Print

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

[xenoargh]

If I go to an abandoned station with no skill, I can only destroy it and loot the debris, and I get nothing but junk, or maybe one rare item.

This is one of the reasons why I removed the level caps in Rebal; I don't want to play a character that's so gimped at the high end that they somehow cannot salvage, even with a giant fleet.

I really feel should happen is that:

1.  Salvaging takes time (like installing a Comm Sniffer).
2.  Skills, crew numbers and Rigs should reduce the time spent, not the loot you get at the end.  Realistically, the loot's all there; it's just how long it would take to get it.

Sure, this means that, in unpopulated Systems with great abandoned stuff, we get Monty Hauls, if we're willing to sit around long enough (but that's preventable by having even those Systems see some Pirates / Scavengers show up). 

So make it cost several days of time for the speculative act of looting without skills or Rigs; the amount of time should be dependent on the size of the loot pile; maybe an abandoned Station takes a week, whereas a Cache takes an hour.  Then there's a big benefit to using same, if there is time pressure in the game design, but it's not flat-out prohibitive to ignore that part of Industry.  Given that we're all expecting more Skills in Industry... if the level cap stays in place, this problem will get worse, not better.

[Sutopia]

I got an idea 
How about just REMOVE the damn combat tree?

Here's the story
I just re-watched "Gundam Seed" lately and the plot is just like a hammer hitting my head.
The fleet commander do join the battle, technically, but lacks any real combat skill.
The flagship and CIC are all under officer's command (making all the combat decisions) and the fleet commander make tactical decisions like concentrate fire at certain enemy, go somewhere as top priority and things like that.
So, why do our character even NEED a combat tree? We should be sitting comfortably on a powerful flagship and LET OFFICER DO HIS/HER WORK on VERY EXACT SAME SHIP, make sense?
(I'm not gonna go to the part when enemy commander actually rides FIGHTERS to join the battle... )

That is to say, only officers own combat skills and apply to his/her ship exclusively while changing flagship doesn't nullify the effect.

[TaLaR]

@Sutopia
Assuming nothing else changes, this might actually kill viability of larger fleets. If I have only up to 10 combat-capable ships (rest is officer-less fodder), I'd rather chain-deploy them instead of letting AI waste what essentially becomes my few extra lives in this scenario.

Just having separate combat and campaign points on player character does not have drawbacks like this.

[Sutopia]

@Sutopia
Assuming nothing else changes, this might actually kill viability of larger fleets. If I have only up to 10 combat-capable ships (rest is officer-less fodder), I'd rather chain-deploy them instead of letting AI waste what essentially becomes my extra lives in this scenario.

Just having separate combat and campaign points on player character does not have drawbacks like this.

You do know currently the player combat skill is applied on whichever ship you're on EVEN AFTER TRANSFER FLAGSHIP.
You're already free to do what you stated in current version by going full combat tree and rapidly change your flagship, and doing even better for all your officer only getting logistic skill to make them all 100% CR.

EDIT?
Let's sort things out.

Applying a separate combat skill tree can cause problems.
If the level is still limited so you cannot get all skills, it can cause similar condition to current whole tree, players are "tied" on certain type of flagship in end game.
If the level limit can gain you every skill, there is no choice or decisions made in end game and that was one of the reason making skill overhaul so I'd say that's also a NO.

On the other hand, making combat skill only on officers enable you to play different styles of combat just about every battle. Since the officer skill levels are limited, decisions happen. It's two birds with one stone change.

[TaLaR]

You do know currently the player combat skill is applied on whichever ship you're on EVEN AFTER TRANSFER FLAGSHIP.
You're already free to do what you stated in current version by going full combat tree and rapidly change your flagship, and doing even better for all your officer only getting logistic skill to make them all 100% CR.

That's the point - currently I'm free to do it or not. Fleet is large enough to have 10 officer-AI ships and enough extra ships for me. But with your proposal, only up to 10 combat-capable ships remain in fleet. That's not enough to both deploy a fleet and keep reserves. And If I had to choose like that, fleet gets the short end of the stick.

[Megas]

I want to be the ace pilot that slaughters everything.  If I lead a fleet, I want to be the superhero unit at the front while the wingmen support.  I do not want to be the wormy puppet master or administrator that hides behind minions stronger than him.

Currently, I need to be wormy puppet-master (and/or administrator if I want QoL or exploration stuff) to be optimal with the current skill system, but that is no fun.

I do not want officers much stronger than unskilled that only they matter like during 0.7.x.  That is effectively having a fleet cap of 11 ships, with civilians and new acquisitions taking up the remaining slots.

[Sutopia]

You do know currently the player combat skill is applied on whichever ship you're on EVEN AFTER TRANSFER FLAGSHIP.
You're already free to do what you stated in current version by going full combat tree and rapidly change your flagship, and doing even better for all your officer only getting logistic skill to make them all 100% CR.

