Brainstorm This Adding some excitement to combat - Small Ships - DOT Weapons - Hacking and more!

    Joined
    Sep 22, 2015
    Messages
    34
    Reaction score
    10
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    Regarding hacking, the counter I proposed was that the larger a ship is, the harder or longer it takes, and the ship owner being hacked also has the option to actively thwart the attack. Then if the hacker is thwarted, they can be punished with a feedback computer. I think a firewall is an interesting concept too though. How about being able to configure the firewall differently, so it introduces different challenges to a would-be hacker? I understand how certain changes may create more complexity than some people would like. But, don't get me wrong, I think all the ideas I suggest would add something to the game. (I wouldn't suggest them otherwise) However, I don't expect all my ideas to get implemented (or any, but I can hope!), but I do think combat could use some more depth and factors that allow more variability and "out of the box" type thinking. I am fully with you about having more weapon types. I am also a strong believer in giving full control to server owners, so they can turn on or off certain features, and I think the same would go for these experimental weapon types. I'd say release them as a "beta" feature that allows players to test them.

    About ramming, there is already is a feature in game that allows block damage to occur upon collision, but most servers have it off. If you want this form of gameplay, I suggest finding a more hardcore server that might have it on. Most servers turn it off though because it's problematic when people accidentally bump into bases and other people.

    The reason why you generally don't see people flying around in smaller fighters during attacks is because they die too easy. They lose faction points, credits, items, etc. (whatever the server has as the penalty). I don't feel there is enough incentive for them to be used presently.

    I agree with you about smaller AI ships being kind of derpy. lol They kind of float around sideways at top speeds. But even if they did try to move around a lot, my turrets would still take em out quickly. I think making AI move around a bit more realistically would be cool though.
    [DOUBLEPOST=1455374423,1455374191][/DOUBLEPOST]

    Well yeah, I think that the larger a ship is, the harder it should be to hack. And no matter what, any ship should have counters. I think the ship owner should have an active ability to combat the hacking, and the would-be hacker should be punished if they fail. Perhaps a "firewall" type block with modules could be used to bolster the defenses even more. I understand though the worry about complexity. I think these types of features should be optional for servers. My methodology of throwing ideas out there is to see what sticks. I don't really expect all my ideas to get implemented, but I do think combat could use some more depth in StarMade, so I have attempted to add that in my ideas. :)

    Yeah, the smaller AI ships are kind of derpy. lol They kind of float around sideways at top speeds. But even if they did try to move around a lot, my turrets would still take em out quickly.

    I totally agree that adding some of the ideas you suggested would make smaller ships extremely fun to build and fly. I do believe there needs to be difference in large and small ships. Once a ship gets maybe over 80m in L W H then certain weapons systems and engines are too small to add to your ship and your ship is classified as a larger ship. Thanks for the information on adding ramming to the game because that alone makes flying small ships fun for me.
     
    Joined
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages
    60
    Reaction score
    30
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Ok, hello there. Sit down and have some tea.

    So with the current state of thrust, weapons available, and turrets, there really isn't a whole lot that a smaller ship can do in most of the PVP fights I've seen. What I've noticed is that large titan ships just sit there and rely on their turrets to kill everything. They don't even need to turn. The current system encourages boring fights between large ships that are also very laggy. We need to give people a reason to enter the cockpit of a smaller ship and fly around like madmen to help bring down their opponent. Not only would it be more FUN but it would be a lot less laggy for servers.

    Now, I don't think a small fighter SHOULD be able to bring down a large titan very easily, BUT, I do think they should be able to have some effect if they are skilled enough.

    That said, here are some of my ideas on how I think we can make small ships more viable:

    1. Allow shields to weaken FASTER if a specific part of a ship is hit over and over. For example, a small fighter might not do much damage at all when first attacking, but if they keep hitting the same spot on their opponent, their enemy's shields weaken faster. The fighter still has to worry about possibly getting blown out of the sky by turrets, but if they fly carefully and their aim is true, they can become significant. If they have terrible aim though.. well they are just gnats.

    2. Give ships a kind of flare gun. Any missile locked on would retarget the flare instead. Turrets would also target these flares. We've seen this in many flight combat simulators because it adds a level of skill to the game. With StarMade, perhaps the "Flare" could be something a little more unique, like a device that simulates their core signature. When activated, it shoots out and would actually look like their ship to everybody who is targeting it (though their real ship would still be quite visible). Perhaps a player's ship would also need to power down completely for a moment for it to be effective, and their true signature bleeps off the radar for a moment while their fake signature pops up. The "flare" would remain active for 10 seconds.

    3. Give ships a combat scanner, which is passive and tells a pilot when missiles are locked on. It would flash a warning in red. It might also tell them when someone is targeting them. It does not have any active ability. It can only be turned on and off, using a small amount of power while on.

    4. Implement DOT (Damage Over Time) and status effect weapons. The purpose of this in most games is that it introduces a play style of hit and run. This is an important tactic of nimble fighters. For all of these types of weapons, the projectiles need to be slow enough for smaller ships to dodge, but larger ships would have a much harder time since they are bigger, slower moving targets. Here are a few examples of new weapons I propose:
    A. The Shield Disruptor.
    This slow-moving projectile crackles and glows as it moves forward and when it hits, hit damages shield regeneration. It would stack and last a certain amount of time, perhaps five seconds. If you keep hitting the same spot, over and over, it would do a slight exponential amount of damage for each additional hit, so long as the effect does not wear off before the next hit happens. The downside of this effect is that it is a rather slow projectile with a short range. They would also be dumb-fire. No lock-on. This weapon would NOT be very useful against small fighters (even if equipped on a turret), but small fighters could use it well on a large ship.
    B. Energy Distruptor
    Each module does 5 energy damage per second, over 5 seconds. The hits stacks with the previous amount of disruption and lengthens the time of the effect from previous hits. The difference between this and a shield disruptor is that it doesn't matter where you hit the enemy, it works the same. So a small fighter could actually completely disable a large ship's power regeneration if they kept hitting them long enough and does not allow the status to come off.
    C. Thruster Disruptor
    This works the same as an energy disruptor, except it affects thrusters. It could be strengthened with a push/pull/stop module as a tertiary effect, which would affect what TYPE of thrust it affects. A push module oriented forward as a tertiary effect would affect the forward/backward thrust of a ship. A stop module would make it affect the ability of a ship to brake. A push module facing backwards would make it affect the ability of a ship to rotate.
    D. Turret Discombobulator
    What it does is damages the ability of turrets to turn on their axis, by reducing the effectiveness of the rail mass enhancers. The shots would HAVE TO hit a turret, not the main ship to be efffective. These shots would also be a bit faster than the disruptor varieties, since turrets tend to move around a bit. It could also be modified with a push or pull module (facing a certain direction), which would change the effect to make a turret spaz out, turning in that direction involuntarily and disrupting it's aim. With this, I would also suggest a change in how rail mass enhancers work. Turrets would have a move speed proportionate to the amount of mass enhancers provided. So if there is 50% of the required mass enhancers, it turns at 50% speed, not 1% speed as it is now. The effect stays for as long as the turret keeps getting hit, and the effect grows larger and larger. If the DOT comes off however.. the turret regains full functionality.

    5. Implement hacking.
    This could basically be a series of mini-games - or simply a hack requiring time. You have to get very close to an enemy ship and then start hacking them. You can also be counter-hacked by a person on the ship you are attempting to hack. It would work fastest while in astronaut mode and touching the ship. While you are hacking, you are unaware of the outside world (unless you die). The larger a ship is, the harder it is to hack. You can hack their shields, energy regen, thrusters, open all doors on the ship, or disable all AI turrets - you choose. If you succeed, shields/energy/thrusters are brought down entirely for 30 seconds, all the doors on the ship open, or all turrets are turned off for 30 seconds (and then reset to their previous state). If you fail, you lose nothing. However if the enemy ship being hacked had a "Feedback Computer" installed, it sends a power arc toward the hacker upon an unsuccessful hack. It would do significant damage to shields and power if the hacker was in a ship and would do significant damage to an astronaut, possibly killing them. It only affects the person who attempted the hack, not everyone else nearby. The more modules attached to this feedback computer, the stronger the effect would be. This would encourage smaller ships and boarding parties with the intent of hacking! Also, a combat scanner would tell a pilot if someone is attempting to hack them.

