Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 34

Author Topic: Combat Readyness isn't fun..  (Read 151221 times)

Cerus

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2013, 11:58:22 AM »

I like the idea of CR, but it feels kind of arbitrary how it drains sometimes. I want the limitations and strategic thinking that it enforces, but I really dislike the arbitrary feel of the "frigate timer" and CR drain on deployment not feeling like it has much to do with what I would imagine might actually put a strain on a ship's systems and crew to make it less combat ready.

All I know is I also had more fun before it was implemented, but I'm happy to wait and see what happens with it.
Logged

Riztro

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2013, 12:14:07 PM »

Had to register for this.

Combat readiness is the single most important part of Starsector going forward. Sure, when all we have is two systems working as a sandbox to shoot things in, it's not much. But if the game is ever to be a challenge, something to play rather than something to play with, it needs a supply system. And to be honest, it's a good system. There's no fussing with different resources to supply the ships, there's a noticeable difference between different levels of CR, and there's a high variability in supply costs depending on how well you plan your engagements and movements.

I'm sure there's tweaking to be done but all by its lonesome, CR improved 0.6 a hell of alot more than anything else in there at the moment.

Logged

Uomoz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
  • 'womo'dz
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2013, 12:34:15 PM »

Had to register for this.

Combat readiness is the single most important part of Starsector going forward. Sure, when all we have is two systems working as a sandbox to shoot things in, it's not much. But if the game is ever to be a challenge, something to play rather than something to play with, it needs a supply system. And to be honest, it's a good system. There's no fussing with different resources to supply the ships, there's a noticeable difference between different levels of CR, and there's a high variability in supply costs depending on how well you plan your engagements and movements.

I'm sure there's tweaking to be done but all by its lonesome, CR improved 0.6 a hell of alot more than anything else in there at the moment.



This guy I like.

But really, what bothers me about CR, is the in-combat degredation. The bonuses feel a bit contrived, as you have little control over them, and the penalties are just extreme - if your battle lasts more than a few minutes, everything will just start malfunctioning constantly. A combat readyness drop after battle based on length and damage taken is fine, but the in-combat degredation is incredibly unfun.

I disagree: first I find fun having to take in consideration more factors (like the frig timer), rather then less, second this update actually differentiated ship roles a bit more and that was a VERY needed thing. Haven't anyone noticed the HUGE speed buff on all frigates???
Logged

icepick37

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
  • Go.
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2013, 12:58:53 PM »

Had to register for this.

Combat readiness is the single most important part of Starsector going forward. Sure, when all we have is two systems working as a sandbox to shoot things in, it's not much. But if the game is ever to be a challenge, something to play rather than something to play with, it needs a supply system. And to be honest, it's a good system. There's no fussing with different resources to supply the ships, there's a noticeable difference between different levels of CR, and there's a high variability in supply costs depending on how well you plan your engagements and movements.

I'm sure there's tweaking to be done but all by its lonesome, CR improved 0.6 a hell of alot more than anything else in there at the moment.



This guy I like.
Me too, haha.  Welcome, btw!  :D

I disagree: first I find fun having to take in consideration more factors (like the frig timer), rather then less, second this update actually differentiated ship roles a bit more and that was a VERY needed thing. Haven't anyone noticed the HUGE speed buff on all frigates???

I actually didn't. Probably b/c you start in a frigate, haha. But now you mention it I could usually catch stuff in a hammerhead that now I have no prayer of getting to.
Logged
“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire

Mattk50

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2013, 01:34:42 PM »

Sure, I don't think the supply consumption (in the current state of the game) works, but I see the point of it for future versions. However, managing the supplies (buying them, selling excess, etc) is more finicky than it needs to be
If you SERIOUSLY have a problem with buying and selling a SINGLE RESOURCE to manage all the supplies for all your entire fleet, then there is nothing that can be done for you. Just play the old versions of starsector forever. I assume its going to get at least a little more "finicky" when officers, outposts, trading, etc comes in.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23987
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #35 on: September 16, 2013, 02:00:49 PM »

@Mattk50: That seems a bit harsh. Let's not get into borderline-ad hominem and "you don't like something so go away", shall we?


To everyone that registered just to post here: thank you for your feedback, I really appreciate you taking the time. Also, welcome to the forum!

Sure, I don't think the supply consumption (in the current state of the game) works, but I see the point of it for future versions. However, managing the supplies (buying them, selling excess, etc) is more finicky than it needs to be, and ships seem to hold EXTREMELY little compared to how much they consume - a long frigate (at least, some of them) can't get from the centre of the first starsystem to the tri-tech base under its own power without malfunction. I think the consumption rates and/or the cargo hold sizes need to be tweaked.

