Disabling systems after HP % is Pointless

[Mered4]

Seriously. Why is this even in the game? This is a game that involves destroying blocks. If you haven't tested the HP system yet, you need to kill about half the opponents ship to overheat his core and then kill him with swarmers or turrets or whatever. That's right. I said HALF. I don't know about you, but when half of my ship is gone, it doesn't work. Especially if the computers are hit - then I'm a sitting duck.

Right now, if you hit 55% Structural HP, your base systems (thrust, power, and shields) basically stop working. So, as if losing half the mass on your ship and probably all your weapons and effect computers wasn't bad enough, now you cannot move.

*sarcasm*
I was doing just fine until I lost my thrust!
*/sarcasm*

Here's my point:

The disabling of systems after a certain percentage of structural damage is completely pointless because those systems can be destroyed by the enemy anyway. They probably have already. Like I said earlier: HALF YOUR SHIP. It's gone. I'd be gone at 25% shields, tbh. I'm not repairing that. Are you kidding?

TL;DR

It's pointless and should be removed. Give us Fleet Control! :D

 

[godmars]

That's the entire point..it's to give people a chance to get onto your now immobile ship for boarding shenanigans

 

[Mered4]

That's the entire point..it's to give people a chance to get onto your now immobile ship for boarding shenanigans

I have a question for you:

Why should I get off my ship to kill you? Assuming your escape pod is intact (which is a stretch - half your ship is gone, remember?), I highly doubt I'll be able to get into your drifting hulk before you use a jump drive to GTFO.

To top it off, I've got all these swarmers and turrets and weapons and shields to hide behind. Why would I ever come on your ship where you can kill me?

 

[Winterhome]

I have a question for you:

Why should I get off my ship to kill you? Assuming your escape pod is intact (which is a stretch - half your ship is gone, remember?), I highly doubt I'll be able to get into your drifting hulk before you use a jump drive to GTFO.

To top it off, I've got all these swarmers and turrets and weapons and shields to hide behind. Why would I ever come on your ship where you can kill me?

Your ship systems are debuffed by the damage that you have. I'd love to see a ship design that's capable of even running at 50% structural HP, let alone jumping.

By the way, there's always at least one ship that you can escape to when yours gets shot down - the one your enemy is piloting. Getting your ship wrecked is a good excuse to send a boarding party to the ship that killed yours.

 

[Mered4]

Your ship systems are debuffed by the damage that you have. I'd love to see a ship design that's capable of even running at 50% structural HP, let alone jumping.

By the way, there's always at least one ship that you can escape to when yours gets shot down - the one your enemy is piloting. Getting your ship wrecked is a good excuse to send a boarding party to the ship that killed yours.

Like I said earlier:

Why should I, the glorious human being who just removed you from your illustrious vessel, dignify myself to stoop to hand to hand combat?

I'll just adjust my monocle and blow you away from the safety of my own fabulous spaceship, assuming I can still shoot.

 

[Puddles]

You do know that 50% HP is not always half the ship?
There is a debuff for larger ships that makes breaking a block deal more damage to the HP pool.

The HP Damage penalty here means that damage done to HP is increased by 210%, meaning that on larger ships like this you only really lose like 15% of blocks (larger ships as in 150k mass). Ships are still kind usable at that stage I believe.

 

[Mered4]

You do know that 50% HP is not always half the ship?
There is a debuff for larger ships that makes breaking a block deal more damage to the HP pool.

The HP Damage penalty here means that damage done to HP is increased by 210%, meaning that on larger ships like this you only really lose like 15% of blocks (larger ships as in 150k mass). Ships are still kind usable at that stage I believe.

It's about 70% of the ship's mass when I tested it on a 185k mass ship. The ship was basically unusable, though it's computers were intact (being one of my ships, I place them in.....defended locations

 

[Criss]

Why should I, the glorious human being who just removed you from your illustrious vessel, dignify myself to stoop to hand to hand combat?

Because the playerbase requested boarding, and now we have the options to. You don't have to do anything. You're not forced to engage in optional boarding mechanics. Why complain?

 

[Mered4]

Because the playerbase requested boarding, and now we have the options to. You don't have to do anything. You're not forced to engage in optional boarding mechanics. Why complain?

I'm not complaining about boarding mechanics that no one has talked about at all if you've been paying attention to the forums.