    Hacking Mini-Game Ideas (New! 01-20-16):
    There are so many possibilities. Many games throughout the years have introduced mini-games for such things as lock picking, hacking, etc. So, what would be appropriate for StarMade? I am definitely curious to know other player's thoughts on this, but here's what I have so far for some thoughts.
    A. Matrix-style
    Hacking:
    This is arguably the most complicated route to go, but I think it would be pretty cool. You plug in and enter an alternative world that has three dimensional properties. This "world" would be procedurally generated, with a virtual base being the target. Weapon systems, shields, doors, and turret AI systems would have physical counterparts which would need to be disabled by the hacker. The larger these systems are on the real ship, the more difficult it would be. Perhaps the virtual manifistation could be a modular base that is like a maze. You have to navigate through it to find the system you want to affect. The larger the mass of the ship, the larger the maze is. When you find the system you want to affect, the hacker holds down their right mouse button to initiate deactivation. The larger the system is, the longer it takes. Perhaps the virtual base could also be player designed, being docked segments that HAVE TO comply with certain rules (such as being a certain size, have a docking port on different edges and docking modules on the edges. It could be configured that players also start in a small fighter ship in this universe (which they cannot exit) and instead of right clicking on systems, they have to destroy them. More than one hacker can join this virtual world at a time, but when all hackers have left, it resets to it's default state.
    Counter-Hacking:
    To banish the hacker, a member of the ship being hacked plugs into the virtual world equipped with a weapon, and has to kill the hacker.

    B. 2-D Asteroids Style
    Hacking:
    A 2-dimensional game opens up and a person is piloting a simple 2-d ship that shoots straight shots. They have to fly around and find the systems floating around. The larger the ship they are hacking, the more asteroids are around to impede their traveling and the farther apart the different ship systems are. There might also be somewhat dumb AI controlled ships flying around, working as the ship's natural self-defense system. Once the hacker finds the ship system they want, they have to destroy it.
    Counter-Hacking:
    A member of the ship being hacked enters the world with their own ship and a pointer directing them to where the hacker is.

    C. A Simple Hacking Console
    Hacking:
    This would not be a mini-game at all. The hacker simply selects the system they want and starts the hack. The larger the ship is and vitality of the system, the longer it takes. For example, how long it takes to hack the doors would simply rely on the mass of the ship for the calculation. Shields would rely on the amount of shields, shield rechargers, AND mass - it should probably take longer than opening doors. Disabling turrets would rely on the number and mass of attached turrets, not taking into account the main ship size. Etc.
    Counter-Hacking:
    To counter hack, a member of the ship being hacked has to respond within a certain timeframe and initiate the counter hack. If they don't respond fast enough, however, there will be nothing they can do. Perhaps it could show an animated progress as it "searches for the hacker." When the hacker is found, they are booted from the system (and punished if a Feedback Computer is installed on the ship).

    D. A memory game - One Example
    Hacking:
    A ship would have a certain amount of points necessary for each system to be disabled, calculated based on the strength of the system. For example, disabling shields may take 10,000 points on a particularly strong ship, 2,500 to open the doors, 6,000 for disabling turrets, etc. The hacker has to play a memory game, where they flip over different panels which have symbols on them. They have to match them up to other ones of the same type, getting points for each successful try. When they reach the number they need, options to hack the different systems open up.
    Counter-Hacking:
    The counter-hacker could initiate a counter-hack, which would "search for the hacker," (like the simple console hacking), but with a twist. They can change the order the panels are in to further twart the hacker, there perhaps being a cooldown time per change they make before they can make another change.


    6. Charge-Up Modules - New! (Added 01-20-16)
    I got this idea when responding to Kookster, regarding damage beams having a kind of DOT effect. His idea lead me to another idea, which he seemed to like! So I expanded on it a bit! The goal of these modules would be to give an advantage to PLAYERS who control the weapon system, but would not be used well by AI. They would be similar to overdrive modules, being a tertiary effect, but instead of doing flat bonus damage (by 2x) and increasing power usage (by 5x), they change the way the weapon needs to be used. If you hold the fire button down, it charges up. Depending on the type of weapon it is attached to, it either needs to be charged up BEFORE being fired or charges up AS you fire it. It would modify existing combos, such as missile/cannon, missile/damage beam, etc. requiring more or less time to charge up fully. AI would be unable to utilize the charge-up effect, except for damage beams. I'll detail below the effects for each weapon type:
    A. Missiles:
    Holding down the fire button will first use up the amount of power needed to fire the weapon, and then continuously use power as it charges up. When you release the fire button, a larger, faster moving missile screams through the sky. The damage, speed, and explosion effect are increased. (I highly recommend adding some sound effects as well, like a rumbling noise as it charges and a BOOM as it is launched.)
    B. Damage Beam:
    When firing the weapon, it creates an energy feedback loop for as long as it continues to hit the target (up to a maximum effect). The beam becomes larger, more powerful, and would need more energy to keep the beam stabilized. The higher the effect percentage, the greater the effect can be (but also longer to achieve it). It would use less power than an overdrive module to achieve the same damage bonus, but if you lose your target for even a few seconds, it loses that feedback charge. The natural counter for smaller ships would be to dodge these hits or if evading turrets, use a radarjammer or flare to disrupt the turret's aim.
    C. Cannons:
    These would work similarly to Missiles, except the speed, damage, and penetration of the projectile is changed. The projectile would not grow in size.
    D. Damage Pulse:
    These would do more damage, have a larger range, and would possibly gain a moderate push pulse type effect too.
    E. Push Pulse:
    These would have more push effect, have a larger range, and might also cause the enemy ship to lose a certain amount of thrust for a moment.

    So, these additions to the game I think would require balancing, of course, but it would give pause to anybody who relies on brute force alone. It would encourage some pretty interesting fights. As always, thoughts and suggestions are welcome. Thank you for reading. :)

    Edit: Added a fourth DOT weapon, the Turret Discombobulator, better explained the purpose of slow projectiles for DOT/status effect weapons, and added a new section for "Charge-Up Modules."
    Edit: Expanded on hacking, giving some suggestions for mini-games, including some of the ideas suggested by other forum members, and added some more effects hacking might have.
    really like the flare system, although it should be expensive because i could just put 200 flare blocks on my capital in all directions and fire at once
     
    Joined
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages
    855
    Reaction score
    75
    really like the flare system, although it should be expensive because i could just put 200 flare blocks on my capital in all directions and fire at once
    Or only distract missiles from targets of x units(mass, or heat(a combination of power, shield, damage output, damage taken, and power drain on the ship)). You could make larger and more pronounced flares, but they would need more modules and would have diminishing returns(presumibly so only a ship frigate class or smaller could reliably use flares(without needing obscene amounts of space for flares).

    I think flares should either distract all missiles, or all missiles that are not from the parent ship(If my battle fleet has a flareship with 9,001 flares on it, nobodies using missiles in my sector!)
    [DOUBLEPOST=1455662076,1455662042][/DOUBLEPOST]Even my own ships:p!^^^^^
     

    Ithirahad

    Arana'Aethi
    Joined
    Nov 14, 2013
    Messages
    4,150
    Reaction score
    1,329
    • Purchased!
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 8
    Alright, so you think combat is exciting and smaller ships have the upper hand, and nothing needs to be done to help make combat more exciting and to encourage people to use smaller ships. You say it is "crappy pirate AI" in my comparison. But you fail to realize that a "fleet" someone makes, as opposed to a titan, would ALSO be crappy AI modules.. Which is exactly the same as a pirate fleet.
    AI is getting at least some reworks in with the fleet system. Don't expect miracles, but it seems to be at least getting things like collision avoidance.
     
    Joined
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages
    855
    Reaction score
    75
    AI is getting at least some reworks in with the fleet system. Don't expect miracles, but it seems to be at least getting things like collision avoidance.
    It seems to be at keast getting a formation setup as well.
     

    Lukwan

    Human
    Joined
    Oct 30, 2015
    Messages
    691
    Reaction score
    254
    Yes : Ship-flares for missile-decoy
    Yes: Combat sensor...I do indeed need to know when someone is 'locking' me.
    Yes: DOT. How about this: allow an 'Over-charge; module for small ships. *mini-game...hold the trigger to charge, release trigger to fire. Hold too long and it over-heats and shuts-down (or blows up in your face :eek:)

    Hacking hurts my brain. Seems mighty complicated and could be a potential game-breaker.
     
    Joined
    Apr 3, 2015
    Messages
    186
    Reaction score
    171
    • Legacy Citizen 7
    • Purchased!
    • Community Content - Silver 1
    MY SUGGESTION:
    I think a game more in the style of Namco's Bosconian would be more suitable than asteroids. Something like this...
    672974-bosconian-sharp-x1-screenshot-enemy-formation-coming-after.png
    Of course, this is just a suggestion.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Benevolent27

    Benevolent27

    Join the Dark Side
    Joined
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages
    585
    Reaction score
    327
    • Purchased!
    Yes : Ship-flares for missile-decoy
    Yes: Combat sensor...I do indeed need to know when someone is 'locking' me.
    Yes: DOT. How about this: allow an 'Over-charge; module for small ships. *mini-game...hold the trigger to charge, release trigger to fire. Hold too long and it over-heats and shuts-down (or blows up in your face :eek:)

    Hacking hurts my brain. Seems mighty complicated and could be a potential game-breaker.
    I like your idea of an overcharge function for weapons. What do you mean by it being a mini-game though?

    For hacking, it doesn't have to be complicated at all. It could be as simple as pressing a button. The reason I suggest it is because it would open up a new dimension of attack, giving more roles for attackers, especially against a larger ship. It would also give the pilot of a large, immovable ship something to counter (besides waiting for their shields to get too low and jumping out if they need to).
    [DOUBLEPOST=1456022698,1456022466][/DOUBLEPOST]
    MY SUGGESTION:
    I think a game more in the style of Namco's Bosconian would be more suitable than asteroids. Something like this...
    View attachment 22724
    Of course, this is just a suggestion.
    This is EXACTLY what I was thinking when I said an "asteroids type game." Thank you for the mock-up! :D
     

    Lukwan

    Human
    Joined
    Oct 30, 2015
    Messages
    691
    Reaction score
    254
    I like your idea of an overcharge function for weapons. What do you mean by it being a mini-game though?
    As in it requires skill to pull it off and there is a penalty for failure. Many other games use an over-charge mechanic with a little progress bar, complete with a 'red-zone' to warn of 'Overload' being imminent. The super-jump for the horse in MC is a perfect example. It takes skill & timing.

    My comment re. hacking was related to the need to defend against another type of attack. I tend to over-build protective systems in my designs so I would need to learn about hacking...even if I don't do it myself.
     

    Benevolent27

    Join the Dark Side
    Joined
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages
    585
    Reaction score
    327
    • Purchased!
    As in it requires skill to pull it off and there is a penalty for failure. Many other games use an over-charge mechanic with a little progress bar, complete with a 'red-zone' to warn of 'Overload' being imminent. The super-jump for the horse in MC is a perfect example. It takes skill & timing.

    My comment re. hacking was related to the need to defend against another type of attack. I tend to over-build protective systems in my designs so I would need to learn about hacking...even if I don't do it myself.
    Ooh, ok.

