Print

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

[Alex]

I like the idea- it sounds more interesting than using a straight crew calculation, but maybe some hybrid might work more "realistically"?

In terms of CR deployment loss, would it be feasible to base it on the proportion of fleet points of both fleets?

For example, if a 30-point fleet squares off against a 10-point fleet, the 10 point fleet would take 3 times more CR than the 30-point fleet, which would sort of reflect the psychological state of the smaller fleet ("Why am I committing suicide?").  Perhaps it could be partially mitigated by crew experience- green crew are cowed by everything and take full CR reduction, but elite crew are hardened and take only some portion of the CR loss.

Well, my question is, why? You've provided a lore explanation for the change, but one can provide a lore explanation for virtually every change, and that's not the same as providing a reason to make a change

(Btw, CR reflects more than just the crew's mental condition, in fact it's leaning more on the side of "overall condition of ship".)

"More realistic" by itself is not a very good reason, either, not without careful consideration for the impact a change has on gameplay.

For CR loss after combat, maybe it could be based on amount/severity of damage taken? A fleet that is nearly annihilated would be nowhere near combat ready, and ships that suffered engine shutdowns and multiple disabled systems would similarly be less ready.

That's actually there - there's a CR loss for weapons/engines being disabled in combat. Might end up replacing that with a straight calculation based on hull damage taken, though, to simplify things.

For recovering CR, in addition to using supplies, maybe there could be travel modes where a fleet travels at some percent of it's full acceleration/speed to increase its rate of CR gain.  Faster fleets might be able to regain CR faster than pursuing fleets, which could reflect a "harrying" situation?  This all might be needlessly complex, however.

Hmm. I've got some ideas kicking about re: "alert levels" which, if implemented, would be along these general lines.

[FlashFrozen]

Just as an idea, why not make the Field Repairs skill in the Technology tree give a slight boost to CR at like level 5 /10? just seeing as a crew effective at repairing them ship should atleast be slightly more proficient at readying them for combat.

[Astyanax]

Well, my question is, why? You've provided a lore explanation for the change, but one can provide a lore explanation for virtually every change, and that's not the same as providing a reason to make a change

(Btw, CR reflects more than just the crew's mental condition, in fact it's leaning more on the side of "overall condition of ship".)

"More realistic" by itself is not a very good reason, either, not without careful consideration for the impact a change has on gameplay.

I guess I left that important bit out

I was trying to resolve the case where multiple fleets of shuttles or freighters could reduce a capital ship to unreadiness by engaging one after another.  That seemed pretty unrealistic in my mind, but the changes I suggested may well be a case where the cure is worse than the disease.

[Alex]

I was trying to resolve the case where multiple fleets of shuttles or freighters could reduce a capital ship to unreadiness by engaging one after another.  That seemed pretty unrealistic in my mind, but the changes I suggested may well be a case where the cure is worse than the disease.

Ah, I see. The "Stand down" option pretty much takes care of that. You'd have to throw (and lose!) a prohibitive amount of smaller ships to make a dent in the CR of a larger ship. For example, something like 20ish Hounds to make an Onslaught non-combat-ready. At that point, you might as well take it on directly.

[silentstormpt]

How would this CR work on station battles, you limited to defend and salvage right?

I know station battles aren't in yet, its just some brainstorming for what is to come

[harperrb]

Huh.  I find "harry" to be a perfectly valid word given the context

There's no doubt that it's fitting. But given that a good portion of  Starsector's players know English only as a second language, I think it is not a bad idea to eschew words that those players are very likely to not know. Of course my only measurement of that likelihood is the fact that this is the second word on the game I had to look up (first was entoptic, which just sounds cool), so it doesn't have to mean anything.

“The more one pleases generally, the less one pleases profoundly.”

 – Stendahl, Love 1822

[Gothars]

Also: Ohhh, new screen borders (look at the picture in the blogpost). Supplied by TRIPAD?  

A wholly-owned subsidiary of the Tri-Tachyon Corporation.

Soooo... does that mean you plan on introducing such a world-intrinsic UI across the board?  We were talking about just that in the graphics thread.

[Reapy]

Excitedly waiting for part 2

Harry was a recognized word for me. I think whether you say harass or harry it is equally confusing as to what it will do in game, even if you know the definition of the word. You will have to read a tool tip to know what is actually going to happen, and that in turn should help define what "Harry" means via the context of its affect on the fleet.  Hence, leaving harry in gives the two fold benefit of expanding the users vocabulary without sending them to the dictionary.

[Kommodore Krieg]

I'm looking forward to this update, these are very interesting mechanics.  I'm a little surprised so many people aren't familiar with the word "harry".  As previously mentioned it makes perfect sense in the given context. 

[RawCode]

harras == hit and run tactics;
deal as much damage as possible without taking damage self;

in case of SF:
force to retreat right now, without any chance to fix stuff or regroup (this shoud result in bonus loot and slowest enemy ships may be damaged or destroyed at cost of CR)

[L33tGuilty]

So is this patch ready for DL or not yet?? Then one that includes CR offcourse

[arcibalde]

So is this patch ready for DL or not yet?? Then one that includes CR offcourse

Not yet 

[Alex]

Soooo... does that mean you plan on introducing such a world-intrinsic UI across the board?  We were talking about just that in the graphics thread.

Yeah, I noticed If it happens, it'll be a gradual process. I've been wanting to make things less UI-looking for a while, and this is a step in that direction. But I'd expect some of the older UI elements to stick around for a while, if not longer.

So is this patch ready for DL or not yet?? Then one that includes CR offcourse

It's not even particularly close to being ready. CR has a lot of tendrils! So, on the one hand, I feel really good about building a solid foundation for the campaign. On the other hand, I feel bad about making you guys wait, but oh well

[Cycerin]

Looking forward to the next blogpost, there's more completely new info in that one it seems.

[RSS_Ornel]

Honestly if fleet splitting is implemented i will love to have my own fleet be a pure elite one full of high tech phase frigates and such so i would love an engagement type that lets you split a portion of the enemies fleet off. I have an idea for this: the chance of success is not 100% and thus sometimes you will fail the "leadership roll" and you will not successfully ambush a fleet. Also could this require phase ships so i have a reason to use them again.(alex pls )