Print

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

[AxleMC131]

From what I saw about XIV variants, the "...performed by pre-collapse industrial methods (or techniques)..." (caveat: may not be exact text, but close enough if not) could just mean Hegemony could build new XIV ships with pre-collapse industry tech.  Survivor of original XIV does imply the ship is likely pre-collapse.

Very true. Personally I'm not very good at flying slow, heavily armoured ships and much prefer something quicker and lighter for jumping in and out of combat (although I've found I'm useless in command of any form of Phase ship!), and I see the XIV ships very much as collector's pieces.

[Megas]

The only XIV ship where the speed cut might make a difference (between being able to kite or not against the things that matter) is Dominator.  Otherwise, the main advantage of XIV is the extra OP and better flux stats.  More armor is better (though not as much as speed), but being able to cram more stuff and vent spam more easily makes the XIV ships better.

[DatonKallandor]

Now, obviously, you'd need an appropriate reputation & commission with a faction that can do the conversions.  And I don't think it deserves its own front-row button in the ship UI - a conversion is, much like refurbishing a (D)-class ship, something that would be expensive and not to be undertaken lightly.

Since you mention it, there has to be UI for D-class refurbishment - that would be a great place for other types of conversions too.

[OzarMidrashim]

"Thus, one more option:  when docked at a port, you can “restore” a ship to peak condition, getting rid of all d-mods. This is quite costly, up to several times the cost of buying a new hull – but is always an option for a ship that’s worth it..."
"For using ship recovery to acquire new ships that you’re not able to find for sale, then – compared to current boarding there’s a much higher chance to be able to recover one, but a higher cost to fully restore it once you do have it."

Why not mix credits, supplies and heavy machinery (and any other related commodity) as a "currency" used to remove D-mods?
D-mods would use diffirent elements depending on their nature/origin, and and ships would get theose more in line with their function, so civilian ship would more likley loose structural integrity, primitive military suffer from armour micro-damages, tugs and frigates engine failures and advanced prism/teleport craft get some electronic glitches.
There was an old saying about those "restorations" (as i worked in this branch for time) and even more common in recent times for everyone..."it might be more cost-effective to buy a new one"...mostly due to policy of mostly electronic-oriented companies and an extreme example for industry. For balance purposes costs need to be high, but "several times the cost of buying a new hull" is balance-breaker in other way around. Same as new one would work, as you already payed in supplies to drag it out of debrie field costs are higer, two times would give you a pause...but several times - i hope its a hyperbole.

As for boarding...i love boarding in almost every other game...lets say taking over is my little "fixation" from dungeon keeper to Homeworld (where in main storyline I captured all enemy ships above corvete, not destroyed even one exept bugged attack carrier of turanic raiders) ...so new system even if a large step forward brings mix of smile and sadness.
I still hope for good boarding system...but more oriented around EMP weaponry and specialized to this role craft, like we have a carrier for fighters maybe reffited salvage/mining rigs. Then use marines, who had easy time in their power armors killling those officers. Or infiltrator frigates.
We can't play pirates or get immersive feeling without it. Firefly and Serenity would not stand for it =P

Read today all blog updates, love your aproach expecially around rising Time-To-Kill on higer levels.
Its more fun when those large ships struggle and struggle rather than volatile exploding, what about making their chunks break off like in SCY Nation, as i see Orbital Stations/Platforms almost have it?

Regards!

[Alex]

Hi! Sorry if this is a bit short; a bit busy but still wanted to reply.

Why not mix credits, supplies and heavy machinery (and any other related commodity) as a "currency" used to remove D-mods?
D-mods would use diffirent elements depending on their nature/origin, and and ships would get theose more in line with their function, so civilian ship would more likley loose structural integrity, primitive military suffer from armour micro-damages, tugs and frigates engine failures and advanced prism/teleport craft get some electronic glitches.

That feels like adding-detail-for-sake-of-"realism". As with adding complexity anywhere, the question is, what does it get us mechanically?

There was an old saying about those "restorations" (as i worked in this branch for time) and even more common in recent times for everyone..."it might be more cost-effective to buy a new one"...mostly due to policy of mostly electronic-oriented companies and an extreme example for industry. For balance purposes costs need to be high, but "several times the cost of buying a new hull" is balance-breaker in other way around. Same as new one would work, as you already payed in supplies to drag it out of debrie field costs are higer, two times would give you a pause...but several times - i hope its a hyperbole.

Ah, but the point is that it's only useful for ships you can't get otherwise, i.e. rare ships. For anything you're able to buy, it's absolutely not worth restoring a d-hull. It's not meant to be a cheaper way to get normal hulls.

As for boarding...i love boarding in almost every other game...lets say taking over is my little "fixation" from dungeon keeper to Homeworld (where in main storyline I captured all enemy ships above corvete, not destroyed even one exept bugged attack carrier of turanic raiders) ...so new system even if a large step forward brings mix of smile and sadness.

Fair enough

I still hope for good boarding system...but more oriented around EMP weaponry and specialized to this role craft, like we have a carrier for fighters maybe reffited salvage/mining rigs. Then use marines, who had easy time in their power armors killling those officers. Or infiltrator frigates.
We can't play pirates or get immersive feeling without it. Firefly and Serenity would not stand for it =P

This has come up a bunch, but the short answer is I don't like the idea of mixing boarding directly into combat. It's too much to try to cram in, I think - consider how it would affect the AI, and just in general how combat plays out. If it's an alternate way to defeat ships *and profit from it*, there's a high risk that the player would feel forced to do it even if they don't want to, too.

