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 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34

Author Topic: Combat Readyness isn't fun..  (Read 151216 times)

Astyanax

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #435 on: October 06, 2013, 06:49:00 PM »

Quote
Maybe also tie in OP?  A weapon that has high OP has a greater chance of malfunctioning than a basic vulcan cannon.
Ewww, no!  If I spend more OP, a relatively scarce resource, to use better weapons, and spend AP/SP in Technology to get more OP, I should get what I pay for, not punished by cutting-edge weapons breaking.
I don't know... I sort of feel like low tech ships would have fewer malfunctions overall, but lose CR more readily when fielded and in combat.  On the other hand, I think high tech ships should take more supplies to get combat ready, but are more efficient once they're ready: they should use less CR to deploy and have a lesser rate of CR degradation?

On the other hand, low CR would high OP weapons more strongly?

Ugh, I'm not explaining this well...
« Last Edit: October 06, 2013, 07:16:25 PM by Astyanax »
Logged

thebrucolac

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #436 on: October 06, 2013, 07:47:51 PM »

I am also in the camp that thinks CR would be improved by a degradation of performance rather than straight up disability. If you have high CR, your weapons do more damage and your ship moves faster, your system abilities recharge more quickly, your shields are more efficient and raise quickly, and your armour better at reducing damage. If your CR is low, your systems are overstressed. Your weapons have their damaged reduced, repair more slowly when broken, your engines crap out in a stiff breeze, your armour is loosened by constant stress, your flux overcharge bonuses are lower, EVERYTHING should suck more. If you have none, firing your weapons breaks them half the time, your systems repair so slowly you are easily made helpless, your ship abilities are crummy, your shields raise slowly, etc. If it is a combat variable, it should rise or reduce according to CR.

It might also be good to have a timer at the beginning of a combat so that ships newly entering combat don't suffer CR loss if the battle abruptly ends. Taxing your systems to their limit to survive would wear things down, but just showing up for a few seconds seems a little underwhelming for a full CR hit. CR is fun, it just isn't fully fleshed out yet. As a core mechanic, I think it is very solid.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #437 on: October 06, 2013, 07:51:55 PM »

I am also in the camp that thinks CR would be improved by a degradation of performance rather than straight up disability. If you have high CR, your weapons do more damage and your ship moves faster, your system abilities recharge more quickly, your shields are more efficient and raise quickly, and your armour better at reducing damage. If your CR is low, your systems are overstressed. Your weapons have their damaged reduced, repair more slowly when broken, your engines crap out in a stiff breeze, your armour is loosened by constant stress, your flux overcharge bonuses are lower, EVERYTHING should suck more. If you have none, firing your weapons breaks them half the time, your systems repair so slowly you are easily made helpless, your ship abilities are crummy, your shields raise slowly, etc. If it is a combat variable, it should rise or reduce according to CR.

That's already a thing, except that if you have really low CR (<10% I think) your ship isn't ready for combat and can't be deployed.
Logged

thebrucolac

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #438 on: October 06, 2013, 08:01:15 PM »

I know combat performance is already affected, I'm saying it would be good for CR to affect all the variables, like shield speed and upkeep, flux costs of weapon fire, etc. I don't think it does. It affects engine speed, and when it is low weapons crap out, but they crap out at random, not based on your actions. It might be better for such effects to be based on what the player tries to do. Then high CR is amazing and low CR is terrible, but you can still manage. A big fleet in terrible shape should still be able to do something about a small fleet in great shape. Hobbling along in hostile territory is otherwise unfeasible, the present hard shutdown of all combat ability is a bit extreme, and does not immerse me the way other elements of the game do. I go out of my way to justify game mechanics to myself, but CR needs to be fine tuned before I can do it.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #439 on: October 06, 2013, 08:59:24 PM »

I know combat performance is already affected, I'm saying it would be good for CR to affect all the variables, like shield speed and upkeep, flux costs of weapon fire, etc.
That seems like a bit much to me.

I still don't understand all the issues people are having with CR. I just got done playing to level 30 with a high-tech/fighter fleet, which are extremely supply hungry and have the largest CR oscillation, and had no issues with CR that weren't fully my fault and fully preventable.
Logged

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #440 on: October 06, 2013, 09:00:09 PM »

If CR also goes down based on how tired the crew is due to constant fighting, how does that jive with having CR completely restored at a friendly station? Do you end up taking the crew out drinking? Or does the date automatically advance however many days are enough to get them all willing to jump back into battle? I haven't figured that out, yet.

