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: New music for Galatia Academy (06/12/24)

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Reactor breach.  (Read 8758 times)

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Reactor breach.
« on: February 18, 2012, 08:46:01 PM »

Starships can move faster than the speed of light. Their furnaces power weapons that spit antimatter, black holes, and beams of faster-than-light theoretical particles, all of which requires massive amounts of energy. While the deaths of these ships can be blinding, however, they rarely convey the impact of the flash they produce.

Don't get me wrong: I am very happy with the way ships currently die. In fact, I prefer it to the explosion-happy interpretations of space combat in other games, where everything explodes into a nice, clean, antiseptic ball of gas leaving behind nothing; Starfarer's ships die like spaceborne whales, spitting flame and  floating off as burnt out space hulks, dramatic and impressive. As such, I think such ship deaths ought to be the standard for how ships die, but occasionally, for particularly large ships, cruisers and above perhaps, it would be interesting if there were a chance for them to take so much damage that their reactors cascade dangerously and detonate in a thermonuclear explosion, dealing damage to nearby ships and blinding yet others' sensors for a short amount of time, and leaving behind asteroid-like chunks of dead ship.

How it would work, I'm not entirely sure of. I think it would work one of two ways:

1) If a ship is killed by an attack that deals a certain multiple of its remaining health prior to death, it has a % chance of detonating. For example, if a ship with 1 hull is struck by an attack that deals 30 damage, or 30x the remaining hull, it goes thermonuclear.

2) If a ship is killed by an attack dealing damage above a certain threshold to the engines, causing a reactor breach.

Detonating ships shouldn't go all at once. They should rumble with miniature explosions, lose navigation, and leave behind a trail of flames before finally going. Obviously an exploded ship can't be scrapped or salvaged, but this does create an opportunity for another gameplay feature: Self destruct! A noble end for a brave captain.

Obviously a pretty low-priority suggestion. I'd be happy with the game if it didn't make it in at all, but I do think it would be cool. Cool *** should happen in space warfare.
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

icepick37

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
  • Go.
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2012, 08:55:14 PM »

Sounds very Mechwarrior.  :)  I like the idea, though. Could be really interesting.
Logged
“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire

Subject901

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2012, 07:46:53 AM »

if a self destruct was added i can imagine a onslaught running into a paragon and going super nova. bit op
Logged

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2012, 07:54:06 AM »

In all fairness, if you're willing to sacrifice like, five hundred crew and an Onslaught, you should probably get a little something out of it. Also, in my opinion, the Paragon ought to be able to take an exploding Onslaught, long as its shields are up. It'd get jacked up, but it'd survive.
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

Sc0tch

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2012, 08:10:50 AM »

I like the idea of reactors going critical on the larger ships but I don't think you should have to kill them all the way to have it happen. I like the idea of there being a very small chance that the reactor can go critical when the ship is being destroyed or is heavily damaged and things like how much flux you have built up and where you are being hit could effect that. I think it makes sense that a ship would have a higher chance of it's reactor going critical right after it got overloaded and then hit by a barrage of enemy fire.
Logged
"I'm surprised how much fun I'm having playing a game that isn't even done yet."
My thoughts 30 minutes I started playing Starfarer

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2012, 08:16:45 AM »

Oh, high flux is a great idea! A ship getting killed at high flux might..... pop :D
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

arwan

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2012, 09:22:28 AM »

in a way we already have reactor critical explosions. if you are next to a ship and it explodes it whites out your screen.. and for a long time if its a large ship like an astral though there is no damage to you. that would be a slippery slope to go well.. how far out should a shock wave go and how much damage should said shock wave do...
Logged
Alex
You won't be able to refit fighters and bombers at all. They're designed/balanced around having a particular set of weapons and would be very broken if you could change it. Which ones you pick for your fleet -out of quite a few that are available- is the choice here, not how they're outfitted.

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2012, 09:32:04 AM »

Which I alluded to, but that's not really an explosion, it's more of a flare up, since the hulk is still intact.

