The Case for Damage Control.
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
03-15-2010, 10:15 AM
Originally Posted by
From a pure gameplay perspective, the typical reason against this is that it leads to a death spiral.
When you're low on hull or hit points or whatever you use to track damage, you are already in a bad spot. Suffering additional penalties worsens this, and you have even less chance of a comeback. The system is kicking the guy that's already lying on the floor, so to speak.
Another question is - is there really enough time "spent" in a hull damaged state to make something like damage control an interesting addition?
It would probably require a lot of re-balancing to ensure that adding something like system failure and damage control adds to the game without making fights too tough or too easy.
There is no doubt that additional depth would be needed to make it work. IMHO NPCs should start out tougher then they are. It seems odd that I can trash a ship the same size as me before he can get a single shot off in many cases. That is closer to Babylon 5 combat then Trek combat. I compare the combat experience to something closer to SFC2 or BC. In these games there was a little more difficulty to beating someone of your same size. The experience of the combat was a lot more in depth.
Death spiraling however is a problem but I think it is easily overcome with special ability such as engineering team. If that ability repairs say, 40% of your hull, then you get 40% of your systems back as well. Link the systems directly to the hull strength of the ship. Its a cheesy way to do it, but its also quick and effective. In short I don't think that we should be getting schooled by a battleship with 3% health with tractor beams, probes, and weapons of all kinds. There should be some reflection that he is about to die.