I can see it being a bit of a drag for solo frigates. Or are you talking about larger fleets, too? Just for the record, a frigate can easily get around the whole system a many times over on a single hold full of supplies - provided that it doesn't engage in combat and have to recover CR.


Also, fuel feels really redundant. Even when inter-sector travel has more of a point, it still feels like supplies will be the bottleneck, rather than fuel. I would almost suggest either amalgamating the two or making sublight travel also use fuel - your ships have huge fuel bays and very little cause to use them, while they absolutely chew through supplies. Some tweak there might be worthwhile.

Agree, at this point. It's currently tuned not to be much of a concern because exploration doesn't exactly exist.

But really, what bothers me about CR, is the in-combat degredation. The bonuses feel a bit contrived, as you have little control over them, and the penalties are just extreme - if your battle lasts more than a few minutes, everything will just start malfunctioning constantly. A combat readyness drop after battle based on length and damage taken is fine, but the in-combat degredation is incredibly unfun.

I think that for most cases, the 3-5 minutes you get without degradation is plent of time to do a lot. There's one problem, though, where the game will create an unduly large battlefield when one fleet is large and the other is tiny. Then you'll end up with 3 frigates playing hide-and-seek for a while, and as the battle drags out much longer than it should, CR degradation becomes a major problem. I'll fix that up for 0.6.1a.

edit: I would also say that 'stand down' being unavailable for anything beyond a fairly trivial fight doesn't help things.

The idea for stand down is to prevent small ships from harassing big ships to death without actually fighting them. It's not intended to help you recover CR after tough fights; one of the main reasons behind CR is to add a real cost to deploying ships, so that you don't want to deploy an overwhelming force. Ultimately, this leads to more fair, challenging, and fun battles.


I like the idea of CR, but it feels kind of arbitrary how it drains sometimes. I want the limitations and strategic thinking that it enforces, but I really dislike the arbitrary feel of the "frigate timer" and CR drain on deployment not feeling like it has much to do with what I would imagine might actually put a strain on a ship's systems and crew to make it less combat ready.

All I know is I also had more fun before it was implemented, but I'm happy to wait and see what happens with it.

Thanks for being willing to give it time! I think once more campaign mechanics are there, things will fall into place more and more.


Had to register for this.

Combat readiness is the single most important part of Starsector going forward. Sure, when all we have is two systems working as a sandbox to shoot things in, it's not much. But if the game is ever to be a challenge, something to play rather than something to play with, it needs a supply system. And to be honest, it's a good system. There's no fussing with different resources to supply the ships, there's a noticeable difference between different levels of CR, and there's a high variability in supply costs depending on how well you plan your engagements and movements.

I'm sure there's tweaking to be done but all by its lonesome, CR improved 0.6 a hell of alot more than anything else in there at the moment.

Appreciate you dropping by, and glad to hear you like how it works!


Spoiler
-snip-

I have lot's of fun with his version, there are many other new things besides CR. But I tend to agree that the whole logistic system, seen for itself, is not a very "fun" mechanic. I don't know if pure logistics even can be.

-snip-

Pure logistics can absolutely be great fun!  Just look at Cities In Motion or, if you're a weirdo like me, Euro Truck Sim.  XD

It just has to be designed correctly.  The problem is with the fact that Alex seems far too afraid of becoming too "micro managey".  What has to be kept in mind is probably the NUMBER ONE THING that will upset a player: lack of control.  It's why so many people hate table top rpgs (don't worry, I love them).  It's why there are jokes everywhere on the internet of a veteran samurai killing tanks (Civilization).  While realistic, lack of control will *** nearly anyone off.

The only problem with CR I've had is, very possibly, that it's far too abstract.  It may be far better to split things up.  I see people bringing CR being taking care of crew injuries, replacing damaged parts, ect.  It's my opinion that it should maybe be split into 3 parts.

Upkeep:  Very basic.  Base daily cost.  It's the cost of food, basic supplies, clothing, ect.  This is per ship.  Could also include per crew, but I'm not sure how easy that would be to really balance.  This is a baseline and shouldn't change.
Maintenance:  Subsystem damage, maintenance.  This should be our repair costs.  This should be what we use when going into combat.  Lighting up that tachyon lance is not easy if there's a pothole in the EM shielding!  This should be able to be suspended by the player.
Casualties/Medical:  This, I think, is the best addition.  As people have stated, they see CR, in part, as taking care of injured crew.  I agree with this assessment, and it makes sense that you can't just "suspend medical treatment" and everything is fine and dandy.  But, in this game, it always had the atmosphere of "unfriendly, unrelenting universe".  You can't suspend this.  BUT, you can cancel it, and lose a random, but high, percentage of the injured crew.  Not only is that insanely inhumane (which can be interesting in itself in an ethical exploration standpoint), seeing your injury numbers after combat gives a kind of beautiful depiction of the human cost of your conquest.

