Disabling Systems after HP % is Pointless, PART TWO!

[lilFishy]

Le wild me opens SMD Forums to see is there soemthing new, and sees this therad as the most recent one.

How on earth is this not locked due to massive derailing or anything like that?

You stated that you do not like the system, but i have not seen you point out to any actual flaws. There is no point in keeping this thread. THE END.

P.S. I do not care that you come form MF, for all i care you could have come form the Mars and i would still be irritated by your pointless posts.

 

[Zeno9141]

I like the new system. Lots of others do too. You don't.

I have yet to hear of any feature like this being removed from Starmade just because some whiny fella didn't like it. So far I've only seen more pros than cons to this feature and the graphs say more than enough. If ya got something clever to say, be sure to do so. On topic enough?

 

[Mered4]

I like the new system. Lots of others do too. You don't.

I have yet to hear of any feature like this being removed from Starmade just because some whiny fella didn't like it. So far I've only seen more pros than cons to this feature and the graphs say more than enough. If ya got something clever to say, be sure to do so. On topic enough?

"I like the new system. Lots of others do too. You don't."
I'll quote this for you:
"But I DO LIKE IT. Where in the hell did you guys get this notion that I don't like the HP system? It's LIGHTYEARS ahead of what we had before. Does it need tweaking? Sure! But so does the entire game. It's alpha!"

Le wild me opens SMD Forums to see is there soemthing new, and sees this therad as the most recent one.

How on earth is this not locked due to massive derailing or anything like that?

You stated that you do not like the system, but i have not seen you point out to any actual flaws. There is no point in keeping this thread. THE END.

P.S. I do not care that you come form MF, for all i care you could have come form the Mars and i would still be irritated by your pointless posts.

"yet to point any actual flaws"
Earlier in the thread.....I said this:
"I simply noticed this feature that has the following characteristics:

1) It does not solve an existing gameplay issue. Thus, it is meant to either improve a system in the game already (the HP System) or to add a new feature.
2) It adds on to an already existing feature - namely, that of block loss from weapons fire. In my tests, block loss was significant enough on ships larger than 50k mass to significantly limit the vessel's performance. When I say significant, I mean that it was behaving erratically and many of its systems were so heavily damaged that specific functions on the ship were practically nonexistent.

Using the brain I was given at birth, I deduced that, in regular combat, there is no need to disable the systems when they are already being literally destroyed by weapons fire. I also tested this theory and found that while it holds true for both very large and very small ships, there is a middle ground (about twice the width of a Beam-Missile explosion radius) where the feature is useful. It is useful because the ship is basically already dead in the water due to missiles, but is just above the threshold for overheating."

Perhaps you guys should try trolling someone who doesn't pay attention

 

[Zeno9141]

1) It does not solve an existing gameplay issue. Thus, it is meant to either improve a system in the game already (the HP System) or to add a new feature.

lel core drilling maybe?

 

[Mered4]

lel core drilling maybe?

This isn't talking about the HP system. It's about the disabling of systems after 55% structure has been reached.

 

[therimmer96]

I'm sorry, but who is trolling you? You MF folk love saying that SMD is full of trolls, but always seem lack any sort of proof

 

[Zeno9141]

I'm sorry, but who is trolling you? You MF folk love saying that SMD is full of trolls, but always seem lack any sort of proof

+ Seem to have fun calling us trolls and getting reactions.

Owh, I think I caught a hook on my tentacle. SAYONARA BABY

 

[Mered4]

+ Seem to have fun calling us trolls and getting reactions.

Owh, I think I caught a hook on my tentacle.

What reactions? You've yet to reply to my argument with a logical rebuff. I'm actually laughing my ass off right now.

The "realism" argument is already out the window. That's been brought up three times and I've had to reply the exact same way each time.

 

[lilFishy]

"I like the new system. Lots of others do too. You don't."
I'll quote this for you:
"But I DO LIKE IT. Where in the hell did you guys get this notion that I don't like the HP system? It's LIGHTYEARS ahead of what we had before. Does it need tweaking? Sure! But so does the entire game. It's alpha!"