    I like your suggestion because it adds another dimension to combat and rewards skill. A person who can pilot well and multi-task how they fire their weapons will have a greater chance of defeating their enemy. I also like the suggestion that it be a module, rather than as a replacement of the default firing mechanics. Giving choices is important.

    I think that from the responses I've gotten to this post, people want to see more variability in weapons. I'm hoping that the developers will see that and decide to either open up modding for weapons or implement more variety for the weapons systems.
    [DOUBLEPOST=1456123393,1456123253][/DOUBLEPOST]
    No problem, Benevolent27. I'm always happy to help.:)
    You know, I was thinking with hacking.. Perhaps a person could level themselves in these mini-games. So the more they hack, the faster their ship runs.. the better the weapons are.. ect. As a balance measure, the counter-attacker's ship in the mini-game would be based on their hacking skill AND also by the amount of anti-hacking modules they place on their ship.
     
    Joined
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages
    855
    Reaction score
    75
    Ok, my opinion on hacking is that it should only be either:

    1.
    A cloakinglike thing where you select a ship and a system, then fire it to use it to take away from that system(weaker jump drive, slower engines, main cannon/cannon system does less damage). Uses up a lot of power while active, and you need to be within a 1 sector radius. The stength and power usage of the hack depends on how many hacking modules you have.

    Or 2.
    A system almost like the matrix, where you go into an alternate starmade universe where you need to go through a maze or something to destroy terminals. More modules you have the longer it takes to charge up, the shorter time you have in the maze. Lots of ideas for upgrades or ship/nonship movement and combat, but that's the basic idea. Much more starmadey than some candy crush or 2d space shooter(no offense anyone). Even though those would work, it just wouldn't go with the feel of the game.
     
    Joined
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages
    131
    Reaction score
    28
    Eh, I don't like the idea of a hacking mini-game. Too childish and kind of unrealistic imo.

    Maybe some sort of simple code written for Star made, and to hack a module you'd have to write a function that does x.

    Just some really simple coding mechanic.
     

    Wolverines527

    Warrior/Builder
    Joined
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages
    363
    Reaction score
    54
    Torpedoes you have to build would allow ordnance on ships for torpedo bombers which would be an interesting concept
     
    Joined
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages
    855
    Reaction score
    75
    It already works, you just need dumbfire* torps, and set the configs to ~100,000 damage and 32 radius, and really complex rail systems each torp costs ~11500 or so, between the push system and the warhead, combined with the standard core, docker, and power.

    *tracking missiles are possible, but are difficult to set up needing
     

    Wolverines527

    Warrior/Builder
    Joined
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages
    363
    Reaction score
    54
    It already works, you just need dumbfire* torps, and set the configs to ~100,000 damage and 32 radius, and really complex rail systems each torp costs ~11500 or so, between the push system and the warhead, combined with the standard core, docker, and power.

    *tracking missiles are possible, but are difficult to set up needing
    Interesting i wasnt sure it could be done it was just a theory on my end
     
    Joined
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages
    855
    Reaction score
    75
    It really is except for on test servers. I never heard a story about them except for testings, no real combat, but even so they had devistating effects.

    Challenge:
    Some torp guy should go and make a video of them using torps to take down a ship(or crimple it) in a real fight.

    Torps must be the only weapon used.

    Ship attacked must be reasonally big(no, you cannot just attack a tiny fighter) and must be AI and combat worthy with turrets. Think a large frigate. For the surest choice just chose a ship of the shipyard.

    Warheads must have a radius of 32 and a damage of 100,000.

    Torpedos should be seperate entities docked to the ship, not a ramming peice.

    You MAY use AI to make seaking missiles if you feel like it.

    Torps can be self propelled(defensive push effect), or ship propelled(push effect logic on the ship).

    Auto reloaders are allowed, but once the fight starts you cannot give your ship extra torps, it must have all in it's own loading and fireing system.

    Try not to exit the ship core, and use inner ship remotes.

    A ship is crippled if it:
    A. Overheats(duh)
    B. All major turrets(pd's don't count)
    C. You hit the computer room
    D. Ship runs out of power(good luck)
    E. Ship loses it's true ability to fight(loss of weapons, shields, and other systems until it cannot fight a less powerful ship without loosing.(if it gets split in half and gutted, basically if you maul it everywhere)
    Good luck!
    This is not a competition, just a challenge to someone.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Apr 21, 2015
    Messages
    41
    Reaction score
    20
    • Community Content - Bronze 1
    I like the idea of hacking, especially in combination with logic. So you could open the door of a hangar by using the button the other player packed there.

    Additionally i would recommend to add a target to a hack: I want to target the shields rechargability or a specific weapon system, the trusters a turret or ......

    I like most the ideas given in this threat even when i'm not so fond of the dot-thingy. I can see large ships jumping in shooting ones and jumping out again.

    Also i think a small ship should still be a small ship BUT it should be able to have an impact (like deactivating exactly on turret). A single small ship shouldn't be a danger to a big ship. But a group of small ships (Targeting all of the main systems of the ship and the last guy starting to hack or breach trought the ship).

    I would like to have a system which is capable of revealing the systems of your oponent.
     

    Benevolent27

    Join the Dark Side
    Joined
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages
    585
    Reaction score
    327
    • Purchased!
    I like the idea of hacking, especially in combination with logic. So you could open the door of a hangar by using the button the other player packed there.

    Additionally i would recommend to add a target to a hack: I want to target the shields rechargability or a specific weapon system, the trusters a turret or ......

    I like most the ideas given in this threat even when i'm not so fond of the dot-thingy. I can see large ships jumping in shooting ones and jumping out again.

    Also i think a small ship should still be a small ship BUT it should be able to have an impact (like deactivating exactly on turret). A single small ship shouldn't be a danger to a big ship. But a group of small ships (Targeting all of the main systems of the ship and the last guy starting to hack or breach trought the ship).

    I would like to have a system which is capable of revealing the systems of your oponent.
    I like your thoughts on hacking! I hadn't thought of hacking an individual door or button. This would make boarding a lot more practical. I also like the idea of hacking for intel, such as information about the enemy's systems.

    I agree with you that 1 small ship should not be a threat in and of itself to a large ship, but I do think that some balance should be added, by giving some advantages to players who aim and fly well.

    For DOT's, I was mostly limiting my ideas to energy/shield damage, which would be temporary effects, rather than DoT's that do damage to blocks. Though I think there would still be ways to balance DoT's that do actual block damage as well. Right now big ships already can jump in, shoot a lot of missiles, and jump out right?

    Now, if someone does blanket fire a bunch of chemical weapons onto a person's base and jump out, you might see this as griefing, but to me I'd see it as an opportunity for someone to jump into an AstroTech ship to clean it up.
    [DOUBLEPOST=1456672667,1456672254][/DOUBLEPOST]
    Eh, I don't like the idea of a hacking mini-game. Too childish and kind of unrealistic imo.

    Maybe some sort of simple code written for Star made, and to hack a module you'd have to write a function that does x.

    Just some really simple coding mechanic.
    But wouldn't that be a game? lol. I may call it a "mini-game," but I don't think it actually has to be a game. More like some kind of challenge to overcome to achieve the hack.

    I think making a person plug in and they control a device that has blinking lights might work. Maybe they have to type in commands to initiate different levels of hacking. For example, "Overload firewall," which takes time.. then.. "Hack shield system," ect. When done, they can either clean up the traces they have left, or leave them to be found. I've played games like Uplink before which were pretty fun. Having that sort of functionality in StarMade would add depth to the game, I think - even if it was simplified a bit.
     
    Joined
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages
    131
    Reaction score
    28
    But wouldn't that be a game? lol. I may call it a "mini-game," but I don't think it actually has to be a game. More like some kind of challenge to overcome to achieve the hack.
    I mean, I guess you could look at it that way, but some sort of arcade like challenge seems pretty uninteresting.