I really think this adds far more to the game and gives the player more control, while also not being too micro.  We're only talking a single fleet here.  Two dozen ships, if that.  If you're running low on supplies, this is not too much to think about and shouldn't be a problem very often, only if something has gone horribly wrong.  For example, you took on a large fleet and lost a major ship or two and were then chased and caught by another fleet, which you luckily beat.  The chase drained your supplies and the multiple combats in quick succession (as well as the low maintenance of the ships) have caused large amounts of crew injuries.  Do you halt maintenance on a few ships to keep you held over 'til port, but risk being outmatched on the long trip home, or do you stop treating the injuries and lose 80% of the casualties you sustained in battle, just so you don't have to risk losing more ships to retreats if you're caught on the way?  Or are you so low, you have to do both?  Are you ethically willing to do both?

I dunno.  I may be off base here, but I see some interesting passion in that.
[close]

Hmm. Honestly, I think that might be going off the deep end a little bit. I can see how it might be fun (certainly things like the decision about caring for your crew), but really, ships already have plenty of stats. Adding a couple more just doesn't seem like something to be done lightly.
Logged

Yemala

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #36 on: September 16, 2013, 02:18:35 PM »

Sure, I don't think the supply consumption (in the current state of the game) works, but I see the point of it for future versions. However, managing the supplies (buying them, selling excess, etc) is more finicky than it needs to be
If you SERIOUSLY have a problem with buying and selling a SINGLE RESOURCE to manage all the supplies for all your entire fleet, then there is nothing that can be done for you. Just play the old versions of starsector forever. I assume its going to get at least a little more "finicky" when officers, outposts, trading, etc comes in.

I meant mechanically. As in, the sliders are awkward, and I am constantly referencing different bits of the screen to try to hit the cargo quota. It isn't a huge deal, but it is annoying and almost certainly easily changed.

How dare I mention something minor I find annoying in a relevant thread. The nerve of me.
Logged

Mattk50

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #37 on: September 16, 2013, 06:48:47 PM »

I was awestruck at the idea that someone would actually have an issue with moving the abstracted resource in the abstracted cargohold system around in the interface less than once every 5 minutes to the point of being game breakingly labor intensive.

Obviously nobody who plays this kind of game could be that horrible. Sorry for mistaking you for such a person. God help that person if they ever run across such niche games as far cry 3, deus ex: HR, any rpg, or such classics as call of duty modern warfare 5 6 and 7 and fall victim to their inventory/loadout systems, dying a painful death as the game overwhelms their senses, the carpel tunnel spreads throughout their body, down to their heart which stops beating, and they succumb to their fate.

Logged

Zapier

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #38 on: September 17, 2013, 12:03:29 AM »

I feel like I'm a little late to this party to really add anything constructive, but I'll try without trying to really quote and snip pieces from all over the place.

To me, the CR system requires only a little more management than before, but I also see how it does connect the rest of the game and give things for the traders of the future and such to consider when hauling resources to trade somewhere... it gives the combat fleets something to consider when they have a chance to board a derelict (wouldn't that be fun in the campaign? Random events or spawns of ships to explore with your marines? Such a complete and total off track line of thinking for this post...) or disabled vessel since the cost of supplies, even if left to mothball, might be too much strain depending on where you are or cause you to completely scrap badly damaged ships that survive combat because the strain on supplies would be too much to live with. It creates some consequences and some forethought which games like these need to keep it more interesting or else it turns into this fast run away system that I would say even fewer people enjoy after an even shorter time.

I also wanted to quickly comment on a mention about the capital ships operating alone should be easier because that's how it works in our real world navy (or some general generalization) and that while it may be true that it was mentioned by Alex a long time ago that the capital ships were meant to be few and far between in the vision for the universe and that most would like be centered in a fleet or two... not so numerous that these valuable assets are sent across large regions of space alone or without much support at all. The CR system could be viewed as a way to also make that happen. As even the OP mentioned about not bringing realism into it, I think the same applies with all aspects of the game. Sometimes you just have to accept that a game system is exactly that. Despite as much immersion as possible, sometimes for the sake of balance there might be rules or systems put in place we might not all enjoy.

