Transporters: no transport on same entity

[Dire Venom]

Ok ok ok!!!!! Theres a lot of strong opinions on this thread.
What about:
-->Allow multiple Telporters per station.
-->Only One teleporter allowed PER ship, or incurr and exponential energy cost per extra teleporter
--> Multiple teleporters on an entity incur a horrific energy cost, as do multiple beams attached to one computer atm.

That good:?

 

[Thalanor]

1) He doesn't understand how griefer friendly this is.

Griefer friendly? Was starmade griefer friendly before (without these transporters)? No, it was not. Again, you didn't read anything in this thread. It was stated repeatedly that if your ship is not docked, then it is not safe, whether I kill it with a ship or with boarding, and the latter is actually much more difficult. This exact same thing we had already, but you didn't read it, as expected.

2) He does play on PvP servers, just under a different name.

Yeah, sure, I have a seeecret griefer identity... is this seriously your chain of argument now?

3) He actually believes that every RP builder in the game is going to suddenly throw everything in the trash because they have a method that will save them all of 7 seconds walking down a hall.

As has been stated from page one, the game already doesn't promote traversable interior space. It should promote it more, not even less.

I legitimately do not see any other valid place for this to come from. It actively promotes the worst kind of PvP,

Worst kind of pvp? If your fighting force is inferior and your ship out in space, then you will be evaporated. Whether you will die in a 5 minute ship battle or in a 15 minute boarding action doesn't matter, except that the latter actually gives you a much higher chance of defending against an opponent with superior resources. Astronauts are equal in battle. This point has been brought up already. You did not read the respective posts, did you?

it actively discourages the PvE builders from playing the game the way they want to play it, what good does it serve?

Why does it discourage PvE builders if internal transporters actually remove any incentive for them to, well, build?

People who want to build RP spaces will build RP spaces, with or without it. People who don't want RP spaces will continue to not build RP spaces with or without it.

Repeating from above (and several previous posts, which again you didn't read): the game already doesn't promote traversable interior space. It should promote it more, not even less.

The only thing I can see it doing is actively punishing people in PvP by removing their ability to get to their own ships and fight back.

How? How does this remove the ability to "get your own ships"? You are either docked at home, in which case you are safe, or you are out in space, in which case you face potential opponents with the ships you have in your fleet, whether you want it or not.

Yet again every one of your lines shows that

you've been ignoring the majority of the stuff written in this thread, or at least not making an effort to understand it.

 

[Groovrider]

Ok ok ok!!!!! Theres a lot of strong opinions on this thread.
What about:
-->Allow multiple Telporters per station.
-->Only One teleporter allowed PER ship, or incurr and exponential energy cost per extra teleporter
--> Multiple teleporters on an entity incur a horrific energy cost, as do multiple beams attached to one computer atm.

That good:?

No. Not when beaming to another section of a federation ship is as simple as asking the computer to do it.

 

[Awdred]

I love the transporter system. Saves me a bunch of time moving between ships, stations and bases. Don't really care how hard it might make it for a boarding party. Don't want my ships boarded in the first place. I would rather see it self-destruct then loose a ship plan to another faction.

But for those who want to board ships as part of their PvP game, I agree with Fatcobra...



Both Teleporters and Boarding. The end mechanic of boarding is to steal the other faction's ship or it's plan. Theft, spoils of war, whatever you want to call it. That needs to be controlled too. Theft is considered immoral by society, and therefore illegal. Making every server boarding friendly is going to upset way more people then it will please. The Devs are just setting the game up to be a griefer paradise.

Schema, take a note. Joking aside, this is the right solution. If I want my pvp server boarder friendly, I could do that. If I want to protect my work from boarders, I could do that. Not to mention, who wants to walk 100m across a ship to get to my core.

 

[Edymnion]

You don't seem to understand that removing options does not promote anything. It simply removes options.

If you want to promote the use of interior space, then you need to give the interior space an actual reason to exist. Thats what they're trying to do with the crews and cargo spaces. That is promotion, they are giving you a reason to do something.

Hint: If the only way to make someone do something is to force them by removing every possible other option, then it probably isn't a good choice in the first place.

BTW, you can keep claiming I don't read what you wrote all you want. I've read every last word of it, and I still dismiss your reasoning as either naive or biased. Yes, it is possible to be fully informed and still not agree. You made your points, and I either do not find them valid to start with, or I do not find them to be of sufficient weight to justify what you are proposing.

 

[Jumper11550]

Why does it discourage PvE builders if internal transporters actually remove any incentive for them to, well, build?

