Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Suggestion: permanent damage
03-06-2010, 08:23 AM
Ship to ship combat is dangerous. This is true on Earth as well as in space, so I came up with an idea that might serve as a sort of death penalty and a deterent to abuse of self destruct.

My thought was, for every time you die, only 90 or 95 percent of the hull damage sustained will be repaired after combat. Numbers could be up for discussion, but I don't think it should be too harsh. The point is to have a slow degradation of your hull strength as you accumulate combat damage. This will also add some "realism" to the game. Think of it like this: a warship that takes combat damage can repair a lot on it's own after combat, but not everything. Some things require the service of a shipyard.

After a certain percentage of degradation, say 50 percent, two random systems go offline due to the damage. It could be any system: consoles, weapon systems, deflector dish or (heaven forbidd), the shield. Note that the systems will not be permanently destryoed, only disabled until you repair at a ship yard. At 25 percent of full strength, another random system goes offline and there is also a small risk that one of your officers is killed. Calculation of your new hull strength, and any other system damage, will take place after you return to sector space. (Where most of the repairs between action can be assumed to take place, and a proper evaluation of ship status can be made by the captain.) To add some immersion, you new status could come in a dialouge box with you highest ranking engineering officer. (Think of the scene in "Das Boot" when U96 is sunk off Gibraltar and the captain demands proper damage reports)

An example to clarify: My cruiser has a total hull strength of 19 500. If it takes 1000 hull damage in combat, only 900 of that gets repaired by the crew after combat leaving my new hull strengt in next combat at 18 600. Next combat my cruiser gets destryoed (taking 18 600 damage), leading to a large degradation of hull strength. If I allow this to continue and my hull strength at some point goes down to 9 500, I lose one of my phaser arrays and an EPS engineering console.

Cost for repair: Up for discussion but using Starfleet Merit seems like a better alternative than energy credits.

Left to figure out: At what point do you determine the amount of damage sustained? Total damage sustained during a mission sems unfair since with proper repairs you could accumulate damage several times your hull strength leadig to a huge penalty after only one mission. Another suggestion is to use you hull strength at the point you finish the mission, but this doesn't take into account if your ships gets destroyed during the mission and you respawn. Perhaps a combination of these two could work: your hull status at the point of finishing, and a fixed absolute number of fixed percentage (preferably percentage since absolute numbers here would be unfair for escorts compared to cruisers) for evey time you suffer a warp core breach?

Comments? Criticism? Ideas to improve on my thoughts?

Regards
Lt Cmdr Emma T. Firy
Commanding Officer, Vesper class cruiser USS Sven Dufva
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
03-06-2010, 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovet
Ship to ship combat is dangerous. This is true on Earth as well as in space, so I came up with an idea that might serve as a sort of death penalty and a deterent to abuse of self destruct.

My thought was, for every time you die, only 90 or 95 percent of the hull damage sustained will be repaired after combat. Numbers could be up for discussion, but I don't think it should be too harsh. The point is to have a slow degradation of your hull strength as you accumulate combat damage. This will also add some "realism" to the game. Think of it like this: a warship that takes combat damage can repair a lot on it's own after combat, but not everything. Some things require the service of a shipyard.

After a certain percentage of degradation, say 50 percent, two random systems go offline due to the damage. It could be any system: consoles, weapon systems, deflector dish or (heaven forbidd), the shield. Note that the systems will not be permanently destryoed, only disabled until you repair at a ship yard. At 25 percent of full strength, another random system goes offline and there is also a small risk that one of your officers is killed. Calculation of your new hull strength, and any other system damage, will take place after you return to sector space. (Where most of the repairs between action can be assumed to take place, and a proper evaluation of ship status can be made by the captain.) To add some immersion, you new status could come in a dialouge box with you highest ranking engineering officer. (Think of the scene in "Das Boot" when U96 is sunk off Gibraltar and the captain demands proper damage reports)

An example to clarify: My cruiser has a total hull strength of 19 500. If it takes 1000 hull damage in combat, only 900 of that gets repaired by the crew after combat leaving my new hull strengt in next combat at 18 600. Next combat my cruiser gets destryoed (taking 18 600 damage), leading to a large degradation of hull strength. If I allow this to continue and my hull strength at some point goes down to 9 500, I lose one of my phaser arrays and an EPS engineering console.

Cost for repair: Up for discussion but using Starfleet Merit seems like a better alternative than energy credits.

