Print

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

[AxleMC131]

This stems from a thought I expressed just now in another Suggestions thread. Basically, I'm a little confused by the missions you can pick up in Starsector's campaign, which - aside from Commissions - all encompass finding some form of cargo and then getting it to a location within a deadline. On its own I have no problem with this mechanic, but in the grand scheme of the game (and some dubious mission criteria) I have a few issues I would like to mention.

1) Mission deadline. I have no idea if procurement missions generate with a specific deadline based on how far the mission pickup and cargo destination are away from each other, but it certainly doesn't seem it. An awful lot of the time I find my fleet being asked to transport X amount of cargo from Arcadia to Hybrasil in 15 or even 10 days. Even with a speed 10 fleet, emergency-burning off cooldown the entire way, this is not possible. I would very much like to see this reconfigured to set the procurement mission deadline roughly on the time it takes to travel from the mission pickup and cargo destination locations, with some leeway for finding the cargo and then modified by how desperate the recipient is for the delivery (is it an emergency, or a casual delivery?). Needless to say, I do love the "bonus for quick delivery" bit of the mission when they occur, as it usually works for a larger audience of fleets - slower fleets can gladly accept the base payment, while a faster fleet can attempt the speed run for some added benefit.

2) General transport contracts. Procurement contracts (Find X cargo and deliver to Y location within Z days) are all well and good, but they seem a little strange to completely make up Starsectors contracts. I feel there should also be, perhaps more commonly, General Transport contracts you can accept, which instead of forcing you to find the required cargo, give you the cargo straight up and say "Take it over here as fast as you can". I imagine this might encourage players to steal cargo, which I believe (don't quote me on this) is why we have Procurement contracts instead of this: it would make an easy way for players to infinitely farm cargo for free. A way around this may be to require a positive standing with the faction to be offered the contract, or perhaps if you accept the goods and then make off with them, when the deadline runs out the employer contacts the authorities and sends a fleet after you to see what the hell you're up to...

Additionally, to balance the existing procurement contracts further, I think the destination for them should be the same place you pick up the contract. Feels a little more right to check the jobs at a planet/station and see a local guy who's looking for some specific cargo [that isn't currently present there] and requires you to go out looking for it.

3) Bounties. Not just set by one faction on its enemy, but the "So-and-so is a notorious pirate captain with a sizeable fleet..." bounty. I would suggest this comes up in the missions as a contract, rather than a general comms transmission. Bounties would then be more like going into the sheriff's office and looking at the MOST WANTED board. That feels more like bounty hunting to me, other than waiting for the authorities to announce them.


I'm sure there are many reasons why Starsector's missions are set out the way they are at present, but hopefully this is some food for thought for some players (and maybe even some developers!)

[Midnight Kitsune]

3) Bounties. Not just set by one faction on its enemy, but the "So-and-so is a notorious pirate captain with a sizeable fleet..." bounty. I would suggest this comes up in the missions as a contract, rather than a general comms transmission. Bounties would then be more like going into the sheriff's office and looking at the MOST WANTED board. That feels more like bounty hunting to me, other than waiting for the authorities to announce them.

I can see why the bounties are broadcast. Mainly because it would be a warning to civilians and it would also attract bounty hunters in the near by area.

[DatonKallandor]

I don't get why they wouldn't be both - general advisory for everyone in range and then put into the news/contracts section for people who come by later who weren't in range to hear the initial warning. Fluffy and good for gameplay.

[Midnight Kitsune]

I don't get why they wouldn't be both - general advisory for everyone in range and then put into the news/contracts section for people who come by later who weren't in range to hear the initial warning. Fluffy and good for gameplay.

News and Police bands don't just broadcast once if a heavily wanted criminal is in the area though

[AxleMC131]

Aye. Perhaps the comms broadcasts could say, "Known criminal/pirate/ganglord (or whatever) spotted in this system - take caution, do not attempt to approach them, they are extremely dangerous..." blah blah blah... So a warning, but very little information other than their general area. If you think you could have a go at catching the bounty, you could head to "the sheriff's office" (as I like to put it) and pick up further details.

Also, I think bounties shouldn't just say "A sizeable fleet". I reckon we need a bit more detail - at minimum it could be known the classification of the ship the bounty target was last seen in command of.

[nomadic_leader]

Yes please. It's inconsistent and non-intuitive that the bounties aren't in the same place as the other campaign missions.

Also agree about the procurement contracts. There should be some that just give you the cargo and tell you to take it somewhere. Oh no the player could sell the cargo! But there are so many ways to prevent that as an exploit (this is a common 'mission' in real life too and cf hundreds of other games)-- since the client wants for example some specific luxury goods, not just any luxury goods bought off the market, make the mission cargo so you can't sell/split it, and/or lose 3x monetary value and/or small rep hit if you jettison it or don't deliver by deadline. Or use special cargos (with a generic crate icon) like muffins or chairs that can't be sold anywhere else.