Its more fun when those large ships struggle and struggle rather than volatile exploding, what about making their chunks break off like in SCY Nation, as i see Orbital Stations/Platforms almost have it?

Stations are basically that, yeah. For regular ships, I don't want to do that for... various reasons (Complexity in various aspects, not necessarily mechanically desirable, etc.)

[Deshara]

Its more fun when those large ships struggle and struggle rather than volatile exploding, what about making their chunks break off like in SCY Nation, as i see Orbital Stations/Platforms almost have it?

Stations are basically that, yeah. For regular ships, I don't want to do that for... various reasons (Complexity in various aspects, not necessarily mechanically desirable, etc.)

#1 of which is that it's actually not fun to play a ship that's already broken but isn't dead yet. There's a direct correlation between how long between having irrevocably lost an engagement and how long it takes to hit the 0 state and get to reset & the frustration of the player (see: moba's)

[Cyan Leader]

That feels like adding-detail-for-sake-of-"realism". As with adding complexity anywhere, the question is, what does it get us mechanically?

I'd argue that giving meaning to commodities for players that aren't traders is a worthy addition. As a combat focused player I only look at them as money that I will soon trade for at the next station I dock with. However, if I need metals (or other specific materials) to repair D-mods I might consider not scuttling it for other more expensive commodities every single time, thus making the choice of what to keep post-battle more interesting. It'd also make players think if they should sell everything while docking or use their station storage.

[Megas]

In the end, there is not much difference between boarding a ship and killing the enemy crew versus blowing up the ship, killing everyone in the process, and put the pieces back together for a functional ship (then limp it back for full restoration).  The end result is you captured a valuable enemy ship.

[Megas]

This has come up a bunch, but the short answer is I don't like the idea of mixing boarding directly into combat. It's too much to try to cram in, I think - consider how it would affect the AI, and just in general how combat plays out. If it's an alternate way to defeat ships *and profit from it*, there's a high risk that the player would feel forced to do it even if they don't want to, too.

As an example, the game Endless Sky has this problem.  Until depreciation was introduced, looting and boarding were the most profitable activity by far (and may still be, though not as much as before), and since only the flagship (which you control) can loot and board, Bactrian was (and may still be) the no-brainer flagship choice for optimal play, despite stronger combat ships available later in the game.

[AxleMC131]

I'd argue that giving meaning to commodities for players that aren't traders is a worthy addition. As a combat focused player I only look at them as money that I will soon trade for at the next station I dock with. However, if I need metals (or other specific materials) to repair D-mods I might consider not scuttling it for other more expensive commodities every single time, thus making the choice of what to keep post-battle more interesting. It'd also make players think if they should sell everything while docking or use their station storage.

This is actually a really good point. I have never used any storage space at stations for the simple reason that I never keep any commodities, except for supplies and fuel. Even if it seems mechanically unfeasible, I feel lots of players like Cyan and myself currently see metals, heavy machinery, organics, volatiles etc. simply as "more cash". Personally I think you could do worse things than add context to those materials by making them actually usable by the player.

[Alex]

That's a bit circular, isn't it? Giving more meaning to something can be a nice bonus, but it shouldn't be the main reason. If that's the case, the right design move is probably to remove both things.

For commodities in particular, a lot of them don't have a point right now and mostly act as background flavor, so it's totally expected they're "just credits". That'll change gradually (the next release will give more meaning to a couple, etc), but stuff that gives them meaning will be stuff that's good to add for *other reasons*, i.e. commodities are a projected part of the implementation of that stuff, just added to the game early. Some commodities may change/be removed/etc during this process.

[AxleMC131]

That's a bit circular, isn't it? Giving more meaning to something can be a nice bonus, but it shouldn't be the main reason. If that's the case, the right design move is probably to remove both things.

I suppose that's true. When it comes down to it, "kinda nice" and "necessary" are two very different things.

For commodities in particular, a lot of them don't have a point right now and mostly act as background flavor, so it's totally expected they're "just credits". That'll change gradually (the next release will give more meaning to a couple, etc), but stuff that gives them meaning will be stuff that's good to add for *other reasons*, i.e. commodities are a projected part of the implementation of that stuff, just added to the game early. Some commodities may change/be removed/etc during this process.

Can't argue with that. Again it's a balance between two alternate points: "like the real world" and "just a game". Keeping a balance between them is important, and I'm no expert. I can settle for background flavour. I'm sure it's just my human nature being impossible to satisfy, haha!

Still, nice to know some commodities will have practical uses - or at least a little more meaning - in future.

[Voyager I]

We're pushing up on the one-month mark again.  Wasn't this the last major feature to be blogged about?

[Alex]

We're pushing up on the one-month mark again.  Wasn't this the last major feature to be blogged about?

Indeed. Currently working on exploration content (putting all those features to work!); after that, some end-to-end playtesting.

[AxleMC131]

Currently working on exploration content (putting all those features to work!); after that, some end-to-end playtesting.

:O Not too long until the update then. Can't wait!