Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21); Blog post: Of Slipstreams and Sensor Ghosts (09/24/21)

Author Topic: Permanent system damage  (Read 3691 times)

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4306
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Permanent system damage
« on: May 15, 2012, 10:05:33 AM »

Hi,
I always felt that the subsystem damage system could use an overhaul. Right now only weapons and engines can be damaged, and only for a few seconds. It might add some tactical depth if those subsystems (and possibly even new ones, like sensors, comm, shields or hangars) could be permanently damaged and had to be repaired after the battle  (like armor). The way it is now every ship stays at 100% attack power, even if its armor and hull a already ragged. I'm not an advocate of great realism, but that just doesn't feel quite right.


That way new tactical goals would arise, some examples:

- the enemy fleet is too strong and fast, but some frigates manage to take out its paragons engines so the player fleet can escape in the starsystem view
- the enemy battleships torpedo launchers could be taken out by bombers before close combat with the players battleship begins
 
Once the starsystem map has more possibilities like fleet splitting or helping allies there are many more interesting scenarios possible.


There  are different ways of implementing such a system. Maybe the simplest way is to count how often a subsystem is temporarily deactivated. And every time it gets frizzled there is a increasing chance for it to be permanently offline.

f.e.:
1. time offline : 100% reboot chance
2. time offline : 95% reboot chance
3. time offline : 90% reboot chance
4. time offline : 80% reboot chance
and so on

It would have to be balanced, so permanently damaged subsystems don't occur often by chance, but are usually the result of a deliberate enemy attempt to shut it of. Otherwise it might get annoying.

I think (hope) such a system would be relatively simple to implement (no new graphics) but would open many new ways of playing the game.

Thanks for reading

Cheers
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

KDR_11k

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2012, 11:10:04 AM »

The problem I see is that it favors ships that can avoid subsystem damage entirely (e.g. by heavy shielding) over those that can simply survive it and fight on (especially heavy ships like the Enforcer, Dominator, Onslaught line).
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4306
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2012, 03:16:08 PM »

Mh, good point. Maybe that could be compensated by not allowing permanent damage before the armor in the subsystem specific region is destroyed.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1996
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2012, 03:48:19 PM »

Or how about ballistic weapons have more hitpoints and better reboot chance?

The Low-tech always struck me as the old reliable kind... Ballistic weapons are generally less delicate than Energy too IMO...

Now missiles could be a problem so maybe the things are effected by armor as well

Also then EMP would have to be nerfed.... unless they have 100 percent reboot and doesn't count for chance decrease
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2012, 05:30:42 PM »

I don't know if I'm a fan of a permanent disable on ship systems. I don't feel like low-tech ships need to have any added disadvantages, but I do prefer the low-tech, so my opinion might be biased. I wouldn't mind flight decks and sensors being able to be disabled, though. Maybe every time they went offline it took longer for them to come back online?
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1996
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2012, 06:07:35 PM »

again... Low tech weps should have more hp and more reboot chance
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

TJJ

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1885
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2012, 06:10:15 PM »

Already been suggested several times.

I believe Alex has posted a blog entry on this specific issue, and believes that permanent damage is a bad idea as it results in a downward spiral in combat effectiveness.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1996
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2012, 06:12:46 PM »

ya...

I don't think it takes into account the whole multiple times before disabling thing tho....

that can essentially allow dev to control how hard it is to perma-disable without effecting how hard it is to disable
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Karmashock

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2012, 03:27:55 AM »

I think something like this is a good idea. Just so it encourages a fleet that has sustained combat damage to go into dock rather then just repair everything in transit.

This whole idea could interact with the supply ship idea too. So maybe supply ships can repair serious damage by manufacturing new parts from supplies? Just an extra reason to keep one around in larger fleets.
Logged

Alrenous

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2012, 03:45:02 AM »

I still think it should happen, but only after the hull is gone. Instead of simply killing a ship, you start taking out critical systems, and the ship only dies if the critical system in question is the reactor.
Logged

Aleskander

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2012, 04:32:51 AM »

This would be interesting to be able to damage certain subsystems on a ship, if only for a few seconds. Keep in mind that the hull of the ship is not those systems. The hull of the ship is how it stays together. Imagine a naval vessel, the hull is the only way it stays floating. Without the hull everything is destroyed anyway.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4306
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2012, 05:42:34 AM »

I like the "less damage to kinetic weapons" idea to balance between high- and lowtech. It might be good to combine it with a specific factor for each ship that determines the resistance of other subsystems (engines and later additions). It sounds plausible that those big old fireholes of an Onslaught are a lot tougher than the slender, efficent engines of an Odissey. This is also a factor that could be easily augmented via the officers/the character.


@Alrenous: While I like the reactor-kill idea in principle, I see no simple way of implementig it. Keep in mind the ships are 2D, so a subsystem has to be at an edge in order to be damaged. A reactor is typcally in the ships middle.


Question: Does Alex or somebody involved with the development actually read this suggestions from time to time?
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

WKOB

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 732
  • Odobenidine Benefactor
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2012, 05:51:34 AM »

Alex is pretty much alone from my understand, with some community help and, yes, he fairly often comes through and does a wave of replies.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1996
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Permanent system damage
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2012, 12:23:55 AM »

I think something like this is a good idea. Just so it encourages a fleet that has sustained combat damage to go into dock rather then just repair everything in transit.

I just love the sight of a bunch of ships from a scattered fleet regroup (still red hot from damage) and limp towards their hostile counterpart (presumably just as banged up) with about half of the weapons on each ship still functioning, fighting to the last man

One of the many things I miss from GSB
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette