Faction Modules - Should be detectable

[rariisan]

Arguing for "realism" is absolutely ridiculous in this kind of setting. I agree that scanners should be a bit more specific with /which/ planet plate has the faction module, but having it pinpoint the location is pretty cheese.

Also you presented two arguments (one of which argued for realism in a video game that is anything BUT realistic) . I responded to one with an image. I've never seen anyone so assblasted from a reaction image before.

*sigh* I guess I'll have to break it down for you:

Argument #1: "I don't think it's worth it with the loss of realism/immersion" -> This game isn't realistic, that doesn't mean we can go "fuck logic, let's just have everything happen without reason and not change whatever's wrong with the game, because some of our users grew accustomed to this exploitable block". I don't know anyone who doesn't want his game to be ruled by the laws of logic as good as it can. And no, that you won't be able to use a military strategy some people consider an exploit is not a valid reason.


Argument #2: "I'm not sure I want a game which military strategy consists on a single person with the minimum amount of credits effectively DESTROYING half of your planet" -> Another reason you completely disregarded. This system allows for this exploit, that's why it's not good enough. I might aswell go on a fresh new server, mine for 10 minutes, get a ton of faction modules and claim every single planet I see floating around, what a nice "military strategy", eh?


Argument #3: "If there has to be a piece of technology that could make the whole thing unclaimable, there should be a way to (with enough time) remove it/detect it." -> Another argument you disregarded. Destruction of your own planet is NOT a valid way of removing a faction block any kid can hide. And I highly doubt that this was schema's intention.

Argument #4: "how annoying it is to forget where your faction module is" -> Self explanatory.

Now these are only the arguments I put IN A SINGLE POST, most of them unanswered by you. So far your only argumentation has been "but I use it as a strategy " and "you don't agree with me? Here's a completely ambiguous gif. Redundancy MUST proof my point, right?". I'm not mad at you, I just point out how weak your argumentation is, and therefore your suggestion to keep everything as it is.

 

[CyberTao]

Also, I thought the whole point of the coming HP system was to prevent coring and make armor viable... wouldn't that serve just as well to prevent coring and sniping the faction module? Not to mention the latter has almost five times the armor rating, or 80 times the effective HP if my math is right.

The HP system will still allow blocks to be destroyed. So you can still tunnel through a ship and bash on it's core if you wanted, it just wouldn't cause overheat. I know for a fact blocks will be individually destroyable because we have WIP systems like collisions and breakoff, and I don't think the Devs are lazy/lame/uninspired enough to just make a second shield. I would be one of the ones protesting if they did.

The faction module will always be a block, and hence destroyable. It's importance makes it significant, but I doubt it will be coded to survive like the ship core unless the depletion of HP. If they did, my point is moot, but I believe they wont, and until/unless they do, this point stands.

The "Dock it or lose it" bit was referring to how most peoples will shrug off coredrill ship theft if you are offline and didn't dock your ship to a homebase, making it invincible, which I thought was less viable after the faction points update (I remember hearing larger stations + docked ships = more FP costs). Some servers, though few, actually limit or disallow homebase docking.

realism

It's not worth the loss of realism, so lets give up some of our realism? The argument of "Realism" is probably one of the most annoying ones on the forums really. The reality is someone failed to secure their territory before a troll claimed something, or you claimed territory not knowing someone already owned a planet. Use the admin commands (which I recently learnt) to reset the faction on it. Each plate needs it's own faction module I I believe, and I doubt there is one all sides. If there is use the command again to set it to the proper owner.

• faction_set_entity
  • DESCRIPTION: Set faction ID for an entity
  • PARAMETERS: factionID(Integer)
  • EXAMPLE: /faction_set_entity 1001

0 is neutral. I had once made the mistake of hiding and losing a faction module, then being told to move it. Half an hour of searching and a modified texture pack later, I found it. I know the feels, but you don't need an ingame function for ownership issues, that's why we have so many damned faction commands.

 

[rariisan]

It's not worth the loss of realism, so lets give up some of our realism?

The reality is someone failed to secure their territory before a troll claimed something, or you claimed territory not knowing someone already owned a planet.

• faction_set_entity
  • DESCRIPTION: Set faction ID for an entity
  • PARAMETERS: factionID(Integer)
  • EXAMPLE: /faction_set_entity 1001

1. "So let's give up some of our REALISM?" Double standards much? Also please explainm e what is realistic about it? That you grew accustomed to it doesn't mean it's realistic, NOR yours.

2. "The reality is someone failed to secure their territory before a troll claimed something, or you claimed territory not knowing someone already owned a planet." I explained in the previous post to yours (which i posted 2 seconds before yours) that any user can just claim as many planets as he can, what then?

3. That admin command doesn't work. Got a planet changed, got a confirmation message, faction didn't change. Even then, there's no reason the game should say "Well here's an exploit, but you server admins can go behind every player who has been trolled and solve it for him!"

 

[Comr4de]

1 is retarded as I have already stated
I responded to 2 and 3 when I said that it should specify which plate the faction module is on. 4 is your own damn fault.

 

[rariisan]

I responded to 2 and 3 when I said that it should specify which plate the faction module is on.

You right now: "Yeah it would suck if you had to destroy all your planet to find the faction block, but not if you just have to destroy one face of it!".

 

[CyberTao]

Trolls are gonna troll. You're suggestion a feature that would undermine part of current faction tactics so you can disspell a certain type of trolling, if you wanna go claim all the planets you can, it's entirely your choice to do so. Dealing with trolls is an admin responsibility. If it wasn't a troll, then you are just stealing someone else's planet. What about factions that wish to go out and claim all the planets in their system so that they own them from the start, protect them somewhat from other players? Lolnope /snipefactionmodule. All it would do, is intensify the war with trolls, since they could even steal your colonized planets with little to no destruction. It'd just be the new core drill, except it would work on planets and stations now as well.

If the command didnt work (I dunno if you have to select the core, or all of the plates), then report and get that fixed. I don't see why we would need 2 functions ingame to do the same thing.

Also, you can still build on a destroyed planet face. Make it a industrial section, be creative.

 

[rariisan]

What about factions that wish to go out and claim all the planets in their system so that they own them from the start, protect them somewhat from other players? Lolnope /snipefactionmodule.

If the command didnt work (I dunno if you have to select the core, or all of the plates), then report and get that fixed. I don't see why we would need 2 functions ingame to do the same thing.

Also, you can still build on a destroyed planet face. Make it a industrial section, be creative.

1. He'd be able to blow up my planet anyways, why should I care that he's able to change its ownership if I'll be able to recover it later? Your solution goes like this: "Player A claims planet, Player B can only destroy it". Mine, in the ther hand, goes like this: "Player A claims planet, Player B can choose to destroy it or claim it." It's just better and more elegant.

2. I'm glad schema doesn't share your philosophy on letting admins deal with exploits.

3. Dealing with the consequences of trolling isn't as elegant as avoiding the possibility of trolling in the first place.



Also tell me about those "faction tactics" involving undetectable Faction Modules. I'm genuinely interested.

 

[CyberTao]

Already did mate, the entire point of hiding them. Please tell me how easily locating a faction module will not simply circumvent the entire idea of the HP system? You yourself seem to be ignoring this, unless you're RP posting, and skip it because I wasn't talking to you.

"Fixing" an exploit and creating another one seems like a bad indeed to me. It's probably happened before as well, yet this is the first big fuss anyone has every raised over it.

"Player A claims planet, Player B can choose to destroy it or claim it."

And so begins Starmade's first game of tag/capture the flag. What would be more "elegant" is a faction just admitting defeat and surrounding the planet, defactioning it before fleeing. But hey, people play the game different. Differing opinions and whatnot.

 

[rariisan]

Already did mate, the entire point of hiding them. Please tell me how easily locating a faction module will not simply circumvent the entire idea of the HP system? You yourself seem to be ignoring this, unless you're RP posting, and skip it because I wasn't talking to you.

"Fixing" an exploit and creating another one seems like a bad indeed to me. It's probably happened before as well, yet this is the first big fuss anyone has every raised over it.

And so begins Starmade's first game of tag/capture the flag. What would be more "elegant" is a faction just admitting defeat and surrounding the planet, defactioning it before fleeing. But hey, people play the game different. Differing opinions and whatnot.

1. A faction Module is not a Ship Core. Destroying a faction module doesn't evne destroy the planet, it doesn't even make it destroyable! (Since it already is). It just makes it claimable, which is way better than having it destroyed.

