repair times its that the moment you stop engaging an enemy their ships are repaired (beyond opportunity cost).
With repair times just damaging an enemy before you have to retreat can also give you an advantage if utilised properly.

Say you manage to drop a few torpedoes through an enemy cap's shields.
The ship survives, but has to retreat for repairs and is out of the game for a couple of hours for repairs.

Similar on a defending side, you'd want to keep forces back to have them up to speed when you actually need them. So they arent in the dock repairing when the next attack comes.
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#83
I think we have to assume that people are not going to run LT 24/7 so I'd rather try to work with you guys to find repair times that are acceptable. LT is not EVE online where you can train skills while offline. Is 24 hours for a fighter to get repaired too long? I'd say yes. Is 2 seconds too short? Probably. There has to be middle ground where it is reasonable. Sliders without actual time scales assigned are actually meaningless.
Image
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#84
BFett wrote: Sliders without actual time scales assigned are actually meaningless.
Obviously any sliders here would have time scales assigned. How else would they function?

Presumably at the "RTS" mode limit you might have 2 seconds for fighter fixing, and at the "strategic" limit you'd have 24 hours, say, and players can choose what they want in between. Everyone's idea of the perfect middle ground is different, hence why you should listen to Flat and watch Sliders starring Jerry O'Connell
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#86
BFett wrote:The point being that Josh will need to define how short and long the slider goes. It may be helpful to give him a rough idea for the amount of time people would like to see.
I don't see why he couldn't just choose the short end to be instantaneous. The long end is a different story.

Better: Assume repair times are set by some scaling constant (e.g. repair time for some reference fighter). Through playtesting, Josh can suggest some constants that work well, but the decision is up to the user. This way, instead of even a slider, all the user has to do is choose the constant, or use the default.
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#87
Scytale wrote:
BFett wrote:The point being that Josh will need to define how short and long the slider goes. It may be helpful to give him a rough idea for the amount of time people would like to see.
I don't see why he couldn't just choose the short end to be instantaneous. The long end is a different story.
Maybe he should make a slider for how long people want their slider to be. :ghost:
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#88
Dinosawer wrote:
Scytale wrote:
BFett wrote:The point being that Josh will need to define how short and long the slider goes. It may be helpful to give him a rough idea for the amount of time people would like to see.
I don't see why he couldn't just choose the short end to be instantaneous. The long end is a different story.
Maybe he should make a slider for how long people want their slider to be. :ghost:
narfnarfnarf
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#89
Dinosawer wrote:
Scytale wrote:
BFett wrote:The point being that Josh will need to define how short and long the slider goes. It may be helpful to give him a rough idea for the amount of time people would like to see.
I don't see why he couldn't just choose the short end to be instantaneous. The long end is a different story.
Maybe he should make a slider for how long people want their slider to be. :ghost:
make it a logarithmic slider and it'll catch 99.99% of the peoples wants :ghost:
Post

Re: Some thoughts about damage and repair

#90
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Dinosawer wrote:
Scytale wrote:
I don't see why he couldn't just choose the short end to be instantaneous. The long end is a different story.
Maybe he should make a slider for how long people want their slider to be. :ghost:
make it a logarithmic slider and it'll catch 99.99% of the peoples wants :ghost:
Wait, is the slider itself logarithmic, or the slider that determines the slider length?

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 3 guests

cron