Print

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

[Reapy]

Was wondering about the two boarding options, why you would end up picking the 'ships at a safe distance option', it seems that when you have smaller ships you probably couldn't afford to throw expensive marines away and risk them getting lost in space, so you'd want to dock up closer.

When you do have marines to throw away, you would probably be in a state where you have lots of money and bigger ships, which would nullify the risk of boarding due to the ship size/armor, or even the cost of losing a ship by the target exploding.  I have a feeling option two will be underutilized.  But either way seems like the numbers are probably tweakable to make it more so, but at first read it feels like the tradeoffs might hurt too much and you will always want to hard dock.

Also, could you leave some hooks in the API so someone can write a boarding combat game as detailed as the current space combat portion of the game?

[Doom101]

Was wondering about the two boarding options, why you would end up picking the 'ships at a safe distance option', it seems that when you have smaller ships you probably couldn't afford to throw expensive marines away and risk them getting lost in space, so you'd want to dock up closer.

When you do have marines to throw away, you would probably be in a state where you have lots of money and bigger ships, which would nullify the risk of boarding due to the ship size/armor, or even the cost of losing a ship by the target exploding.  I have a feeling option two will be underutilized.  But either way seems like the numbers are probably tweakable to make it more so, but at first read it feels like the tradeoffs might hurt too much and you will always want to hard dock.

Also, could you leave some hooks in the API so someone can write a boarding combat game as detailed as the current space combat portion of the game?

I can think of a few reasons ( granted these are far and away) to use the launch teams at them from afar option,
the ship your boarding is massive, ie an onslaught for example and taking that much damage simply is not acceptable for ANY ship in your fleet.

Your fleet is mostly expensive ships, IE Tempests, or Hyperions. these are very fragile ships and practically any damage would destroy them and the cost of replacing them both in rarity and credit value is far beyond that of what throwing a few hundred marines out an airlock would cost you.

another great example of two: let's say your rolling with your brand new high tech capital ship, say an Odyssey even with your biggest ship taking too much damage wouldn't be acceptable, and bringing transports with you just isn't feasible because you need to be fast. granted with a paragon that threat is pretty much gone, unless maybe boarding another paragon.

[MindsEye]

I really dislike only being able to board one ship. also dislike that boarding is random. I would like to see boardable ships have a battle element. Like say you must induce a flamout and disable a ship without destroying it and then it will be boardable. Or maybe you need special weapons like ion lasers which are extremely weak against shields and armor. I have a feeling this has been discussed but making boarding chances tied to the player sounds more fun.

[Flare]

I'd like to see less boarding and more carrying the wrecks back to a shipyard for refurbishing or scrapping instead. I've always thought the reactor going off like that when a ship suffers enough damage to be a pretty cataclysmic event in terms of the foundational superstructure being intact enough to allow you to repair the thing without expensive facilities and basically replacing everything.

What can you salvage from a ship like that really? I grab a ship that says it has 2% hull which I assume is 2% from being absolute irrecoverable junk, and then I spend about 1000 credits worth of supplies fixing it, in an otherwise total rebuild of something barely distinguishable from the wrecks that I evidently blew 2% more holes in to repair.

[Reapy]

I can think of a few reasons

Good points, so perhaps early on it won't really be the best option, but as the size of fleet battles increase it will become more and more a balanced tradeoff.  Sounds about right, it will of coarse all come down to the numbers, but thinking of it that way it doens't seem as one sided a choice as I originally thought.

[Alex]

Oh, btw, what about boarding of not combat ready ships that fly around alone? At the moment you get them for free just by catching them (they surrender), will they get the new boarding mechanics, too?

They can still attempt to disengage, and will be deployed in the escape scenario. So, no more free caps there - you have to chase them down and disabled them. They'll be easier to board if they have a lot less crew/marines, though.

I would like to see boardable ships have a battle element. Like say you must induce a flamout and disable a ship without destroying it and then it will be boardable. Or maybe you need special weapons like ion lasers which are extremely weak against shields and armor. I have a feeling this has been discussed but making boarding chances tied to the player sounds more fun.

Hmm. It was discussed before, but the reason I didn't like it is it'd make boarding too strong. However, if boarding is still an expensive, not-automatically-good choice, then that's something worth considering again.

I'd like to see less boarding and more carrying the wrecks back to a shipyard for refurbishing or scrapping instead. I've always thought the reactor going off like that when a ship suffers enough damage to be a pretty cataclysmic event in terms of the foundational superstructure being intact enough to allow you to repair the thing without expensive facilities and basically replacing everything.

What can you salvage from a ship like that really? I grab a ship that says it has 2% hull which I assume is 2% from being absolute irrecoverable junk, and then I spend about 1000 credits worth of supplies fixing it, in an otherwise total rebuild of something barely distinguishable from the wrecks that I evidently blew 2% more holes in to repair.

It's a fair point. You know, I really want to see how it plays out in the context of the real campaign. (I know, I keep saying that. But it's true!) The good thing about the new setup is that it's extremely flexible. It's using the unified "interaction dialog" UI, done in a moddable way, and so it's much easier to change. The new UI work required (which is usually a big chunk of the time) is minimal.

Also, could you leave some hooks in the API so someone can write a boarding combat game as detailed as the current space combat portion of the game?

Already possible Though difficult, but not because of the API, but because, erm, writing a detailed boarding combat game is a challenge.