I don't see how this could be a slippery slope, plenty of other games features exploding ships that deal proximity damage. Determining the parameters is not a slippery slope.
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

arwan

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2012, 10:47:52 AM »

ok.. demonstration

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_nuclear_explosion

trying to find a (obviously not realistic due to realism being gargantuan HUGE explosions) fun for most people and distance for damage.. then damage amount per range... would be ridiculously hard because likely you the player would lose a TON of ships in any explosion like this in space. especially your fighters. games that do these kinds of area damage effects tend to patch them a lot. thats why there slippery slopes. you will always end up with a lot of angry people posting its either to strong or not strong enough or not realistic enough or
range is to large or range is to short.. trying to find a balance for thousands of people is very difficult.
Logged
Alex
You won't be able to refit fighters and bombers at all. They're designed/balanced around having a particular set of weapons and would be very broken if you could change it. Which ones you pick for your fleet -out of quite a few that are available- is the choice here, not how they're outfitted.

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2012, 10:54:27 AM »

There is no atmosphere in space. A massive portion of the destructive potency of a nuclear weapon lies in the fact that it creates a shockwave in the atmosphere.

Don't get me wrong, nukes in space are still dangerous, but they are nowhere near as dangerous as they are in a terrestrial environment.

Somehow, I don't see there being a looming flame war over the balancing of an occasional exploding space ship. If self destruct is too annoying, then sure, don't include it, but I think a few exploding ships would be fun and dramatic.
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

arwan

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2012, 10:58:35 AM »

most of your destructive nuclear explosion damage in space is radiation and emp. which is what the wiki was for.

also i dont mind exploding ships but i dont want a chain reaction. and there would have to be some balancing for fighters.. otherwise people could lose half there fleet popping one ship.
Logged
Alex
You won't be able to refit fighters and bombers at all. They're designed/balanced around having a particular set of weapons and would be very broken if you could change it. Which ones you pick for your fleet -out of quite a few that are available- is the choice here, not how they're outfitted.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24476
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2012, 11:02:29 AM »

Detonating ships shouldn't go all at once. They should rumble with miniature explosions, lose navigation, and leave behind a trail of flames before finally going. Obviously an exploded ship can't be scrapped or salvaged, but this does create an opportunity for another gameplay feature: Self destruct! A noble end for a brave captain.

Obviously a pretty low-priority suggestion. I'd be happy with the game if it didn't make it in at all, but I do think it would be cool. Cool *** should happen in space warfare.

I like this idea - especially with some smaller, initial explosions to create a bit of tension before the final detonation. But getting this right would take a while - things like that are all about feel, and getting the feel right takes lots of iteration. So it's a question of, do I add this, or do I work on <campaign feature X>? Not that this should stop you from bringing up cool ideas! :)
Logged

Iscariot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 852
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2012, 11:13:11 AM »


I like this idea - especially with some smaller, initial explosions to create a bit of tension before the final detonation. But getting this right would take a while - things like that are all about feel, and getting the feel right takes lots of iteration. So it's a question of, do I add this, or do I work on <campaign feature X>? Not that this should stop you from bringing up cool ideas! :)

I DID say that it was pretty low priority suggestion. Of course I'd rather have campaign stuff, but I noticed no one had mentioned it, so I thought I might throw it out there. For memory's sake. ;)
Logged

The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.

arwan

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2012, 11:33:23 AM »

i think its a cool idea. and if it happens i wont be mad about it. as far as when it should be worked on.. well.. that is an interesting subject that brings in some timing thought and the learning curve of the game

if you do it now. people get used to it now though they lose out on X other feature you were working on for the time being..

if you work on it later after you finish feature X then people get used to the combat as it is now and will love feature X coming out now. but once you get reactor breaches out combat will change and so people will have to relearn some parts of combat and that probably will frustrate people. especially i imagine people who may not be the best of pilots and ram the ships there blowing up... (cough) like TB (cough) LOL.

then there is the balance.. which personally i think is a back burner item as long as its functional before V1.0

ultimately my vote would be to work on it now. not because i really really want to see it in game mind you but because i think it would be better to put it out sooner rather than later for people who for example have not yet purchased the game but will soon and for people to get used to it.

though in the back of my head i keep hitting myself because personally i want the feature X.. LOL.
Logged
Alex
You won't be able to refit fighters and bombers at all. They're designed/balanced around having a particular set of weapons and would be very broken if you could change it. Which ones you pick for your fleet -out of quite a few that are available- is the choice here, not how they're outfitted.

ChronoWarden10

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Reactor breach.
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2012, 02:37:47 PM »

Yes please, self destruct, i might lose an onslaught to an hegemony fleet of fighters, but im taking them all with me.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2