I would like to state that on this one point, the folks that like RP interiors are going to do it regardless, and the folks that will be happy about transporters reducing that need will for the most part already not be doing it. I don't suddenly feel the need not to build an RP interior just because transporters exist. Your assertion that because people can now get away with smaller interiors must mean that they will choose to do so is flawed. This won't change anyone's mind about the kind of interiors they want to build, they're going to do what they were doing before anyways.

 

[Lecic]

The pro-transporter argument boils down to "I think boarding is griefing instead of a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy."

 

[Thalanor]

You don't seem to understand that removing options does not promote anything. It simply removes options.

You don't seem to understand that it is unhealthy for an array of options if one of the has both the lowest cost and highest benefit.

If you want to promote the use of interior space, then you need to give the interior space an actual reason to exist. Thats what they're trying to do with the crews and cargo spaces. That is promotion, they are giving you a reason to do something.

Yes, that is promotion, but the value of said spaces would decrease if NPC crews were just stored away into a secluded chamber while player movement is exclusively done with internal transporters.

Hint: If the only way to make someone do something is to force them by removing every possible other option, then it probably isn't a good choice in the first place.

It is not about removing every option but one, but about removing one option to make every other viable again.

BTW, you can keep claiming I don't read what you wrote all you want. I've read every last word of it, and I still dismiss your reasoning as either naive or biased. Yes, it is possible to be fully informed and still not agree. You made your points, and I either do not find them valid to start with, or I do not find them to be of sufficient weight to justify what you are proposing.

Yet while I go through your every line, you completely evade answering to these every time, instead coming up with an one liner about how I am a trigger happy server griefer or something. Respond to the actual points one by one (hint: multiquotest exist) if you want to give the impression you are replying to these instead of coming up with your ever-same rehash of

"I think boarding is griefing instead of a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy."

 

[Edymnion]

The pro-transporter argument boils down to "I think boarding is griefing instead of a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy."

Nah, it boils down to "I don't want to spend 10 minutes walking across my station just to manufacture a computer block, and then walk 10 minutes back to the ship I wanted to put it on."

You know, same reason we have grav tubes and rail elevators, because there is a difference in having a nice stroll to look at the pretty things, and having to trudge across town every time you want a coke.

 

[Awdred]

The pro-transporter argument boils down to "I think boarding is griefing instead of a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy."

Not at all. Boarding is totally legitimate, but I should be to have teleporters around my ship, even if I replace all walking from room to room with it.

 

[Edymnion]

Yes, that is promotion, but the value of said spaces would decrease if NPC crews were just stored away into a secluded chamber while player movement is exclusively done with internal transporters.

Then the problem is with poor implementation.

If you're so worried that every mode of movement across every conceivable scale from large to small is going to be rendered worthless by transporters, then have you considered that the problem is that there *ISN'T* an attractive, viable way of getting around large distances on foot in this game?

My current station is fairly small, and has the docking area on a separate level from the living quarters, factories, sick bay, etc. Its frustrating to have to stop and wait for the max speed rail elevator to take me up to crafting, I grab the wrong thing, go back down to the ship, realize my mistake, take the lift back up again...

It serves no purpose. There is no benefit to my gameplay experience, or anyone else's. There is me, sitting in front of a keyboard, not playing the game while I wait for it to get to where I want it to go.

It might as well be a loading screen.

And the station I'm building now is orders of magnitude larger than that. Going from the center of the station to the edge to get into a ship even on a max speed rail car would still be "go make a sandwich" long.

 

[Lecic]

Boarding is totally legitimate, but I should be to have teleporters around my ship,

One or the other.

Nah, it boils down to "I don't want to spend 10 minutes walking across my station just to manufacture a computer block, and then walk 10 minutes back to the ship I wanted to put it on."

Once again, let me repeat- I think transporters should be allowed on stations. I DON'T think they should be allowed multiple times on ships.

Also...

"Holy crap, the cutting torch is the most griefer friendly thing I've seen in this game, what do you mean you can cut someone's faction block out and steal their entire ship/station?!?".

Don't cripple my PvE because you want to be able to gank people easier in PvP.

Its like MMOs that don't allow flying because it makes it harder for the griefers to gank people, or remove/cripple legit PvE abilities because they're not well balanced for PvP.

I honestly do not see boarding in a positive light in any form right now. I see it purely as a griefing tactic.

"This makes it harder for me to kill people who don't want to fight me in the first place".

Its no protection against anyone intentionally griefing just for the lulz.

1) He doesn't understand how griefer friendly this is.

 

[Edymnion]

Also...

Whats your point?

