Any questions, comments, suggestions regarding the mod development.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 21 May 2012, 20:58

FriendlyFire wrote:No, it's not possible. Find a balance which does not involve making stuff up out of thin air, since you seem to know better, Colt.


If you can't find a way to allow projectiles to bypass shields, then I think ultimately you'll just have to change the way bombers work. Because the current method simply is not viable, certainly not for final. Having cap ships inflict, near exclusively hull damage when cap ships require resources, money, and build times is pretty unacceptable.

Only thing I can suggest, if bypassing the shields isn't possible, is to simply shift the role of bombers away from sub-system warfare to simple bombardment. After all, subsystem warfare is only really useful when bombers can hit the subsystems when big ships can't. Since shields drop instantly, big ships can hit subsystems just the same as bombers can, albeit with less accuracy. So gearing bombers towards dropping shields quicker is the only route I can see.

While I want bombers to be useful as much as the next guy, I don't want cap vs cap battles to be broken just to facilitate that. As it stands now, nobody docks when damaged, they always suicide because it's horribly expensive to repair ships. Now, maybe in final you can repair ships for free, but if not then I don't think making shields essentially useless is the way to go.
User avatar
User

FriendlyFire

Rank

Developer

Posts

1693

Joined

15 Feb 2010, 16:14

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by FriendlyFire » 21 May 2012, 21:00

There is no free lunch. Capital ships are supposed to be expensive to maintain. Having shields so strong they never get scratched would entirely defeat that point.

If you don't like the idea of your capital ship costing tons to support and maintain, don't get in one. Whatever happens with balance, capitals will be massively expensive to maintain.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 21 May 2012, 21:07

So make them expensive to maintain. You guys are already implementing a resource system to build them, add in an upkeep as well. Basically, the way it is now, you're not simply making cap ships expensive to maintain, you're making them worthless. Why spend a ton of time and money buying an ISD just to have to spend a frigate's worth of resources to repair it after every single fight when you can just buy a bunch of frigates instead. There's no balance between cost and usability. If your ship is going to take hull damage no matter what, fielding a bunch of frigates is FAR cheaper than fielding an ISD. And if your enemy decides to field a cap ship like that, then you can beat them simply by making them spend a fortune repairing it after every battle.

What exactly makes heavy caps like VSDs and ISDs worth it? Why not simply field more nebulon-b's and strike's and never bother with VSDs and ISDs? How are their costs justified?
User avatar
User

FriendlyFire

Rank

Developer

Posts

1693

Joined

15 Feb 2010, 16:14

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by FriendlyFire » 21 May 2012, 21:09

Who said that ISDs and VSDs were a universal panacea? Who said that they were an optimal choice?

They exist. They are an option. Just like a CR90 is also an option. I'll let you ponder on what that may mean.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 21 May 2012, 21:13

So basically, your design philosophy is to include ships with no real purpose or function and that nobody will ever use? I'm gonna be blunt, that's retarded. Every ship should have it's pros and cons. But judging by your posts the heavy caps wont have any pros. They're big and powerful, but also 100% guaranteed to take damage in every single fight which means you have to repair them after every single fight so simply fielding smaller ships gets you the same results for cheaper. What purpose do heavy caps serve in this situation?
User avatar
User

FriendlyFire

Rank

Developer

Posts

1693

Joined

15 Feb 2010, 16:14

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by FriendlyFire » 21 May 2012, 21:14

I'm sorry, I'm not a tutorial. I'm not going to do YOUR work in trying to figure out which ship is adapted to which situation.

I'll point out that I've never said heavy caps were useless. And cut the retarded calls if you don't want us to get a lot less lenient.
no avatar
User

Zhukar

Posts

82

Joined

14 Apr 2011, 23:32

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Zhukar » 21 May 2012, 21:15

Colt556 wrote:So basically, your design philosophy is to include ships with no real purpose or function and that nobody will ever use? I'm gonna be blunt, I have no imagination.


Fixed that for you.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 21 May 2012, 21:17

I'm not asking you to be a tutorial, I'm asking you to explain the mod. You claim they wont be useless but everything you've said says they will. There's no 'adapting' here, there's understanding the game mechanics you're implementing. As it stands, and as you seem to have no inclination of changing, caps are guaranteed to take hull damage due to how useless shields are. Going off simple common sense and the resource system I can only assume those repairs will be quite costly. I know from the demo that multiple smaller ships are equally as effective as one bigger one.

So again I ask, what purpose do heavy caps serve? What can they do that a couple frigates can't? What reason is there for anyone to bother spending time and money getting one instead of a few cruisers?
no avatar
User

Zhukar

Posts

82

Joined

14 Apr 2011, 23:32

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Zhukar » 21 May 2012, 21:30

Colt556 wrote: There's no 'adapting' here, there's understanding the game mechanics you're implementing.


Range.
Firepower.

I'll leave you to do the math.
User avatar
User

DarkForce

Rank

Developer

Posts

830

Joined

16 Feb 2010, 17:46

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by DarkForce » 21 May 2012, 21:32

Colt556 wrote:So basically, your design philosophy is to include ships with no real purpose or function and that nobody will ever use?


Purpose is a malleable term. Sure, certain ships are designed with a particular purpose in mind, but how you use any given ship is up to you, not the design. The design might dictate what you can and can't do, but that's a broad range and there's more than one thing to be found in the middle.

Colt556 wrote:Every ship should have it's pros and cons. But judging by your posts the heavy caps wont have any pros. They're big and powerful, but also 100% guaranteed to take damage in every single fight which means you have to repair them after every single fight so simply fielding smaller ships gets you the same results for cheaper.


Think about what capital ships meant in Star Wars. ISD's were just as much a weapon of intimidation as they were a direct threat. The same applies here. Who isn't going to get a little nervous when they know an ISD is lurking in their system? Maintaining a psychological advantage over your enemy in addition to a military advantage would be worth the credits it costs to maintain, in my book. This is war, ships get damaged, even destroyed. It's a calculated risk.

Colt556 wrote:What purpose do heavy caps serve in this situation?


Here's one for you: Heavy caps in Star Wars, like the ISD, tended to be the core of battlegroups, with numerous smaller vessels forming the perimeter picket lines and preventing damage from actually reaching the mothership. Meanwhile, the heavy caps tended to outrange those smaller vessels in terms of firepower, so they could attack from a safe distance while their picket line soaked up the damage from the opposing fleet. The same applies for the mod. Heavy caps have a longer range, and if positioned correctly, can maintain their shields while dishing out damage.

Does it always happen that way? Not necessarily, but with proper tactics and planning, it certainly could.

And that's only one possible role.
Blame DarkForce, he wasn't clear about it.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign
[ Time : 0.068s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]
cron