Print

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

[Prof_Omnom]

Most people will look at the title and think this is about after action salvage and or scrap. I am instead talking about a full on, boarding torpedo frenzy, in which the survivor is the ship with the most Flak Cannons.

You have the option to launch boarding torpedos if you are near an enemy ship (not sure what the measurements are, very close though). You can launch a series of Missile-Like boarding torpedoes into an enemy ship, most of them likely getting blown to bits in the process. Fortunately, those unlucky enough to survive will commence an attack on vital parts of the ship.

How boarding actions work out depends on specific stats of a ship. For example, A Frigate will have very little chance of launching a successful boarding action against a Cruiser, while a Destroyer boarding another Destroyer is a very even playing field and depends on how the prior battle has gone. Each ship will have a number representing how many shock troopers they have, this number goes down 1 for every boarding action attempted. Every ship also has a crew number which not only goes down for boarding actions, but also goes down if the hull of a ship is repeatedly hit.

Boarding Actions will be crucial in that if a ship is repeatedly boarded, there is a chance that the enemy simply takes over the ship or sabotages, giving it specific Debuffs. Examples are, Flux Core Damaged: The engines will fire off sporadically, Shields take longer to recharge and if your shields are taken down, your ship will start to list, engines firing randomly. Captain Disabled/Killed: Command total will go down to 50% and weapons fire/recharge 25% faster as the crew becomes enraged.

Every ship will also have several anti-boarding torpedo arrays, and fighter formations that are escorting ships can intercept them. Boarding torpedos damage the ships depending on where the actual torpedos hit. A hit to the front of the ship will cause damage to the bridge, while a hit to side of the ship would damage a ships broadside.

I hope you enjoyed reading my post, and hope this gets implemented into the game.

[Alex]

Hi, and welcome for the forum. Please don't create multiple threads with the same suggestion

[Prof_Omnom]

Sorry, my internet is screwing around. Not sure how this happened!

[Alex]

No worries I double-posted myself a couple of times, the forum (and website) have been acting up.

[Prof_Omnom]

Anyway, what do you think of my idea?

[icepick37]

I know SPAZ did it well. Dunno how it'd fit into this game. It's great for SPAZ since goons are essentially currency and fairly easy to come by. That's not really how starfarer will play.

That said, it's a really fun feature and I wouldn't mind seeing it in game, haha.

[Alex]

I think it's very complex to implement! You'd need all sorts of UI change to make it clear to the player what's going on.

Also, if it were implemented, it's not that different from just firing at the enemy ship - ultimately, you're launching stuff at the enemy ship to damage it, which is what regular weapons do already. It's got some differences, sure, but imo not quite enough to justify the complexity it adds.

[floatercommander]

A weapon that disables a number of systems on hit and passes 'through' shields (like fighters) could perhaps do it.

[Flare]

I'm not a fan of cheesy stuff like that. Beams that leached power and caused shields to go kaput without harming the hull was one of the let downs with SPAZ.

[DNAz]

A weapon that disables a number of systems on hit and passes 'through' shields (like fighters) could perhaps do it.

Nothing that negates shield.

Maybe a special beam that does a lot of shield damage and no hull damage.

[icepick37]

I'm not a fan of cheesy stuff like that. Beams that leached power and caused shields to go kaput without harming the hull was one of the let downs with SPAZ.

Why is that? The reasoning is cheesy, but the varied tactics it allows is not.

Also, if it were implemented, it's not that different from just firing at the enemy ship - ultimately, you're launching stuff at the enemy ship to damage it, which is what regular weapons do already. It's got some differences, sure, but imo not quite enough to justify the complexity it adds.

Yeah that is true. SPAZ supposedly adds extra stuff like stealing plans. But you don't really do that in starfarer...  (I say supposedly cause that has yet to work for me...)

One tactical advantage is that you can swoop in, drop your marines, then haul tail outta there while they do the hard work, thus saving you damage at the cost of lots of marines.   Maybe you could make a weapon that attaches to hulls for delayed damage. Spider drones or something?

[Flare]

I'm not a fan of cheesy stuff like that. Beams that leached power and caused shields to go kaput without harming the hull was one of the let downs with SPAZ.

Why is that? The reasoning is cheesy, but the varied tactics it allows is not.

I don't think there's a rational reason behind my disdain for such weapons, I just don't like them. Maybe if I were to explain myself a bit, they seem to be weapons that are only possible for the sole purpose that they are in a game. For example, it certainly seems very strange to have something that would increase the flux levels yet not outright kill everyone on board the ship afflicted or at least give them copious amounts of cancer.

Likewise, if I designed a weapon in real life that allowed me to suck the fuel out of a modern day main battle tank, someone will inevitably come along as say that I could have used one aspect of this fuel sucking gadget and blown up the tank several kilometres away with something the size of a rifle. These things seem incredibly complicated, the understanding of how they work ought to have provided designs of other weapons much more successful than what we have. I hope that uncoordinated rant was intelligible. These weapons just seem to exist due to the fact that they can exist, never mind what other more practical weapons would be available if you took one apart and used the innovations inside of them. I guess what I'm saying is their fantasticness above all other weapons that leaves a lot to be explained. It's like those spider mines in Starcraft. It has always bugged me that no one ever built a mine laying vehicle. The rule of fun, while very, very important, does not have to be invoked a every instance. Sometimes, making the elements within a game do what is practical provides more mileage.

One tactical advantage is that you can swoop in, drop your marines, then haul tail outta there while they do the hard work, thus saving you damage at the cost of lots of marines.   Maybe you could make a weapon that attaches to hulls for delayed damage. Spider drones or something?

Like mines for instance? Those would be awesome, imagine if you could deploy a few on the strategic level.

 In any case, I don't understand the spider mine thingy. Why would you fly so close that you could slap one onto the hull and let it detonate later? Why not just strap the spider warhead thing onto the tip of a missile and let it detonate while it's travelling several times the speed of sound into the side of a ship instantly?

[CommComms]

In any case, I don't understand the spider mine thingy. Why would you fly so close that you could slap one onto the hull and let it detonate later? Why not just strap the spider warhead thing onto the tip of a missile and let it detonate while it's travelling several times the speed of sound into the side of a ship instantly?

Strictly for the sake of argument, you could have an extremely long ranged missile, maybe a modified pilum, that would attach to the hull instead of detonating like normally, then, when the ship is engaged in gun range the weapons fire detonates the attached missiles, quickly damaging and disabling the weapons/systems near where they were attached.  This would give the still functional ship a significant early advantage in a fight. 

I'm not saying it would be practical or should be implemented, just that the idea has some merit.

[icepick37]

The rule of fun, while very, very important, does not have to be invoked a every instance. Sometimes, making the elements within a game do what is practical provides more mileage.

Point well made.

Like mines for instance? Those would be awesome, imagine if you could deploy a few on the strategic level.

Yes, okay. That makes the most sense.

In any case, I don't understand the spider mine thingy. Why would you fly so close that you could slap one onto the hull and let it detonate later? Why not just strap the spider warhead thing onto the tip of a missile and let it detonate while it's travelling several times the speed of sound into the side of a ship instantly?

Yes, point made. Hrm...

[Kilvanya]

Mines are not offensive. they are a restrictive weapon,
meaning you use them to deny paths of movement to your enemy