Left to figure out: At what point do you determine the amount of damage sustained? Total damage sustained during a mission sems unfair since with proper repairs you could accumulate damage several times your hull strength leadig to a huge penalty after only one mission. Another suggestion is to use you hull strength at the point you finish the mission, but this doesn't take into account if your ships gets destroyed during the mission and you respawn. Perhaps a combination of these two could work: your hull status at the point of finishing, and a fixed absolute number of fixed percentage (preferably percentage since absolute numbers here would be unfair for escorts compared to cruisers) for evey time you suffer a warp core breach?

Comments? Criticism? Ideas to improve on my thoughts?

Regards
Lt Cmdr Emma T. Firy
Commanding Officer, Vesper class cruiser USS Sven Dufva
I don't have an issue per say with what you're suggesting, but many, many bugs need be repaired and situations ironed out before something like a penalty should even be attempted. If your system were to be implemented from the beginning, there probably would be anyone much past LT. Commander right now, so that would definitely slow down the fast progression problem. I don't know, there are ups and down either way, but good thought process on this one.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
03-06-2010, 08:53 AM
yeah, no. No ship captain was held responsible for the damage a ship received while under their command unless it involved a successful court-marshal. If it were successful that captain never had to pay for the repair or replacement of the damaged ship. They simply were never given another one.

Our characters do not own their ships. irreparable damage or damage that should result in repairs would be taken care of at no cost to the captain. This is not a good Idea game mechanically as well. STO is supposed to be a MMORPG light. It is supposed to be friendly to the new MMORPG player and the casual player. This kind of mechanic flies in the face of those two demographics.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
03-06-2010, 09:20 AM
1. Too often I enter a DSE and get wiped out before I can even see what's happening, because the levels are borked by some high-level starting it.

2. I shouldn't have to actually pay for my repairs. That's Starfleet's responsibility.


So, once the level ranges are fixed for DSE, and so long as I don't have to do more than go to a Starbase to get repaired, yeah, I like this.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
03-06-2010, 09:37 AM
Paying for repairs... Never once did I hear picard talk to senior staff and go "ok guys.. I need 152 bars of gold pressed latinium this week to fix when we fought the borg.. I got 17 bars.. what do you all have?

Paying for repairs = no. This isn't WoW.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
03-06-2010, 09:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovet
Comments? Criticism? Ideas to improve on my thoughts?
Nothing against you, but my only thought on your idea is "No". One of the things like about STO is that there is no repair cost system, i.e. I can just go out and do stuff without worrying that I might end up with less if my mission doesn't go well. In the worst case now, I just get nothing, but don't lose anything either. I don't want to go out, do some missions, die because I have a bad team/lag/bad luck/bugs/whatever and end up with less than before those two hours. No thank you.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
03-06-2010, 06:54 PM
I'd go for it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
03-06-2010, 07:04 PM
Someone's never been in the navy or spoken to a navy officer before.

When a ship is damaged in battle, it's sent to a drydock and fully repaired, this isnt some dodgy little patch job like you see popularized in battlestar galactica or the like, these are full repairs. They would literally dismantle the secton of the ship damaged and completely rebuild it to combat specifications. ie: 100% perfect again.

In occasions where the part was damaged and is unavailable, the navy in the past has the habit of cutting up a sister ship of the fleet that's decomissioned and just doing a hot swap of the hull section/module that's damaged and install it in the new ship. The methods used to weld severed hull pieces together are actually more resiliant in terms of tensile strength then the original materials - to ensure that the ship does not "fall apart" or have a weakness the enemy can exploit.

There is policies in most major navies to put ships back into warzones with an unsatisfactory damage repair, but that's only under certain conditions and no navies in the world, even in the big WWs, have ever been in that position.

Let's not forget in the 24th centur, repairing is as easy as replicating a new panel pretty much for free (energy only to manufacteur and raw resources) then install it. So theres no reason they WOULDNT fix the ships to be perfect.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
03-06-2010, 07:05 PM
What about instead of adding a small amount of hull damage when you respawn if you're left in a "state of vulnerability" for a few minutes. Perhaps the chances of a system getting disabled or something would increase.

I worry that a player who is continually getting ganked might end up getting the short end of the stick if he or she just keeps losing hull strength.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
03-06-2010, 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephane
Nothing against you, but my only thought on your idea is "No". One of the things like about STO is that there is no repair cost system, i.e. I can just go out and do stuff without worrying that I might end up with less if my mission doesn't go well. In the worst case now, I just get nothing, but don't lose anything either. I don't want to go out, do some missions, die because I have a bad team/lag/bad luck/bugs/whatever and end up with less than before those two hours. No thank you.
I second this.
Well said, Meph.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 AM.