Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mudanzas Valencia]

Hello:

Something to this effect may have been suggested before, however, in light of recent changes it might be worth revisiting.

Boarding ships increase chances of ships being boardable, as do scaffolding repair gantry ships. Even an increase of 1% per dedicated gantry/boarding ships would make a huge quality of life improvement in aggregate. So having a gantry and transport increases chances of ships being boardable to 7%. You could justify it by saying these ships make "borderline" cases more viable.

Also would like to see capturable fighters. Literally could just scoop up a somewhat damaged fighter and reverse engineer a blueprint from it, no capturing required

[Dabor]

Fighters used to be capturable, I'm not sure why they stopped. At this point you just scoop all of your fighters up from the Black Market. I guess since they're so cheap and most of the cost is in maintaining rather than buying them, it's not like people really wanted to board them...

But if you're playing a modded game, you'd want to steal Teutons or Makos or the like.

[Ranakastrasz]

Repair gantries could reduce/remove penalty for refitting in the field as well. Could give them the logistic bonus like starsector+ has for rooks, castles, and cathedrals as well.

Or, +Cr recovery rate, since that would be kinda useful.
Or, you could say, since you have a repair gantry, you can do constant higher level maintanace, which increases the max CR you can have on your ships, since you can maintain those higher level stuff in the field.

[Weltall]

Actually 7% should be more than acceptable. I am not sure what were the chances in 0.6 for the ships to explode or be totaled, but if you consider the % was 20 and after you got it you had to try your luck again between the ship being captured, self destruct or be totaled, that is the 33% of 20, which is about 7%. Obviously it did not work like that, but aw well XD

[Megas]

If blueprints are still canon, then captured fighters would be useless without the blueprint to build replacements.

Summary of boarding during 0.6 days:
You select ships and amount of marines and crew to send.

If you sent assault teams instead of hard docking, ship had an automatic 50% chance of escaping at that point.

Then, if you do not have enough personnel, ship automatically escaped.  Assault teams required twice the men.

Next, military ships had a 25% chance to self-destruct.  Civilians had 5% chance.  Ships that exploded damaged or destroyed your ships that hard dock.

Finally, successful boarding was 50% chance for hard dock, or 25% chance for assault teams, if the ship did not escape or self-destruct.  Failure here meant "...collateral damage..." broke ship beyond repair.

The best chance of boarding military ships was 37.5% for hard dock or 9.375% for assault teams.  Chance of capture with even hard docking was poor, and you can forget about assault teams.  Boarding was such a grief during the 0.6 days that the outrage expressed by a few posters got them banned (temporarily).

As for my personal experience, best case, I capture ships on the first try; worst case, more than ten failures in a row (and an hour wasted) before success.


Boarding in 0.7 is much better than in 0.6.  If we could board multiple ships, boarding would be much like it was in the 0.5 days.

[Weltall]

I agree that I have facepalmed a lot of times during my play in 0.65.2a. The game was teasing me like crazy, waving in front of my face a really juicy steak, only to throw it in fire and let it burn to nothingness. But indisputably I captured a lot of ships from all sizes, compared to both my play on 0.7.1a vanilla and modded.

I just hope eventually a mod to restore the 0.6 boarding will appear >BUT< with the easy boarding feature from SS+. I am guessing easy boarding just loared the chances of the enemy ship to self destruct or be totaled, making it more of an unlucky event, rather than something that happens most of the time. I felt though that larger ship had lower chances to be intact when captured, being totaled more (at least from my current gameplay with easy boarding).

Boarding to me was like a lucky game. If I am lucky I get a prize. If not, well.. tough luck. In 0.7 it is just something that happens and I just have to make sure I always have enough marines. I am sure I am definitely in the group that has less people, that want the old way of boarding back (well more like the toned down version of SS+)

[Inventor Raccoon]

I liked that the old system had a few different things that could happen, but it was a bit too risky and the fact that you could instantly loose your boarding ship was a tad unfair, since there was nothing you could do if it decided to destroy your ship.

