| Author |
Device damage - More please! |
Antra
Admiral
Agents
Joined: February 16, 2002
Posts: 657
From: Grand Rapids, Michigan
|  Posted: 2010-07-08 19:55
In ye olden days, you'd sometimes be at 20-30% hull and all your devices would be dead. That rather sucked. I think I recall that being changed to a more gentle curve. Now though, as someone who doesn't fly stations, I rarely see device damage. I'm pretty sure flux cannon/wave can still inflict it but it's just not that common any more.
I want the feeling of a burning bridge filled with smoke, alarms blaring, my ship's damage control station showing me how badly my command is bleeding, and Scotty telling me how irked he is that he's going to have to fix all of this.
What do you think of making device damage a bit more likely? I feel that FTL/WH drives should be extremely difficult to damage but other than that, go wild.
Side note, if AFEs still have the high HP that I remember, increasing the frequency of device damage would make them more valuable.
_________________
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2010-07-08 20:02
For Cruisers and up it makes sense, but for Scouts and Frigates it wouldn't matter because pretty much as soon as they start taking hull damage they're dead within a couple seconds anyway. Destroyers I can't really say, since I don't fly them.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2010-07-09 12:46
I agree with the above in principle, if only because it would make system-damaging weapons actually have a point.
If anything, I'd go for ships having the potential to suffer system damage every time the hull takes damage, with the chances rising as you take more damage.
This has the obvious benefit of making system damage more tactically significant. If someone hits you and takes out all of your port-side guns then you need to change tactics to use the starboard side more, and ships can be disabled or mission-killed without having to blast every single hitpoint off them.
It would also make little ships armed with system-killing weapons more useful, in that they could nip in and cripple bigger ships without being forced to shoot them to death (which is rather hard in a destroyer).
Overall, this would make dreadnaughts have to think twice before going in without support, since they can't repair extensive system damage very well without outside assistance.
Currently it's basically pointless to fit EMP cannons, and flux weapons are only useful for their hull damage, since if you've done enough damage to start being able to cause system damage with them the situation means that the enemy is probably going to die regardless, and would possibly already be dead if you hadn't fitted all those EMP cannons.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Rebellion
Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: June 20, 2009
Posts: 730
From: sol
| Posted: 2010-07-09 13:34
EMP-Flux
Do massive damage to sheailds
i like the idea of being able to pin point stuff on a ship like engines or weps and so forth
_________________
\"War does not decide who is right, but who is left\"
\"I stopped fighting my inner demons we're on the same side now\"
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2010-07-09 15:21
more system damage sounds good, may make emp and flux have some value.
And why does a 0 hull staion *pictures burning bridge and chunks of the station flying away* have the potential for the same firepower as a 100 hull station? At low hull you'd think some devices were permanently damaged/destroyed/broke off into space.
_________________
|
Eledore Massis
Midshipman
Joined: January 01, 2010
Posts: 3
| Posted: 2010-07-09 17:26
Depending on witch "Olden days" you are referring to.
If you are referring to 482/483, in those days a single EMP weapon did system damage to ALL gadgets of the ship. and once past armor, AOE weapons did system damage as well.
Making it to easy to just knock a player out.
But ff you are referring to 480 or before, in those days armor, AOE weapons, and where the weapon hit was used to determine the system damage. IF you shot some one in the rear, and he had lost armor, you would be damaging his engines and weapons located at he rear. IF you shot him at the side with low hull, his gadgets located at that side would suffer, while still leaving the other sides free from system damage. the EMP weapons had the ability to circumvent trough a certain amount of armor.
I would love to have a hit based system again, but i don't know what is possible at the moment, and there are still other projects to finish or even start..
E.
_________________
|
Antra
Admiral
Agents
Joined: February 16, 2002
Posts: 657
From: Grand Rapids, Michigan
| Posted: 2010-07-09 20:41
480 era is my vote.  I think that's what I was remembering, don't know the timeframe though.
_________________
|
Rhiawhyn Zerinth
Fleet Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 31, 2005
Posts: 257
From: I.C.C Deep space refueling station
| Posted: 2010-07-10 00:18
I agree. hit based system damage would be ideal, especally on larger ships. granted i am unsure of adding system damage through armor/shields with aoe weapons like torpedos or core weapons (this would however make having an assault class of something landing torpedos on you that much more painfull)
480 system damage, scale it with hull class making larger ships more prone to system damage to one or two things occasionally even through armor (oh look, a soft fix for the dread/station spam. anyone piloting a small ship wont feel useless against dreads with torpedos, which damage systems through armor for that facing)
_________________
death is not the greatest loss of life, the greatest lost of life is what dies inside of us while we live.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