2. Creating another exploit? What exploit is this suggestoin creating if you don't mind? That your station is now not only destroyable (& claimable after destruction) but also destroyable AND claimable after the destruction of defenses? If something, it's an improvement.

3. I really doubt most enemies of your faction will "admit defeat" and unclaim the planet. The game doesn't has to expect players to have good sportsmanship (if it did, there wouldn't be protected entities in the first place).

 

[CyberTao]

Locating faction modules affects more then just planets and stations, it affects ships as well. Sniping out a faction module on a ship basically produces the same results as sniping the core does currently, only it doesn't really work with a pilot in it. But hey, not like anyone in this community would have the gull to attack a unmanned ship and steal it outright, right? I'm honestly shocked that anyone claimed your planets.

But I am done here. Making an argument out of lists someone I loath seeing, it produces a "matter of factly" air, and just proves that you aren't concerned with debating or settling, merely trying to disprove or discredit others and empower your own idea. I know Calbiri can see the full picture at least, so if this really does get consideration, it won't be continued if it ends up causing problems afterall.
And don't quote me, and I hope no one rates me anything either, rather just let this disappear from my alerts.

 

[rariisan]

Locating faction modules affects more then just planets and stations, it affects ships as well. Sniping out a faction module on a ship basically produces the same results as sniping the core does currently, only it doesn't really work with a pilot in it. But hey, not like anyone in this community would have the gull to attack a unmanned ship and steal it outright, right? I'm honestly shocked that anyone claimed your planets.

But I am done here. Making an argument out of lists someone I loath seeing, it produces a "matter of factly" air, and just proves that you aren't concerned with debating or settling, merely trying to disprove or discredit others and empower your own idea. I know Calbiri can see the full picture at least, so if this really does get consideration, it won't be continued if it ends up causing problems afterall.
And don't quote me, and I hope no one rates me anything either, rather just let this disappear from my alerts.

1. "Locating faction modules affects more then just planets and stations" then why not put as argument that you'd like this to apply only on ships & stations insted of saying that the whole suggestion is bad?
"Sniping out a faction module on a ship basically produces the same results as sniping the core does currently, only it doesn't really work with a pilot in it." ... Your point being? Your unmanned ship is still destroyable.

2. My reponses are as short and concise as possible. I put the numbers to refer to each of your paragraphs.
But hey, if you're not able to see through it and just call me out on disproving you, I guess that it means that my arguments are solid.

 

[Deleted member 433088]

Well, too bad people are abandoning ship already. The guy asked not to quote him so I won't, but I'm not just going to leave the arguments unanswered.

This game is in early alpha. The fact that something is currently a viable strategy doesn't mean that it should not be changed if it would make the game better or prevent/fix issues, just like you shouldn't get pissed when you need to retrofit your ships or rethink your strategy because of a balance or mechanics change. Getting attached to things in an early alpha or even beta game would only serve to kill development. And yes, I do think having to hide the faction module because there's currently no way to properly protect it is silly, and we should try to tackle the cause instead of leaving it like it is now.

And admin commands shouldn't have to be used to deal with faulty game design.

Drilling will still be a thing in the future HP system? Then I'll have to assume, until I see a dev's word stating otherwise, that it is an intended feature. To be completely honest, I only think it's a bad thing as long as our ships are made of cardboard so anything can drill through a ship of any size.
Since we're discussing a possible future feature, there's no reason to consider it separately from all the other coming changes. You seem to suggest that the core will not be as easily destroyed as it is now in the coming HP system... well, then let's also suggest the same protection be applied to the faction module. Simple as that.

I don't care about realism as much as I care about immersion, I just feel that being able to scan the enemy ship/planet would make sense from a strategical, gameplay point of view. It would give more depth to combat tactics, if you can get the general layout of a ship's innards (as in, not hull/armor/decoration). It is a feature that could be given any amount of depth and balanced in several ways. "Scannership, tell me where that weird cruiser has its engines so I can disable it!". That's how I see it in my mind.

On the other hand, why are you not able to defend your stuff in the first place?
It's a matter of equal effort... If a troll can spend the whole of five minutes to hide a faction module in the sand, why should you have to blow half the planet to take it out? It's completely disproportionate. And if you claimed a planet but didn't bother to build up some defenses on it, or don't have the manpower to actively defend it (or you just did it to troll), is it not fair that it would be attacked and taken out?
And then your ships... we have already agreed that sniping the faction module doesn't work if there is a pilot in the ship. If someone is sniping your faction module and you're not in the ship, you either left it drifting in space, or you left it in a station that got wrecked. As I see it, in both cases the ship is effectively lost anyway. It seems fair in a PvP environment, at least... if you're that attached to your ships maybe you should be joining a creative server or play SP instead?

 

[kiddan]

Well, too bad people are abandoning ship already. The guy asked not to quote him so I won't, but I'm not just going to leave the arguments unanswered.

This game is in early alpha. The fact that something is currently a viable strategy doesn't mean that it should not be changed if it would make the game better or prevent/fix issues, just like you shouldn't get pissed when you need to retrofit your ships or rethink your strategy because of a balance or mechanics change. Getting attached to things in an early alpha or even beta game would only serve to kill development. And yes, I do think having to hide the faction module because there's currently no way to properly protect it is silly, and we should try to tackle the cause instead of leaving it like it is now.

And admin commands shouldn't have to be used to deal with faulty game design.

Drilling will still be a thing in the future HP system? Then I'll have to assume, until I see a dev's word stating otherwise, that it is an intended feature. To be completely honest, I only think it's a bad thing as long as our ships are made of cardboard so anything can drill through a ship of any size.
Since we're discussing a possible future feature, there's no reason to consider it separately from all the other coming changes. You seem to suggest that the core will not be as easily destroyed as it is now in the coming HP system... well, then let's also suggest the same protection be applied to the faction module. Simple as that.

I don't care about realism as much as I care about immersion, I just feel that being able to scan the enemy ship/planet would make sense from a strategical, gameplay point of view. It would give more depth to combat tactics, if you can get the general layout of a ship's innards (as in, not hull/armor/decoration). It is a feature that could be given any amount of depth and balanced in several ways. "Scannership, tell me where that weird cruiser has its engines so I can disable it!". That's how I see it in my mind.

On the other hand, why are you not able to defend your stuff in the first place?
It's a matter of equal effort... If a troll can spend the whole of five minutes to hide a faction module in the sand, why should you have to blow half the planet to take it out? It's completely disproportionate. And if you claimed a planet but didn't bother to build up some defenses on it, or don't have the manpower to actively defend it (or you just did it to troll), is it not fair that it would be attacked and taken out?
And then your ships... we have already agreed that sniping the faction module doesn't work if there is a pilot in the ship. If someone is sniping your faction module and you're not in the ship, you either left it drifting in space, or you left it in a station that got wrecked. As I see it, in both cases the ship is effectively lost anyway. It seems fair in a PvP environment, at least... if you're that attached to your ships maybe you should be joining a creative server or play SP instead?

Very well put. Nice to see someone addressing the issue instead of flaming back and forth.

 

[Lecic]

find the fact that weapon scaling is infinitely linear quite weird. After all, we already have diminishing returns in power generation, shielding and thrusters.

I'm guessing you weren't around for the old weapon system? Because weapons had diminishing returns, everyone built gigantic waffleboards of cannons (antimatter cannons/AMCs at the time) turning the game into a contest of "Who's got the biggest shotgun?"

 

[Deleted member 433088]

I'm guessing you weren't around for the old weapon system? Because weapons had diminishing returns, everyone built gigantic waffleboards of cannons (antimatter cannons/AMCs at the time) turning the game into a contest of "Who's got the biggest shotgun?"

I wasn't around, no, though I have heard waffles being mentioned before and now I see what they meant. But doesn't linear scaling just lower the bar, making the reaching of ridiculous power even easier (as in, takes far less blocks)? It only fixes the problem of scale, not power... given diminishing returns in thrust and power generation, along with some module's power requirements scaling to ship size, doesn't reducing the required size just make ships even more efficient at dealing large amounts of damage?
Sincerely, I haven't been able to find a single statement of where the devs want to take the balance in this game, so I kinda feel like I'm a blind man throwing punches sometimes. However, it would seem that big ships aren't supposed to be a no-brainer.