That's the point - currently I'm free to do it or not. Fleet is large enough to have 10 officer-AI ships and enough extra ships for me. But with your proposal, only up to 10 combat-capable ships remain in fleet. That's not enough to both deploy a fleet and keep reserves. And If I had to choose like that, fleet gets the short end of the stick.

And make you superman again just like how .72 solo fleet?
You're proposing changing current:
30 "buffed" combat ship or
1 "super" combat ship + 29 "so-so" combat ship
into
1 "Ssuper" combat ship + 29 "buffed" combat ships avail in battle you know.
It's not that unpiloted ships are all garbage, they still share and benefit from every fleet buff and that was kinda the point why the skill points are so restricted in .8+'s skill overhaul: make decisions.

[Megas]

Currently, it is cheaper to boost whole fleet than flagship only.  It is better to spend one point in Officer Management to get two more officers that can get multiple pilot-only skills instead of three points for a useful but puny bonus in a Combat or fighter skill for yourself only.

With few skill points, player is pushed to get everything to boost the fleet, if ignoring QoL or exploration skills.  There is not much room for personal luxuries.

[Sutopia]

Currently, it is cheaper to boost whole fleet than flagship only.  It is better to spend one point in Officer Management to get two more officers that can get multiple pilot-only skills instead of three points for a useful but puny bonus in a Combat or fighter skill for yourself only.

With few skill points, player is pushed to get everything to boost the fleet, if ignoring QoL or exploration skills.  There is not much room for personal luxuries.

That really doesn't justify making combat skill tree entirely an exclusive tree.
The only result is making you stronger than ever before, with all the fleet buff AND all the personal combat ability, stronger than 0.72 soloers.
I don't really see a con of making you able to override a "limited" "skilled" ship's control while keeping all the officer buff. If you choose to override control of an unskilled (no officer) ship it's almost the same as how you max all fleet buff and ride a ship with no skill in current version(.81a).
That way you CAN somehow be supersoldier and you DO fight in battle WITH SKILLS properly limited by already existed mechanics.

[JDCollie]

Personally, I would split skills between Campaign and Combat, have separate skill point pools, and move all the carriers skills into the combat side. Furthermore, I would have combat points be retrainable at friendly ports for a fee (probably 1000 x player level), allowing the player to adjust their skill layout for the task at hand. This way the player wouldn't feel like they were crippling their strategic capacity just to be effective on the battlefield, and would also allow them to adjust their skills to fit their fleet as it grows and evolves.

If you're concerned that having a separate tree for combat will make the player overpowered, either nerf the skills, or reduce the number of points available to spend. Additionally, I would have the player's skills replace the officer's skills if they take over a piloted ship. Having the officer's abilities still affect a ship taken over by the player seems like an unintended mechanic to me, and I don't like the implication that I should be forced to switch away from my flagship in order to be combat effective.

[Alex]

Additionally, I would have the player's skills replace the officer's skills if they take over a piloted ship.

(Already how it works and has since forever; not sure where you're getting info to the opposite effect. Just wanted to clear that up!)

[Sutopia]

Additionally, I would have the player's skills replace the officer's skills if they take over a piloted ship.

(Already how it works and has since forever; not sure where you're getting info to the opposite effect. Just wanted to clear that up!)

So how do you think about the idea of "not" replacing the skill, boss?

Removing all the combat skill (to be precise, all skills that only apply to flagship), let player focus on strategic skills while they have the ability to override control of an officer ship while retaining officer's combat skill set.
Just like you boarding that ship and give direct command to the combat pros and they loyally execute your orders.
Personally really dislike the concept of a man pro at EVERYTHING, just too unrealistic and making player some "VERY special existence".

[Alex]

From a realism point of view, of course it makes sense. Gameplay-wise, I don't like it, though - the player building up skills that make their flagship more powerful can be a lot of fun, and I don't want to lose that. Realism on that level is not at all a consideration here, I mean, we're spending points to instantly unlock bonuses that might apply half the Sector away in the case of colonies.

I do have some thoughts about how to adjust the skills a bit to generally improve things, but not exactly ready to talk about it, or even sure that it'll make it into the next release. And still keeping an eye on this thread, as you can see

[Sutopia]

I mean, we're spending points to instantly unlock bonuses that might apply half the Sector away in the case of colonies.

I do have some thoughts about how to adjust the skills a bit to generally improve things, but not exactly ready to talk about it, or even sure that it'll make it into the next release. And still keeping an eye on this thread, as you can see

Cool!
I'm pretty sure Alex, the big boss of the sector, never disappoints any player. 
Looking forward to better solutions.

[Alex]

Hah, thanks for the vote of confidence