"yet to point any actual flaws"
Earlier in the thread.....I said this:
"I simply noticed this feature that has the following characteristics:

1) It does not solve an existing gameplay issue. Thus, it is meant to either improve a system in the game already (the HP System) or to add a new feature.
2) It adds on to an already existing feature - namely, that of block loss from weapons fire. In my tests, block loss was significant enough on ships larger than 50k mass to significantly limit the vessel's performance. When I say significant, I mean that it was behaving erratically and many of its systems were so heavily damaged that specific functions on the ship were practically nonexistent.

Using the brain I was given at birth, I deduced that, in regular combat, there is no need to disable the systems when they are already being literally destroyed by weapons fire. I also tested this theory and found that while it holds true for both very large and very small ships, there is a middle ground (about twice the width of a Beam-Missile explosion radius) where the feature is useful. It is useful because the ship is basically already dead in the water due to missiles, but is just above the threshold for overheating."

Perhaps you guys should try trolling someone who doesn't pay attention

Oh boy, I am in a great mood for rational arguments so lets se what i can dig out from that.
1) It solves a probem.
SHP scales with size, that meaning that your titan will not only get destroyed sooner than before, but it will also start to "misbehave" sooner. The bigger the systems, the sooner after taking dmg they will start to underpreform. Choose any of the real life examples.
Oh, and before you try to use "but these are not connected, systems, rather individual modular components that each...."
Power regen and storage are connected (unless you dislike group bonuses, which is fine). Weapons are connected, and the only things that are not are Jump drives, thrusters and shields, tho i would like some connecting bonus done for the jump drives....

2)Do you put all of your systems mixed or do you separate them?
This system allows, no actualy, encourages smart system placing, spaced armour, and inner hull sections, all of which are used in anything that has to do with combat.
You are now able to utilize these things to a much greater potential than previous. Also, i tend to think of the block loss as a complementary feature now, rather than a stand alone one...

 

[Zeno9141]

What reactions? You've yet to reply to my argument with a logical rebuff. I'm actually laughing my ass off right now.

Ironically I'm thinking the exact same of you right now. Read your own threads m8, I have yet to see you reply reasonable to other's arguments. Everyone's probably done being reasonable right now because nothings penetrating your thick skull. I've seen plenty of valid points in the previous threads, and you're still going on? Like, what's your goal in all this, dude?

 

[Mered4]

Ironically I'm thinking the exact same of you right now. Read your own threads m8, I have yet to see you reply reasonable to other's arguments. Everyone's probably done being reasonable right now because nothings penetrating your thick skull. I've seen plenty of valid points in the previous threads, and you're still going on? Like, what's your goal in all this, dude?

I wasn't "going on." I threw out a rebuff for the few logical arguments thrown at me, and I get lambasted as someone who is stubborn and doesn't like the current system because I disagree with a part of it. I defended myself and attempted to drive the thread back into the topic, where the circle repeats itself. Watch - my next paragraph or two will have you guys calling me all sorts of crazy names.

Oh boy, I am in a great mood for rational arguments so lets se what i can dig out from that.

I'm so glad you decided to be rational. Thank you!

1) It solves a probem.

What problem? There was not a problem to begin with. The HP System already fixed the core-drilling problem.

SHP scales with size, that meaning that your titan will not only get destroyed sooner than before, but it will also start to "misbehave" sooner. The bigger the systems, the sooner after taking dmg they will start to underpreform. Choose any of the real life examples.
Oh, and before you try to use "but these are not connected, systems, rather individual modular components that each...."
Power regen and storage are connected (unless you dislike group bonuses, which is fine). Weapons are connected, and the only things that are not are Jump drives, thrusters and shields, tho i would like some connecting bonus done for the jump drives....