I'm asking why this gimmicky mechanic is in place that serves no purpose and only adds insult to injury.
It's also amusing that someone went down this thought train and didn't come to the very obvious conclusion already without needing to test anything.

 

[Criss]

I believe quite a number of people have asked for astronaut features.

Let me put it this way. Try cutting away half the engine block in a car and see if it runs. We shouldn't be looking at ships as a collection of blocks, but as a collection of systems. It's kind of ridiculous to think that a weapon system or a power reactor or shields or thrust would operate at all once 50% of that system was destroyed..

 

[Mered4]

I believe quite a number of people have asked for astronaut features.

Let me put it this way. Try cutting away half the engine block in a car and see if it runs. We shouldn't be looking at ships as a collection of blocks, but as a collection of systems. It's kind of ridiculous to think that a weapon system or a power reactor or shields or thrust would operate at all once 50% of that system was destroyed..

But that's the point I'm getting at!

A ship that has lost 50% or even 30% of its mass is not a ship - it's a rotting hulk that might run a little bit if you turn the key. It's not necessary to add a mechanic that auto-disables all your systems. Believe me, my ship is getting pounded and I'm losing systems left and right - I don't need reminded by cutting my thrust arbitrarily.

The enemy should have to kill the engines just like any other system. That's how the block system works.

"I believe quite a number of people have asked for astronaut features."
I know exactly one person in the MushroomFleet community who has brought up astronaut features that involve boarding a ship and assaulting it. That person is Slate_Gorgon, and we quickly reminded him that boarding (while it might be cool) will end up being a gimmicky feature that is only used for videos or laughs.

On the forums (which I track fairly regularly), I haven't seen a serious discussion on boarding in months. Now, I know we can't judge the *majority* opinion in any way, but this seems to be a fair indication that it's not on the top of the community's list.

As a reminder, the MFleet Community has at least 75 active players who come on Teamspeak to talk, and around 450 or so that do not.

 

[Criss]

I guess I will just clarify the point I was trying to make then. Half an engine will not run.. at all. It won't start. It wont get the car moving.

That is what I meant when I used it as an example. Literally half of your spaceship is missing. How well do you think that will perform in space, in the midst of combat? It shouldn't function at all. Half of a space shuttle would not make it to space, let alone a foot off the launch pad. The now old system kinda cheated itself out of any penalty. If a missile system or a power reactor had literally 90% of its blocks removed, it could still perform its function. Again, we should be looking at the entirety of a the power reactors as one system, not as a bunch of blocks. That's just the means of creating what we want, in the designs we want. Considering how much longer one can survive an attack now as compared to before, I believe this is a nice compromise.

We have to destroy more blocks now to incapacitate a ship then we ever needed to before. I think that should be pointed out as well.

As far as what Slate_Gorgon said, he is a person that plays the game. If its a good idea, we will listen. We want the game to be the best it can be after all.

 

[Mered4]

I guess I will just clarify the point I was trying to make then. Half an engine will not run.. at all. It won't start. It wont get the car moving.

That is what I meant when I used it as an example. Literally half of your spaceship is missing. How well do you think that will perform in space, in the midst of combat? It shouldn't function at all. Half of a space shuttle would not make it to space, let alone a foot off the launch pad. The now old system kinda cheated itself out of any penalty. If a missile system or a power reactor had literally 90% of its blocks removed, it could still perform its function. Again, we should be looking at the entirety of a the power reactors as one system, not as a bunch of blocks. That's just the means of creating what we want, in the designs we want. Considering how much longer one can survive an attack now as compared to before, I believe this is a nice compromise.

We have to destroy more blocks now to incapacitate a ship then we ever needed to before. I think that should be pointed out as well.

As far as what Slate_Gorgon said, he is a person that plays the game. If its a good idea, we will listen. We want the game to be the best it can be after all.

Criss, a ship missing 90% of its missile system isn't going to be firing those pathetic missiles anymore. The player will notice 90% of his DPS is missing. It's fairly obvious
Once a ship becomes overheated, it will lose the ability to control those systems until it is rebooted. This makes complete sense. Disabling a ship's thrust 5% before this threshold, however, does not make sense if the goal is to create meaningful and varied game mechanics. It feels overly punishing and hilariously unnecessary to beat the player over the head with SYSTEM FAILURE notifications because "in real life a car won't start with half the engine missing."

Last time I checked, the meta behind blocks is that they are a modular invention designed for ultimate redundancy and customization. Thus, they don't stop working because 90% of their buddies are gone.