I specifically said I don't like it when my PvE ability is handicapped due to PvP reasons, and every reason I've seen for this is a pro-PvP reason, and not the good kind of PvP in my opinion. Because I honestly don't buy for a second the "Oh nobody will ever build RP friendly ships ever again because of this" stuff.

Griefing is bad. Anything that promotes it is bad in my book. If I had my druthers, every ship and station a faction owned would become invincible as soon as no one in the faction was logged on as well as the home base.

Morally I object because this promotes griefing. Practically I object because it limits my ability to play even single player the way I want to play it. I literally find no ground on this subject on which I could stand.

 

[Jumper11550]

One or the other.

Why?

Does having transporters invalidate boarding? Just because the effort is now on the boarder to work around it as opposed to the one being boarded to have some elaborate defense. Boarding and the spoils that come with it are an immense reward for very little physical resources put into it. It should be exceedingly hard.

 

[Lecic]

Does having transporters invalidate boarding?

You know what? No, it doesn't. It just makes it a pain in the ass and generally a waste of time, like every other overpowered boarding measure. I'm just going to keep doing the same thing I always do when I encounter that sort of thing. At least those take a little bit of time to set up, though.

EDIT-

Whats your point?

That you think boarding is griefing, and not a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy.

Griefing is bad.

 

[Awdred]

All you'd have to do In a door-free interior is torch through the wall of one room, and you've opened the systems.

 

[Winterhome]

Easy solutions here.

1: Transporters are extremely easily jammed or cannot function when the ship is under a certain power percentage, or something, thus requiring that if you have NPC crew it's a very good idea to have manually walkable access hallways to their stations, lest they be unable to reach their destination otherwise in combat. Make up for this by making crew bonuses noticeably outweigh the space lost in system blocks by making an interior in the first place.

2: Hostile astronauts can use your transporters if they find them, but you can't transport directly into enemy ships from your own ship while your shields are up. If you have an "unboardable" ship that consists of a transporter outside and a tiny core room with a transporter inside, you're giving the enemy player the keys to your core this way.

 

[Edymnion]

That you think boarding is griefing, and not a legitimate and extremely difficult to accomplish strategy.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Lots of griefing has difficulty and strategy behind it.

I just see no value in it as a tactic except to steal someone else's ship. You wanna fight me? Fine, lets go at it, whoever is the better builder and better pilot wins. I don't mind having my ship flat out destroyed.

But to steal it out from under me, while I'm in it, just to fly it around for yourself? Oh hell no. Thats just actively insulting.

I would find more legitimacy in boarding if destroying the faction block left the ship faction locked the way it was before (which is possible, as we can spawn in faction locked turrets with no faction block), and that cutting someone out of the core put the entire ship into decayed status like a pirate station.

As a means of winning, I have little problem with it. What I have a problem with is the fact the only reasons to do it are to actively flaunt the fact you just stole someone's stuff, or because you couldn't win in a fair fight ship to ship.
[DOUBLEPOST=1446598714,1446598638][/DOUBLEPOST]

1: Transporters are extremely easily jammed or cannot function when the ship is under a certain power percentage, or something, thus requiring that if you have NPC crew it's a very good idea to have manually walkable access hallways to their stations, lest they be unable to reach their destination otherwise in combat. Make up for this by making crew bonuses noticeably outweigh the space lost in system blocks by making an interior in the first place.

Or simply disable transporters entirely in combat, and get rid of the shield dropping thing.

 

[Dire Venom]

Im fine with having multiple teleporters per ship (Itd be useful) but there should be some sort of drawback to balance it.
Increased energy, server config options, Increased cooldown time etc. It doesnt have to be much.
Jump inhibitors could also jam teleportrs or drmaticlay increase the cooldown:??

On that note I think having a cooldown associated with each teleporter would be nice. There has to be some sort of drawback with using them, even if it means you cant teleport around your ship 20 times a minutes
[DOUBLEPOST=1446598844,1446598718][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, anyone who just leaves ships driffing about in space deserves to get griffed.
If you can't take care of your own ships you shouldnt have them.

Also spawn stations will soon have public docking so there will be no excuse : )

 

[Winterhome]

On the topic of Boarding.

Boarding is a legitimate strategy because it is extremely easy to counter. If you get boarded, then there are a few dozen ways to get rid of those pesky gnats. Internal damage pulses, beam hallways of death that you can turn off and on, antipersonnel turrets, ten meter thick blast doors with even thicker armor around them, basic hallway and fortification design to give your own astronauts an advantage (ie: access hallway to your core room is a 1 block wide hallway, so they can't dodge, but you have corners to hide around while your sniper rifle reloads)