Again, the realism argument holds no weight in this discussion. I've already explained the meta twice. If we are going to change it, fine. Let's change it. I haven't heard anything about it changing from Schema, however, so I'm going to assume that it will be staying the same.

"The bigger the systems, the sooner after taking dmg they will start to underpreform. "

Hold up. Are you trying to say that this system adds nerfs to big ships? What?
A whole feature designed to nerf big ships? keptick : dude, it's happening.

2)Do you put all of your systems mixed or do you separate them?
This system allows, no actualy, encourages smart system placing, spaced armour, and inner hull sections, all of which are used in anything that has to do with combat.
You are now able to utilize these things to a much greater potential than previous. Also, i tend to think of the block loss as a complementary feature now, rather than a stand alone one...

It does encourage smart system placement. The HP System, not this feature. This feature doesn't really encourage anything. Unless, of course, you count pleading with your attacker to spare you at 55% HP.

Remember, we aren't talking about the HP System, we are discussing the disabling of systems after 55% structure HP.
[DOUBLEPOST=1435166402,1435166212][/DOUBLEPOST]schema
Are we going to be changing the meta from a modular explanation to a realism explanation? Is that in the works? The gentlemen here seem to believe it's already changed. Could you please clarify? Thanks.

 

[CyberTao]

Well, you mentioned Schema. It's pretty clear at this point you never wanted our opinions, so this whole thing would have done better as a PM to Schine instead of a thread in General Discussion. Ah well, I just got here and there is only 1 thing left to do.

 

[Mered4]

Well, you mentioned Schema. It's pretty clear at this point you never wanted our opinions, so this whole thing would have done better as a PM to Schine instead of a thread in General Discussion. Ah well, I just got here and there is only 1 thing left to do.

I'm asking so they have no excuse to continue down their line of reasoning. I've already shown the conditions for it to be true, and until those conditions are met, the argument remains untrue. I'm here to have a discussion with this part of the community. Schema makes his own decisions, regardless of whether or not he reads this thread. In the end, however, Schema is the one I aim to persuade, not the trolls in this thread.

 

[therimmer96]

not the trolls in this thread.

There's that word again, its like you people think it means people

 

[Winterhome]

I'm asking so they have no excuse to continue down their line of reasoning. I've already shown the conditions for it to be true, and until those conditions are met, the argument remains untrue. I'm here to have a discussion with this part of the community. Schema makes his own decisions, regardless of whether or not he reads this thread. In the end, however, Schema is the one I aim to persuade, not the trolls in this thread.

That explains why you're discouraging discussion that doesn't support your point of view, attacking people over having different viewpoints on game mechanics (whereas others are attacking you for being a jerk - there's a huge difference), constantly moving the goalposts, and claiming others' opinions as invalid by calling them "trolls" when they attempt to give you a logical explanation why something is how it is. You cannot ask for "logic" while abandoning it yourself.

 

[Aynslei]

I'm asking so they have no excuse to continue down their line of reasoning. I've already shown the conditions for it to be true, and until those conditions are met, the argument remains untrue. I'm here to have a discussion with this part of the community. Schema makes his own decisions, regardless of whether or not he reads this thread. In the end, however, Schema is the one I aim to persuade, not the trolls in this thread.

Again, do you honestly expect anyone to listen or care about what you have to say after acting like you have? Get lost son, we are done with you.

If wish to persuade ONE person, make a PM, don't come here and whine when people don't agree with you.

 

[FlyingDebris]

I have yet to hear of any feature like this being removed from Starmade just because some whiny fella didn't like it.

The OOOOOOLD docking system. Some Reddit tard made a post and got them to change it. So yeah blame him for years and years of docking boxes.

 

[Zeno9141]

Schema makes his own decisions

Yes, he makes his own decisions. He implemented these features. :^)

 

[Crusade]

Okay, that's enough. Totally derailed again. Everyone has made their points, OP is not happy that people disagree with him and everyone got caught in the bait-maker 4000.

Locked, bruh.