In the end, I feel like those who might really hate CR at the moment are similar to those who hated how easy it was to get all the ships in the game in the previous (and current) version. Everything campaign wise is still so bare and being put together in pieces. I can't even remember how long just making battles as fluid as they are took, but sometimes we probably won't and can't fully appreciate everything until we see what's in store to add on to it. Logistics is just one of those things I feel since there's literally no bases, no trading, no mining, no ship building, no systems that would or could play off these and help put more balance into the CR system by adjusting the cost of supplies or even the individual officers that can have skills to lessen the CR impact from deploying and so on. So, while CR may not be fun, I think we just need to accept that it needs to stick around for awhile longer before we make any real decisions on whether it's really good or bad.

I just hope people aren't forgetting the ultimate goals of this game, that it isn't meant to be simply a space combat game. There are so many more elements going to be tacked on which is probably where the abstract feeling of CR is coming from, that these other elements aren't simply there yet to allow people to really feel and understand the need for systems.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #39 on: September 17, 2013, 12:17:28 AM »

I also wanted to quickly comment on a mention about the capital ships operating alone should be easier because that's how it works in our real world navy

Hmm?

We don't have lone battleships and carriers out in the oceans, do we? (we being mankind in general)

I mean, I'm from canada (who's navy is rubbish so don't quote me on this) but isn't it like cruisers patrol the high seas while cap ships (carriers these days) generally move out as the centerpiece of a battlegroup with destroyers, cruisers and many support ships?
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Zapier

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #40 on: September 17, 2013, 12:19:32 AM »

We don't but there was mention earlier in the thread of people saying it was happening, so I was commenting on that... giving them the benefit of being right that they can operate alone... I wasn't agreeing that that's how it is though.
Logged

TJJ

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #41 on: September 17, 2013, 05:01:35 AM »

I agree with OP; CR in its current form isn't fun.

I think the biggest problem is it's an artificial restriction upon what the player is able to do; much like the annoying stamina bars you find in many modern FPS games.
This artificial restriction is completely unavoidable; it's applied for just playing the game as it's supposed to be played.

Compare this to previous versions, where suffering heavy damage from a major battle would require a re-cooperation period.
On the surface this re-cooperation period appears similar to CR, however there are 3 critical differences:

1) damage is visual
2) damage is avoidable; it's the direct result of the player (or the AI under the player's command) making a mistake.
3) damage isn't completely crippling; even a heavily damaged ship could put up a fight.

Put succinctly CR disempowers the player.

There are other side-issues too; the way it marginalizes the persistence of hull damage, and dramatically increases the reliance upon supplies thereby impacting upon how the player is able to move around the map.
However these latter issues will likely go away with balancing & the addition of more content.

What puzzles me about CR is that it's a 'downward spiral' mechanic, something that Alex has previously said he's dead set against. (with regard to permanent damage to weapons/engines in battles)
« Last Edit: September 17, 2013, 05:19:44 AM by TJJ »
Logged

liq3

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #42 on: September 17, 2013, 05:47:37 AM »

I agree with OP; CR in its current form isn't fun.
I disagree. By stopping the player deploying all his ships every battle, it forces more interesting strategy and makes the game deeper.

Quote
Compare this to previous versions, where suffering heavy damage from a major battle would require a re-cooperation period.
On the surface this re-cooperation period appears similar to CR, however there are 3 critical differences:
1) damage is visual
2) damage is avoidable; it's the direct result of the player (or the AI under the player's command) making a mistake.
3) damage isn't completely crippling; even a heavily damaged ship could put up a fight.
1. What? How is that even relevant?
2. CR Loss in avoidable. Don't deploy the ship(s).
3. CR loss isn't crippling either. Even a ship with just regular crew and less then 20% CR deployment cost can easily do 2 battles in row before CR becomes a problem. High deployment cost ships - that CR cost is part of their balance now. You get to use that super powerful ship in a battle, and then it needs a break to recover.

Quote
Put succinctly CR disempowers the player.
I'm pretty sure that's the point.  ::)
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4661
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #43 on: September 17, 2013, 05:52:47 AM »

I think the biggest problem is it's an artificial restriction upon what the player is able to do; much like the annoying stamina bars you find in many modern FPS games.
This artificial restriction is completely unavoidable; it's applied for just playing the game as it's supposed to be played.
I think this point needs more elaboration. Is limited ammo for ballistics and missiles an artificial restriction? What about credits? Stores having only a limited selection of items in stock?
Logged

Flare

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #44 on: September 17, 2013, 06:16:28 AM »

Or getting hurt and dying when the AI shoots you?
Logged
Quote from: Thana
Quote from: Alex

The battle station is not completely operational, shall we say.

"Now witness the firepower of this thoroughly buggy and unoperational batt... Oh, hell, you know what? Just ignore the battle station, okay?"
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 34