To put this back into context, the issue was that it seems simple to drill and destroy selectively the faction module, if you can know where it is. I suggested that the issue was actually that armor was too weak and weapons were too strong, since the same thing happens with coring, which seems to be considered a bad thing from what I've read in the forums. Therefore, instead of killing what could be a new and interesting game mechanic for the sake of status quo, armor and weapon damage should be revised. Allow the same defense against coring to be applied to the faction module, and you kill two birds with one stone without precluding the addition of a ship/station/planet scanning system.

 

[rariisan]

Very well put. Nice to see someone addressing the issue instead of flaming back and forth.

Yeah I answered harshly to them but I wouldn't call it flaming :P, Mokunen's post is (mostly) a resume of the whole discussion. Which he, indeed, put very well.

 

[Lecic]

I wasn't around, no, though I have heard waffles being mentioned before and now I see what they meant. But doesn't linear scaling just lower the bar, making the reaching of ridiculous power even easier (as in, takes far less blocks)? It only fixes the problem of scale, not power... given diminishing returns in thrust and power generation, along with some module's power requirements scaling to ship size, doesn't reducing the required size just make ships even more efficient at dealing large amounts of damage?
Sincerely, I haven't been able to find a single statement of where the devs want to take the balance in this game, so I kinda feel like I'm a blind man throwing punches sometimes. However, it would seem that big ships aren't supposed to be a no-brainer.

To put this back into context, the issue was that it seems simple to drill and destroy selectively the faction module, if you can know where it is. I suggested that the issue was actually that armor was too weak and weapons were too strong, since the same thing happens with coring, which seems to be considered a bad thing from what I've read in the forums. Therefore, instead of killing what could be a new and interesting game mechanic for the sake of status quo, armor and weapon damage should be revised. Allow the same defense against coring to be applied to the faction module, and you kill two birds with one stone without precluding the addition of a ship/station/planet scanning system.

One way we could balance diminishing returns on weapons is to have all weapon damage divided equally among the outputs. So, it might be possible.

 

[PizzaPress]

As far as drilling undocked ships goes, either the ship should be able to defend itself(and you could be tied to the ship on log-off), or it should be considered lost(can destroy and salvage anyway). The system of locating the module should require some time. Planets and stations will need some AI vehicles to defend them, along with AI ships, and optional turrets.

It should require you be right on said entity, though, and should alert the faction and AI. There should be "keep out" broadcasts which, after something gets within max firing range, can turn faction and AI hostile.
This would allow you to claim something you've defeated. Maybe it should somehow require you have ships close up on all sides, which are not being fired upon? Then you'd have to defeat all the turrets/troops to actually find the faction block. Right now you have to blow up the whole station.
Ideally it would take some time, perhaps more depending on how long it's been claimed.

 

[Deleted member 433088]

As far as drilling undocked ships goes, either the ship should be able to defend itself(and you could be tied to the ship on log-off), or it should be considered lost(can destroy and salvage anyway). The system of locating the module should require some time. Planets and stations will need some AI vehicles to defend them, along with AI ships, and optional turrets.

It should require you be right on said entity, though, and should alert the faction and AI. There should be "keep out" broadcasts which, after something gets within max firing range, can turn faction and AI hostile.
This would allow you to claim something you've defeated. Maybe it should somehow require you have ships close up on all sides, which are not being fired upon? Then you'd have to defeat all the turrets/troops to actually find the faction block. Right now you have to blow up the whole station.
Ideally it would take some time, perhaps more depending on how long it's been claimed.

I agree that, if something like this is added, it should be balanced by taking lots of power and a fair amount of time to use so it would encourage specialized ships for it. It should never be "press a button, find what you're looking for instantly, free, and without error".

I'm not sure I understand what you suggest later, though... you mean make it work like a hacking tool to "take over" the station/ship when it has been abandoned, or make it not work at all until it has been completely neutralized? Both are interesting ideas to be honest.

And about the "keep out" broadcasts, I'm not sure that would be a good idea since it might inform the enemy a ship or base is close and ripe for the taking.

 

[PizzaPress]

And about the "keep out" broadcasts, I'm not sure that would be a good idea since it might inform the enemy a ship or base is close and ripe for the taking.

Obviously this would be an option, and ship AI should defend itself whilst you're offline. That would make ship-stealing a little more difficult. AI would have to be less derpy, though.
*trick AI into flying into the sun*