Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scalamidrion
|
Posted - 2003.12.17 19:38:00 -
[1]
We all love the combat. It is exciting. What makes it more exciting is a higher level of risk of some loss, even if you win.
Each sub-system of our ships has hit points. These should be used to blow chunks out of our ships, which in turn would stimulate the economy as we buy replacement parts. A series of unlucky hits could cost you that 425 rail gun, and severely put a damper on the rest of the battle.
The types of damage delivered by certain weapons would affect the internal component damage to the ship. Heat damage would be largely external, whereas kinetic damage would be more variable depending on the penetration qualities of the weapon and ammo.
Finally, the ability to disable ships and then harvest their materials would be a fun option too!
|
Maximus Frenkyled
|
Posted - 2003.12.18 04:37:00 -
[2]
I like it.
Just Your Average Guy. |
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2003.12.18 19:25:00 -
[3]
wonderful idea
I think they will introduce such a system soon(tm) because modules have already their own hitpoints.
Greetings Grim |
Scalamidrion
|
Posted - 2003.12.18 21:18:00 -
[4]
Another thought that I had about making combat a little more interesting was about structural integrity. I returned to home port several times after battle with no armour left and massive internal damage. Once I came home with a structure of 1.2% left.
While there is likely to be considerable overbuilding in a military ship, this is a little rediculous. I think that when the structure drops below a certain level, radical movement by the damaged ship should cause additional damage to the structure. This would mean that a critically damaged ship would not be permitted to do anything over than continue on a straight course without acceleration until it repaired its structure sufficiently!
Similarly, if the structure dropped below a certain level it should take longer to repair the structure. I would reduce the number of points of repair done by a hull repairer. This would make the heavy structural damage more significant, and force players (and NPCs) to withdraw from combat earlier. More realism!
|
Darsk'hul
|
Posted - 2003.12.19 12:40:00 -
[5]
i vote for this __________
No more CEO of Placid Partners Inc. Contact for this corp is now Yilo.
Freelancer at Lost Order |
Kilroy Kilgore
|
Posted - 2003.12.19 21:46:00 -
[6]
I braught up similiar points not too long ago ( a month or so) glad other people are looking at things the same way:) "These snoosh berries taste like snoosh berries!!!" |
Artean
|
Posted - 2003.12.20 01:37:00 -
[7]
Yep, like it. ........ There is a fine line between gate camping and just standing by a gate, looking like an idiot... |
Scalamidrion
|
Posted - 2003.12.29 20:01:00 -
[8]
Talk about realism coming home to roost. I just lost my battleship, cruiser and indy in twenty minutes. On the other hand, if I had been able to force NPC ships out of combat due to heavy damage, I would have likely lost none of them!
Fighting to the death... Why would any NPC do so? The NPC units in the game play rather stupidly, and it would only take a few mods to their AI to fix it.
If the NPC AI was divided into two levels, or perhaps three, it could be set to a much more realistic set of parameters. Lets call the highest level of AI the Admiral AI. It would choose whether to engage an enemy or to ignore it. It would also choose to disengage. When an enemy is sized up, the Admiral AI would compare relative estimated strengths of the enemies to its own total estimated strength, and if the battle was reasonable enough, engage. Similarly, if too many of the Admiral AI's ships were heavily damaged or withdrawing, it would disengage the entire squadron.
The Admiral AI would also be able to choose from several strategies, including "I do not have enough strength to fight you, so my ships will merely attack you weakest and then flee" and "I am much stronger than you, so lets have a general engagement". Other similar strategies could be developed, specifying which ships would be engaged first in order to achieve the Admiral AI's mission: cause maximum damage for minimal cost!
Each ship would also have an AI. This AI would merely engage the enemy as specified by the Admiral AI. It would also choose when its ship had taken too much damage, and when to withdraw. This would involve some random factor which would represent the bravery of the captain. The Captain AI would withdraw the damaged ship to a safe distance where it would wait, possible throwing the occasional missile in for good measure. When the ship was repair sufficiently, or shields had recovered enough, the Captain AI would then reengage the enemy if the battle still continued. A minimum disengagement time would be required to ensure that ships did not disengage and then reengage immediately because the shields had been repaired 2pts!
The key is that when enough AI ships have been damaged heavily and were withdrawing, all remaining AI ships would withdraw too. PC ships could warp after AI ships, if they guess well to where the AI ships were headed!
Sound like fun? Wait until you read my ideas on Jump Capable Missiles for strategic bombardments!
|
ArLance
|
Posted - 2003.12.29 20:45:00 -
[9]
Yikes, Thank God I am not going to have to program that kinda logic.
Its a good idea in theory though... "You've Got to be Nuckin Futs!!" |
Drethen Nerevitas
|
Posted - 2003.12.29 22:20:00 -
[10]
You want better AI? _______________________________________________________________________
IMPORTANT: Devs (and players) please take notice. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |