Maybe physical damage points to player with drones destroyed a kind of feedback from neural controls until character dies?
This would probably mean that every time you switched drones, you would stop off at a healing station. Not in any way a bad penalty. Giving ships a transmission radius based on some module would give much more interesting battles. It's like the difference between playing Elite Dangerous, and Actually sitting in a cobra mkIII and shooting at the baddies, there is a lot more danger when your life is at risk. In starmade, I don't want a double disconnect where I'm disconnected because I'm sitting at a computer in real life, and then double disconnected from sitting at a computer in the game too. Sitting at a computer in a ship on the front lines is a lot less worse, because I know that if I don't protect the carrier, I'll be back at homebase going "GAHHH." As opposed to being back at homebase going "sigh, I guess I'll need to launch another fighter."Maybe physical damage points to player with drones destroyed a kind of feedback from neural controls until character dies?
Risk of death? What do you lose on death (aside from FP)? Whatever a player can drop when dying, they can simply leave it in the homebase. The only thing a player death does, is taking them out of combat, making them spend valuable lifetime to get back, so they can go on with actually playing the game. Effectively players are punished for playing the game by locking them out of the game. Such a mechanic is necessary in games where you respawn with everything you had when dying, but in StarMade you don't respawn with your ship. Losing ships is punishing, dying is just annoying.Because then there would never be a reason to actually pilot a ship yourself. As an admin for a PvP server, I would really hate how this would limit and detract from the investment a player has in whether they succeed or not in a battle. Part of what makes combat fun is the risk of death. For drones to be viable on a survival PVP server, the risk of death needs to be maintained (as in, that player must be reachable by the person they are attacking and possibly killed). For this feature to add something to the game, it should create more viable options, with their own set of pros and cons, not eliminate existing ones as untenable.
When a player spawns back at their spawnpoint, it takes away the tactical advantage of being at the enemy's gates. Why is this "punishing the player for playing the game"? That player died and was taken out of the fight. Now they have to try and rush to get back into the fight or if they want to try and salvage what is left of their ship. Or just get revenge.Risk of death? What do you lose on death (aside from FP)? Whatever a player can drop when dying, they can simply leave it in the homebase. The only thing a player death does, is taking them out of combat, making them spend valuable lifetime to get back, so they can go on with actually playing the game. Effectively players are punished for playing the game by locking them out of the game. Such a mechanic is necessary in games where you respawn with everything you had when dying, but in StarMade you don't respawn with your ship. Losing ships is punishing, dying is just annoying.
I'm not against a range limit in general, but if remote control is implemented, it should have a server setting for range, which also allows for it to be set to unlimited.
Even if ships could be controlled from the homebase, stopping the overheating would still require the player being physically present.Now they have to try and rush to get back into the fight or if they want to try and salvage what is left of their ship.
Warheads might be a problem, it's good you brought this up. The AI needs a "shoot warheads, even if neutral" option anyways, so this should be implemented before remote controls.We do not want people piloting 4 block warhead ships as drones, with no possible consequence or possible harm to their astronaut body, and constantly grief other players.
I'd try to avoid to make the range dependent on sectors. Players shouldn't be kicked out of their ships just because the carrier accidentally crossed a nearby sector border. Also, players in remote controlled ships should have a display that shows their distance to their physical position as a percentage of the maximum distance, so they don't get kicked out of their ships by surprise.While I'm all for a range limit to make sure that the players are actually in range of being attacked directly (say within the same sector or two)
I would say that remote controlling a ship should ONLY be possible through the fleet system and ONLY if in range of the ship the player is desiring to control. (Though I would also like to see the fleet system have a better permission system built in, to allow faction members to control the same fleet)Even if ships could be controlled from the homebase, stopping the overheating would still require the player being physically present.
Warheads might be a problem, it's good you brought this up. The AI needs a "shoot warheads, even if neutral" option anyways, so this should be implemented before remote controls.
That is interesting. I'd like to see that as a mod, but perhaps not in the base gameplay.Maybe physical damage points to player with drones destroyed a kind of feedback from neural controls until character dies?
Why not? Perhaps the range could be set to 4 sectors though rather than 2. This way the person could park 2 or 3 sectors out and have the leeway they need not to lose connection to the drone. (But admins could play with this and set it to their own liking) I used 2 because scanners can only scan up to 2 sectors away in enemy territory.I'd try to avoid to make the range dependent on sectors. Players shouldn't be kicked out of their ships just because the carrier accidentally crossed a nearby sector border. Also, players in remote controlled ships should have a display that shows their distance to their physical position as a percentage of the maximum distance, so they don't get kicked out of their ships by surprise.
That's why I suggested a system for losing FP for lost ships (dependent on mass) instead.Piloting a drone from your home base, would have the same challenge, but again, without the risk of faction point loss or player death.
I totally agree with this, all I want is the possibility to make drone wars servers, not an obligation.Another thing to consider are things like bounties, kill boards, notoriety boards, etc. If a player literally never leaves their home base and can never be killed, it really invalidates these kinds of features for servers. But all that aside, I think it'd be pretty cool to have the option to play on a server where everything was "drone wars." I think it would be a lot of fun being able to pop into and out of ships that are scattered throughout the galaxy.
Permadeath would be realitic. :pBut I do not think it would work well for a survival PVP server, such as the one I admin for, because it would take away a crucial element of survival gameplay and realism, death.
As I said, players should have a range indicator, which wouldn't be very helpful since sector borders can't be seen.Why not? Perhaps the range could be set to 4 sectors though rather than 2. This way the person could park 2 or 3 sectors out and have the leeway they need not to lose connection to the drone.
I can this as being feasible. But I'd like to have the option to turn it off. I don't like a lot of clutter on my screen. I'd probably prefer to use distance from my selected target. Knowing which sector it is in gives me a rough effective distance I can travel from it.That's why I suggested a system for losing FP for lost ships (dependent on mass) instead.
I totally agree with this, all I want is the possibility to make drone wars servers, not an obligation.
Permadeath would be realitic. :p
As I said, players should have a range indicator, which wouldn't be very helpful since sector borders can't be seen.
I do. As Benevolent27 said, drone wars servers could be fun. It would definitely encourage fearful players to fight more often.Yeah, I don't think anybody is making the suggestion that you should be able to remote control a ship from inside your faction home with unlimited range.
... Sorta? I'm one of those "avoid PVP at all costs" players, and that's mostly because I despise loosing the ship I'm flying. *I do. As Benevolent27 said, drone wars servers could be fun. It would definitely encourage fearful players to fight more often.
Apparently dying is worse than losing a small ship for some people. I guess most of them do afk fleet mining.... Sorta? I'm one of those "avoid PVP at all costs" players, and that's mostly because I despise loosing the ship I'm flying. *
As in, (and this is especially true of survival servers) all the resources+time that went into making that ship, have now effectively been flushed down a toilet, as I very obviously don't have them anymore. (and the time is the biggest sting, as it means now I have to delay my fun for yet moar asteroid mining so I can make the parts for a replacement goldfish)
I allso despise most forms of server interaction, outside of a very small circle of friends. I'm astoundingly bad at comprehending textual conversation cues, (
I know that problem. However, I find it very helpful to read what I wrote in chat before sending it. By the time I'm done writing and reading I oftentimes calmed down enough to not send the text. Also, reading your own text helps seeing it from an outside perspective.epicly bad given that I'm a native speaker/reader of English) and unconsciously pick the more aggressive word choices. (oh, and all the swearing I'm typically holding back "because children" only makes me angrier, so I start consciously picking ever more aggressive words)
Some cons could be that you can't do build mode, maybe you can't do the zoom out thing, maybe an extra power cost. We have to think about how it would work too. Drone computer/drone controller? And how would the menu work? Would it be like the nav screen, where you can see all the ships(or turrets!) you could control.Because then there would never be a reason to actually pilot a ship yourself. As an admin for a PvP server, I would really hate how this would limit and detract from the investment a player has in whether they succeed or not in a battle. Part of what makes combat fun is the risk of death. For drones to be viable on a survival PVP server, the risk of death needs to be maintained (as in, that player must be reachable by the person they are attacking and possibly killed). For this feature to add something to the game, it should create more viable options, with their own set of pros and cons, not eliminate existing ones as untenable.
It would have to be in a fleet you have control of, and be in the same sector as you. You would just select the fleet menu and click a button to enter the ship as a drone. If it stays in the same sector as you, then you can build. The moment you leave the sector, it loses it's inventory.Some cons could be that you can't do build mode, maybe you can't do the zoom out thing, maybe an extra power cost. We have to think about how it would work too. Drone computer/drone controller? And how would the menu work? Would it be like the nav screen, where you can see all the ships(or turrets!) you could control.
How would factions affect RCing? Could you control neutral ships? What about allied ones? I'm assuming you couldn't control enemy ships, unless there was some system of hacking or you destroyed the faction block.
What if when you got ejected from the computer there was a "Bob's drone was killed by Jonny!"? Would that be fine for the death message thing?
And you can only control it for 4-5 sectors more out after that?It would have to be in a fleet you have control of, and be in the same sector as you. You would just select the fleet menu and click a button to enter the ship as a drone. If it stays in the same sector as you, then you can build. The moment you leave the sector, it loses it's inventory.