Alex's stance right now is that there isn't any particular value on your time in-game that would make you unwilling to stand around for a few days to recover your CR and frankly not much to do but bash pirates over the head, you get an option to skip some pointless waiting and get back to playing.

The implication seems to have been that "Push button, instant CR recover" may not be a mechanic in the final game, and is a temporary measure to make the current alpha more playable while time isn't a resource.
Okay so, essentially, what you are saying is that the crew-exhaustion part of combat readiness will NOT be recovered by the station in future versions unless you decide to stay x-amount of time?

Not necessarily.  That's much too far in the future to predict and will be based off things that don't exist yet.  What I can say is that Alex has shown intent for time to be a resource in the full version of the game and that final mechanics will be designed with the idea that time has value.


I'd also throw in my hat with the other people who would like to be able to deploy zero-CR ships.  The malfunctions are bad enough that it's something you would generally only want to do in situations where it would be thematically appropriate to begin with.  I wouldn't apply this to mothballed ships, of course, since those are specifically undercrewed and only functional enough to move from place to place.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #441 on: October 06, 2013, 09:02:00 PM »

That's already a thing, except that if you have really low CR (<10% I think) your ship isn't ready for combat and can't be deployed.

Problem is, a ship is never unable to be deployed. Deploying constitutes simply pointing the ship in the general direction and firing the engines (which every ship has active, btw)

I don't mind if they can only squeeze a shot off once every OTHER minute, and their shields flicker in and out of existence, just let us point her in the right direction, and fire the engine.

inb4 that'll be useless anyway: That's for the player (or the AI) to decide. If I want a barely functioning ship on the field because we absolutely need every gun that we can get on the enemy, I don't think we should be denied that option
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

thebrucolac

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #442 on: October 06, 2013, 09:26:36 PM »


That seems like a bit much to me.


It is a bit much if the changes are massive, but I think the small buffs and penalties that exist now are minor enough that they can be safely applied to basically every aspect of ship combat. Having a crappy crew or a great crew matters, and I think it should matter for everything your ship is capable of doing. An excellent crew that knows how to keep flux vents clean and primed, and knows how important it is to their survival, is way more useful than a bunch of mooks you got from a hovel full of washouts. I really like CR, so maybe I'm too happy to see it applied across the board, but I think it would be great to see a ship in combat and know just from watching it that the crew is truly exceptional.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #443 on: October 07, 2013, 11:30:18 AM »

That's already a thing, except that if you have really low CR (<10% I think) your ship isn't ready for combat and can't be deployed.

Problem is, a ship is never unable to be deployed. Deploying constitutes simply pointing the ship in the general direction and firing the engines (which every ship has active, btw)

I don't mind if they can only squeeze a shot off once every OTHER minute, and their shields flicker in and out of existence, just let us point her in the right direction, and fire the engine.

inb4 that'll be useless anyway: That's for the player (or the AI) to decide. If I want a barely functioning ship on the field because we absolutely need every gun that we can get on the enemy, I don't think we should be denied that option

Once you're in a situation bad enough you're allowed to deploy your useless ships - when you're down to non combat worthy and being pursued.  Run away more if you want to fight with useless ships I guess.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #444 on: October 07, 2013, 01:52:39 PM »

inb4 that'll be useless anyway: That's for the player (or the AI) to decide. If I want a barely functioning ship on the field because we absolutely need every gun that we can get on the enemy, I don't think we should be denied that option

Correct me if I am wrong, but i thought ships that are deployed (in an escape scenario) at that low amount of CR can't fire anyway. A ship in that condition is nothing more than a glorified asteroid, and is more useful 99% of the time waiting and fighting another day.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #445 on: October 07, 2013, 02:10:58 PM »

I thought non-combat ready ships were unable to do a god-damned thing?
They are, hence my confusion.

[Correct me if I am wrong, but i thought ships that are deployed (in an escape scenario) at that low amount of CR can't fire anyway.

Uhm, that low CR ships should be able to fight is a suggestion. The last two pages where about an idea, not the present state of the game. Just making sure that's not the source of the confusion here.

