Info > Feedback and Suggestions

Hull and armor system overhaul

<< < (4/14) > >>

Imagine:
I'm not sure how many more times you can ask a question which almost everyone has responded to be saying that, basically, you're simplifying gameplay and not actually taking how matches play out, without it getting old.

Personally I just wonder what this infatuation with TTK is, a term which, in all my years of gaming, I have never heard of.

Anyways, in terms of your... inquiries, I'm not going to answer either with yes or no because it's a pretty obvious bait to strengthen your arguments without the willingness to actually consider what the counter-arguments are.

Dementio:

--- Quote from: Van-Tuz on October 01, 2014, 11:30:12 am ---But hey, at least i've  got some straightforward answers that proved my points:
Taking 50% hull damage doesn't change anything major in your behaviour. Sure, you'll fly more carefully but still you don't have any choice but to fight.
Exploiting the enemy's permanent damage is difficult

--- End quote ---

But you always have to fight. Your ally can't carry the team.
Exploiting the enemies permanent damage is sometimes difficult and sometimes not at all, it depends (eg.: from what angle you meet your enemy), that's just how it is.



--- Quote from: Van-Tuz on October 01, 2014, 11:30:12 am ---My system can allow for a choice to be made in the first situation. In my system exploiting hull damage would be much easier and if know that one of the ships has sustained heavy damage you may consciously choose to take a risk. You may easily kill damaged ship and turn it into 1 v 1 battle. The other team would also be presented with a choice: retreat to repair hull damage or risk to lose one ship if you decide to exploit it.

--- End quote ---

I can't see how your system changes how the game plays once a ship sustained permanent damage, especially not if there is no definite way of repairing the hull. Could I not repair my hull from time to time in the middle of combat like I can repair the armor? Can I not fully repair my hull during the duration between "end of engagement 1" and "start of engagement 2"? The damaged ship might not be damaged at all anymore, by the time both teams meet each other again, how does your system make it "easier"?

The team with the damaged ship is always presented with a choice. If it engages it might lose due to one ship being damaged already or it retreats to get a better engagement in which the damaged ship may not even get its armor destroyed at all.

macmacnick:
All ships having the same time to kill or the ability to repair Perma hull makes the game horribly bland, and the Crazy king matches that go on for long enough already would go on for an eternity if this was implemented, literally.


And seriously, what's up with this "Time to Kill" Fetish of yours?

Van-Tuz:

--- Quote from: Imagine on October 01, 2014, 11:49:05 am --- without the willingness to actually consider what the counter-arguments are.
--- End quote ---
All the "counter-arguments" i hear are the same sentences repeated over and over again. Most of my answers were just ignored. Like now. You just ignored 90% of my previous post.

*sigh* okay starting over again.
C-A #1: Making hull always vulnerable would take away "teamwork"
Answer:
* In my system holding explosive barrage until armor is stripped would be a valid way of working in a team. However, sometimes it would be wise not to. This would actually require more skill from gunner because he would need to adapt to situation instead of relying on the "shoot only when red" definitive answer.
* Armor would still be a valuable part (especially on heavy ships) and every possible way of working as a team around it would stay in place.C-A #2: Making hull repairable would eliminate its influence on the next battle
Answer:
* The repair speed won't be fast. But other team would have to act quickly to exploit it. The exact numbers are discussable.
* In the current system to exploit the permanent damage you need to break trough armor. In some cases (Galleon) it's so difficult that 90% of the battle it's not giving any advantage.
C-A#3: Ships would die quicker.
Answer: They're not. Increasing the hull health pool would decrease the damage/ hull hp ratio of explosive weapons. That should increase the time needed for hull destruction. Currently this ratio is so high because explosive weapons need to operate in a very small time window.

The other counter-arguments (unless i have missed something) are just "i don't want it to change". That's just a Baby duck syndrome

=================================
Now it's time for a counter-offensive move. I would make a quick recap of the current system's flaws.
The current "shoot only when red" system is:
* Very punishing for newcomers. The game has lost a lot of new captains and gunners because of that.
* Limits the skill ceiling for explosive weapons by presenting only one valid option.
* Makes exploiting hull damage much more difficult than it should.
* As a result of previous point it limits the number of tactical choices. (Examples were presented earlier)  Do you have anything to say in its defence?

redria:

--- Quote from: Van-Tuz on October 02, 2014, 11:43:28 am ---Do you have anything to say in its defence?

--- End quote ---
It gives me a way to fight back and validates the efforts of the pilot, gunners, and engineers.

In any situation if my crew can keep the armor up just long enough to sneak around a corner and out of sight, or if I disable their piercing weapon (s), then I can escape no matter what my permahull is at. If you remove the capability of armor to completely protect the permahull, then last-ditch engineer, pilot, and gunner efforts can't succeed because you lose health no matter what you do.

With your modifications, a heavily damaged ship is a dead ship. I win a battle and have 2 choices - hide in a corner of the map to repair my permahull, or enter a fight knowing I have literally no way to prevent death.
Currently a heavily damaged ship can be used successfully (and almost nothing is more exciting than nursing your 1% health ship through a match) with the recognition that it is open to exploitation. Armor is very easy to break, and with no way to repair permahull you can expect the next engagement to go badly (but it isn't as guaranteed).

Nothing is worse than feeling helpless. In the current system you can always escape through skills and excellent play. The proposed changes here would take away that capability and leave damaged ships feeling helpless.

Consider - you are an engineer rebuilding the armor. You finish rebuilding it and hit it with your mallet. Would you rather know that you just bought your ship several seconds of immunity from permanent damage, or would you rather watch your permahull continue to drop despite the effort you just put in?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page