[Weltall]

Playing in ironman was indeed quite risky. But boarding a smaller ship with a larger one was always a solution. I have once reloaded my game, after a really hard to win battle, because I tried to board the capital ship that was offered and I lost my flagship. SS+ easy boarding was really nice, since it lowered the bad luck.. then again the time I reloaded for losing my flagship was when I was using easy boarding ^^;;

[Serenitis]

Increased boarding chance.
Skill based, leadership tree. (Might be a better fit in industry when that gets going.) Each level gives a % bonus to the boarding rolls.

Increased Boarding Ability.
Comes from an otherwise unavailable hull mod which is a standard fit on some specialised ships - eg; Valkyrie.
Gives a bonus to marine effectiveness just for being in the fleet, and multiple ships are additive up to some limit.

Scaffolding & Construction Rigs.
Gives a flat bonus to both repair speed or efficiency, and applies only once. Duplicate rigs of the same type do nothing.
Setting can be changed by either some piece of UI wizardry, or swapping between two mutually exclusive hull mods restricted to rigs. (Or having 2 variants.)
Also gives a passive bonus to boarding by having captured ships be in generally slightly better condition, with an increased chance weapons remain intact.

[Weltall]

Why though Industry.. given that you can consider a good "business" raiding people, stealing their cargo and boarding their ships........ but I still do not think the industry Starsector is aiming for, is something like that. Leadership looks more like the tree that should get it, considering the special-ops skill is found on it.

[Megas]

I would not waste skill points on improved chances of boarding.  I would save-scum instead and put the skill points that were not wasted into more useful skills like anything in the Combat skill tree.

Boarding is fairly good now.  All it needs is the ability to choose what ship (or all of the ships) player wants to board in case of multiple viable targets.

[Weltall]

I would not waste skill points on improved chances of boarding.  I would save-scum instead and put the skill points that were not wasted into more useful skills like anything in the Combat skill tree.

Boarding is fairly good now.  All it needs is the ability to choose what ship (or all of the ships) player wants to board in case of multiple viable targets.

This is even more of a reason, to make raising the chances of capturing a ship, a skill. Only people that would want to capture them easier would go to the length of wasting points to get it. I am sure on this game or other skill based games, people are like "Oh my god, who would ever waste points for that!", where others find that useful for their way of playing.

[Serenitis]

I picked industry because to me that covers things like salvaging and techmining.
Maybe this doesn't match up with what anyone else has in thier heads though.

Re: Skill points.
I'm opposite to Megas here. I absolutely would drop skills into a pure QoL ability just to avoid having to save scum, which is a tedious activity which quickly turns me off to the game as a whole.

[Cik]

savescumming for boarding is really just a stupid hack. if you're going to do it, why not just use the console to spawn the ship and save yourself the trouble? there is really no difference.

the reason people do it is because the salvaging mechanics are dumb. rebalance it and make it less RNG and it won't be a problem anymore.

[Weltall]

Using tricks to abuse the game mechanics to get what you want, is definitely not like using the console. With the same thoughts and a more strict view, why play a game that is not Ironman? If you are going to die and reload to try again, you might as well use console and type in "kill them all", or something that would win you the game, since with reloading you will eventually win. That or type in "escape", since you realized you can't beat them. With tricks you waste time and effort, getting frustrated and when you try many times you end up just moving on  where with console it will take seconds.

Even if the salvage will be boosted and changed or even if I will get afterwards a minigame where getting the ship will be mostly skill based, I will still reload if I will mess it up and try again. I rarely play games in a roguelike way, where I use no reloading, but that is rare. So no matter how much boarding is fixed, I am sure people will keep reloading until they get what they want.

I am not saying this to support what Megas is saying. I am just trying to explain how someone that saves and reloads probably thinks. I definitely get pleasure, enjoyment and satisfaction from the way I play, even if people that do not play like me see it.

Actually the major problem with the way Megas is thinking, is that there are people that play in Ironman mode. They would be unable to use reloading and magically the useless skill, due to reloading feature that they would not have, would become really precious.