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: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #446 on: October 07, 2013, 03:20:02 PM »

Correct me if I am wrong, but i thought ships that are deployed (in an escape scenario) at that low amount of CR can't fire anyway. A ship in that condition is nothing more than a glorified asteroid, and is more useful 99% of the time waiting and fighting another day.

What gothars said, I think they should be able to fight, however to a very small extent.

Even if they can't fire weapons, though, in that 1 percent of the time where I think it's worthwhile to deploy that glorified asteroid, I want to be able to deploy that glorified asteroid.
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #447 on: October 07, 2013, 06:13:07 PM »

That's already a thing, except that if you have really low CR (<10% I think) your ship isn't ready for combat and can't be deployed.

Problem is, a ship is never unable to be deployed. Deploying constitutes simply pointing the ship in the general direction and firing the engines (which every ship has active, btw)

I don't mind if they can only squeeze a shot off once every OTHER minute, and their shields flicker in and out of existence, just let us point her in the right direction, and fire the engine.

inb4 that'll be useless anyway: That's for the player (or the AI) to decide. If I want a barely functioning ship on the field because we absolutely need every gun that we can get on the enemy, I don't think we should be denied that option

Once you're in a situation bad enough you're allowed to deploy your useless ships - when you're down to non combat worthy and being pursued.  Run away more if you want to fight with useless ships I guess.

Those ships aren't properly deployed, though.  They're attempting to flee and can't do anything other than trundle towards the top of the map.

If the situation is so bad that I'm trying to send barely-functional ships into battle, I'd like to be given the option and the malfunctions we already have are plenty severe to ensure that this is only a course of last resort.
Logged

rex

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #448 on: October 07, 2013, 07:16:54 PM »

Correct me if I am wrong, but i thought ships that are deployed (in an escape scenario) at that low amount of CR can't fire anyway. A ship in that condition is nothing more than a glorified asteroid, and is more useful 99% of the time waiting and fighting another day.

What gothars said, I think they should be able to fight, however to a very small extent.

Even if they can't fire weapons, though, in that 1 percent of the time where I think it's worthwhile to deploy that glorified asteroid, I want to be able to deploy that glorified asteroid.

Do the retreat burn drives ever fail? Being able to lure the enemy fleet to your entry point could have use. 
Logged

IndirectCell

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #449 on: October 14, 2013, 05:10:16 AM »

I cant agree more, this does not fit whit the game very well, and it makes early game realy tedious that you need to hang around abase and for the love of god avoid fighting twise in a row (realy hard to do seeing usualy 2 or more Groups of enemy swarms... and avoiding 2nd one after first one, is even more annoying.. )..

I can understand how some People like this, especialy if they like big armys that needs to be keept supplied and repaired, but now were nearing the border of "Master of Orion 3" if anyone remembers that.

Sure there was alot of People who liked it... but were talking alot of work to play a game, i dont think ever sombody finished a single game (regarldess of size), and the micromanagement even for the most Extreme People were too much.. Combatreadyness adds bit too much microamage work that needs to be done after every Battle..

I feel like the game was better before where as long as you had supplies the ship keept running (if ship was damaged then the damage was keept on NeXT fight, unless they had time to repair it.

Missile refill, reload seems bs to put into consideration, seeing most systems are Automatic, and one can assume spaceships are more Advanced than Aircraft.. and combat readyness of a Aircraft doesnt og Down, unless the pilot fights over like 16 hours.. if a fight ever lasts that long.. and even then, the fuel is more likely to run out before a malifunction on the system or the pilot.


and combat readyness poorly represent actual combat readyness. assumeing youv been flying in Space for a month.. youd think most of the crew keeps a sleep cyclus and arnt awake 24\7 so when combat comes theyr at theyr worst.. instead of beeing waken up for that combat... im assumeing too they dont sleep in the cockpit 24\7.. also since i usualy run whit allmost full crew as long as its viable and a skeleton crew needed for "basic" running. id assume most of them are on sleep or rotation... on sleep, so this shouldnt be a problem too...

IT feels more like a forced mechanic that doesnt fit the game, even if the finished game handles it differently by haveing Your mobile repair station \ ship.. its still seems unnessessary extras and more of a annoyance that you need to keep watch over.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 05:12:26 AM by IndirectCell »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34