[AxleMC131]

Yes please. It's inconsistent and non-intuitive that the bounties aren't in the same place as the other campaign missions.

Also agree about the procurement contracts. There should be some that just give you the cargo and tell you to take it somewhere. Oh no the player could sell the cargo! But there are so many ways to prevent that as an exploit (this is a common 'mission' in real life too and cf hundreds of other games)-- since the client wants for example some specific luxury goods, not just any luxury goods bought off the market, make the mission cargo so you can't sell/split it, and/or lose 3x monetary value and/or small rep hit if you jettison it or don't deliver by deadline. Or use special cargos (with a generic crate icon) like muffins or chairs that can't be sold anywhere else.

I'd be more for having "unsellable" cargo than new types of cargo you can only get for contracts. The latter would add an unnecessary level of complexity I feel.

Perhaps you could also have to pay a bond when you accept the contract, and when you deliver the goods, you get it back plus the mission payment.

[Techhead]

My opinion: I'd make failure-to-deliver hit you much harder on rep than other missions. Someone in the realm of -20. (Or maybe even more.) Just include a fair grace period so that, as long as you don't irreparably lose the cargo, there's a space between "we're not paying you for this late delivery" and "tell us why we should ever hire you again?"

[AxleMC131]

My opinion: I'd make failure-to-deliver hit you much harder on rep than other missions. Someone in the realm of -20. (Or maybe even more.) Just include a fair grace period so that, as long as you don't irreparably lose the cargo, there's a space between "we're not paying you for this late delivery" and "tell us why we should ever hire you again?"

Yeah, it'd have to be balanced for "player ran off with cargo" and "player was detained by hyperspace storm/bad positioning of jump points" and "player was attacked by pirates and lost the cargo"

[TaLaR]

I prefer broadcast bounties as is. Just think what would you do as bountygiver:
- Broadcast to ensure that everyone even remotely interested tries to kill you target,
- Or limit possible pool of bountyhunters by making them go through arbitrary and unnecessary paper-filling process in person, few solar systems away from target...

[Toxcity]

From a gameplay perspective bounties being seperate from missions is fine. Having them together would just needlessly add clutter. The seperation will especially be useful next version when there is a bigger sector.

[DatonKallandor]

That line of reasoning would mean we could never get more mission types because the clutter would be impossible to handle. Better to solve the clutter problem now.

[nomadic_leader]

There's no need for severe rep hits since they're annoying, and from an "in world" standpoint it's completely unnecessary as long as the aggrieved party is adequately compensated for their loss of product and damage to reputation. So either a failure fee or security deposit before mission is enough. Only a small rep ding is necessary.

Though if you miss a pirate delivery some guys in a buffalo II might show up to break your legs.

But I really do think special, unsellable/unsplittable cargos are the best and they add flavour too. It isn't complicated, it's just a csv file with like two fields: a list of cargo names to be chosen at random for the missions, and a specification of which .png file in /Java/graphics/icons/cargo/ to use as the icon for that cargo.

Code

Bunnies biospecimens.png
Miners crew4.png
Chairs furniture.png
Coffeemakers heavymachinery.png (am I right?)
Helium volatilesB.png
etc...

The clutter argument is invalid: The Comms UI must be scalable to higher volume of missions. Maybe isn't, since each mission takes up an inordinate amount of space, OTOH it's nice because it provides all necessary information without additional click.

Clutter can be reduced by fading and sorting the list so missions the player can't accept due to lack of  cargo space/reputation are at the bottom, but still visible so the player can see what they're missing, and accept them if they don't mind penalties. But they'll be steered towards the missions they can do. Just having more planets in the sector doesn't mean there will be too many missions: The mission definition file should limit the appearance of the mission to a reasonable amount, rather then cluttering comms with missions to every other single planet in the sector.

Or perhaps missions could be sorted into some very broad categories with tabbed interface depending on what sort of action is to be carried out: Combat/Escort, Freight, Exploration, and Misc  (here the story driven quests).

The SS UI does need to be able to support campaign missions better, and it can- it's a problem that's been solved in many many other space games, and it shouldn't be a reason to not have missions or not put them all together in one logical place.

[Toxcity]

Missions and bounties are different though. No matter how many mission types there are, the player has to accept them at a station. That alone can keep the clutter in the missions tab low.

Bounties on the other hand are automatic. They happen whether or not the player does anything regarding them. Those differences are another reason the 2 are seperate.

[AxleMC131]

Should I also mention "passenger transport" contracts? Because we got so many commercial transports (Starliner, Nebula, Mudskipper) in the last update(s?) another thing that surprises me is that I've never seen civilians anywhere in the starsector universe.