[Doom101]

Just thought of another good reason to use the launch boarding teams option rather than docking, Fighter fleets. Not a single ship in that fleet is very tough individually they need each other to be tough the only carriers that should hard dock rather than launching teams would be ventures and maybe Astrals. ( ventures are very very tough if you didn't know)  i mean heck ventures aren't even a real dedicated carrier, and they slow down fleets massively without the travel speed character abilities ( the engine hullmods help too) Condors, Gemini, and Astrals are the only truly dedicated carriers. and they are all pretty fragile. the nice thing about carriers is that they all have space for supplies and fuel so you don't need to bring freighters with you taking up otherwise valuable fighter space in your fleet. without freighters/troop transports a carrier fleet would HAVE to use the launch boarding team option because they couldn't risk their valuable carriers getting blown to bits, an Astral would definitely fix this but i mean come on those are rare as hell and even then they aren't the beefiest ship in the game.

[Gothars]

Oh, btw, what about boarding of not combat ready ships that fly around alone? At the moment you get them for free just by catching them (they surrender), will they get the new boarding mechanics, too?

They can still attempt to disengage, and will be deployed in the escape scenario. So, no more free caps there - you have to chase them down and disabled them. They'll be easier to board if they have a lot less crew/marines, though.

Am I correct in taking from this that there will no longer be made any difference between engagements sizes? Small fleets will have all the options? I like that.



@Doom101: Good point.

[Alex]

Oh, btw, what about boarding of not combat ready ships that fly around alone? At the moment you get them for free just by catching them (they surrender), will they get the new boarding mechanics, too?

They can still attempt to disengage, and will be deployed in the escape scenario. So, no more free caps there - you have to chase them down and disabled them. They'll be easier to board if they have a lot less crew/marines, though.

Am I correct in taking from this that there will no longer be made any difference between engagements sizes? Small fleets will have all the options? I like that.

Yeah. Although smaller battles don't have objectives, and have the initial deployments (which are still a choice as to which ships to deploy, i.e. it's never all your ships, unless it's the only one there is) start out closer to each other.

[Alfalfa]

I've been waiting for the second part of this post all week.

I'm still a bit fuzzy on how the Travel Drive border works (henceforth known as the Burn Strip).  Do you have to be travelling towards the border to activate Travel Drive while in the Burn Strip, or are there no restrictions?  If not, what's to stop you from using the Burn Strip as a space highway?  For example, if I'm trying to reach an objective in the top right, could I just dip into the Burn Strip and speed my way along the perimeter of the map and come out near my destination?  This would seem especially advantageous in a chase scenario, where I could run up the flanks at super-speed, unless the Burn Strip is only at the top in those maps.

[Gothars]

@Alfalfa: If you activate the Travel Drive the autopilot will kick in and your ship will leave the map. It can't be used for faster travel during combat.

I would like to see boardable ships have a battle element. Like say you must induce a flamout and disable a ship without destroying it and then it will be boardable. Or maybe you need special weapons like ion lasers which are extremely weak against shields and armor. I have a feeling this has been discussed but making boarding chances tied to the player sounds more fun.

Hmm. It was discussed before, but the reason I didn't like it is it'd make boarding too strong. However, if boarding is still an expensive, not-automatically-good choice, then that's something worth considering again.

Yeah, boarding ships has now major disadvantages compared to buying ships:

- more or comparable expensive (altogether)
- requires preparation
- requires reduction of your fleet's combat potential
- yields not combat-ready ships
- element of chance
- very little choice about the target


To mitigate the last point (choice) seems the most interesting option, I think. At least, if realized inside combat, the option that is farthest outside the stats and numbers part of the game.


Advantages of boarding (I know of) are:
- gives access to ships that can't be purchased
- can give fast access to needed ships if time is of the essence

Points which are alleviated by... the lack of target-ship choice.

[Alfalfa]

@Gothars: Ah, that explains everything, thanks.

[BillyRueben]

Advantages of boarding (I know of) are:
- gives access to ships that can't be purchased

That particular advantage will probably be a big deal once the campaign gets fleshed out, and getting destroyer (and above) class ships isn't as simple as stopping in to a station to purchase one.

I don't see how people can complain about only being able to board a single ship after combat. A few things to think about:
1. Getting to board any ship at all is unlikely right now.
2. If there is a boardable ship, there likely isn't going to be a second one anyway.
3. You can't complain about how the campaign is too easy, then complain that you can't board 2+ vessels at a time.

[Gothars]

That particular advantage will probably be a big deal once the campaign gets fleshed out, and getting destroyer (and above) class ships isn't as simple as stopping in to a station to purchase one.

I hope so
Just more reason to allow a bit of influence on what ship is boardable, I think.

I don't see how people can complain about only being able to board a single ship after combat. A few things to think about:
1. Getting to board any ship at all is unlikely right now.
2. If there is a boardable ship, there likely isn't going to be a second one anyway.

Yeah, it would be very unlikely, but why not just leave it at that? That something is unlikely isn't a good reason to strictly exclude it. Well, it would be if it had considerable impact on the UI, but since it seems to work in chronologically ordered steps anyway the inclusion of one more step (if it occurs) would not matter.
I don't think its a big deal at all, just don't quite get the reasoning behind it.

[Sarolveldruk]

How will the mechanics for small skirmishes be affected by this?

It would make for a nice and dramatic effect to have a small fleet move in on travel drive all at once from the map border in a formation of some sort.