"As far as what Slate_Gorgon said, he is a person that plays the game. If its a good idea, we will listen. We want the game to be the best it can be after all."

Sure. And unicorns exist AND THEY FLY.
You guys only accept ideas you like and you cast out the people you do not. I'd appreciate if ya'll would come clean about it. This community would be much better off for it.

 

[Criss]

You guys only accept ideas you like and you cast out the people you do not.

It is entirely Schema's prerogative to do so. It is his game. He can changed the meta if he wants. You should not expect the entire story to be written out day one. This is alpha and the game needs to evolve if it is going to have any depth to it. I'm fairly certain these new mechanics can be adjusted in server configs. If you do not want to play this way, adjust it. That is the best I can do for you.

 

[Mered4]

It is entirely Schema's prerogative to do so. It is his game. He can changed the meta if he wants. You should not expect the entire story to be written out day one. This is alpha and the game needs to evolve if it is going to have any depth to it. I'm fairly certain these new mechanics can be adjusted in server configs. If you do not want to play this way, adjust it. That is the best I can do for you.

Oh we will. I'm not here to talk about the server I play on, though. I'm here to talk about the Vanilla version of the game that most people will play. "Go make your own game" is not a valid answer to legitimate concerns.

"This is alpha and the game needs to evolve if it is going to have any depth to it. "

Absolutely. Show me schema's final vision for this game and I'll get onboard the EVOLVE OR DIE train. Until I see his WHY, I'm going to be lambasting every half-assed feature that gets into an update. Planning is an amazing invention, and using it shows that you understand the basic building blocks of civilization.

"It is entirely Schema's prerogative to do so."

Is it? I'm not sure about you, but I haven't heard from schema lately. There was a lot of communication between schema and the community before this whole council thing happened - now it doesn't feel like he's talking at all.

 

[Winterhome]

See, this is why that server catches a lot of flak. There's a total lack of "just roll with it" going on here. Incidentally, schema hasn't spoken out loud for a good two years now, to my knowledge. He pops in very, very rarely, but it's been a really damn long time since he's actually talked to us himself. The council isn't when that started. This started a really, really long time ago.

 

[Mered4]

See, this is why that server catches a lot of flak. There's a total lack of "just roll with it" going on here. Incidentally, schema hasn't spoken out loud for a good two years now, to my knowledge. He pops in very, very rarely, but it's been a really damn long time since he's actually talked to us himself. The council isn't when that started. This started a really, really long time ago.

I spoke to him less than five months ago on Teamspeak.

Azereiah, Mushroomfleet is the definition of "roll with it". We've been rolling with the punches for two years now. Up till the optimization update, the updates seemed to have a purpose. There was a certain inevitability to it. Fleet control was coming soon - as was the HP system.

Eight months later we get this rail system that has some serious problems. Then we get an HP system with its own issues that could have easily been solved had someone with an outside perspective taken the time to analyze the system. And, to top it all off, there is this gimmicky *boarding* feature that will not be used in regular play. Trying to force it in will only make it worse. Don't even go there. The only reason it's in the game is because the "Imperium" gang (Raiben, Dalmont, and Saber) wanted it.

Did I mention we still have rail problems?

Back to the topic:

The idea behind it is (as I understand it) to promote boarding.

However, boarding as an actual mechanic in a game where one player controls a Star Destroyer does not make sense. If this were Space Engineers, it would make sense. However, Starmade is not Space Engineers. It is not Interstellar Rift. It is a game about smashing player-created ships together and laughing as they are obliterated in the most hilarious ways possible by different weapons.

The person who legitimized this idea does not play Starmade on a regular basis. Can we get someone who actually plays Starmade and cares about the game's well being to help with the ideas?

 

[iceman6491]

Mered4, re-read your posts please. And perhaps edit them, to take out the tone you have used. Have you forgotten that the people behind making this game are really people? There is no need to talk to or about someone in the manner you have. Quite frankly it is rude. These are people trying to make a game that pleases the community. And tbh I think they're doing a bloody good job. Sure some things might work better on paper than in practice but the whole idea for editable configs is so that the community can tweak and influence what the vanilla will end up as.

They are also trying to please the community. Not just MF fleet. Get off your soapbox

 

[Mered4]

Mered4, re-read your posts please. And perhaps edit them, to take out the tone you have used. Have you forgotten that the people behind making this game are really people? There is no need to talk to or about someone in the manner you have. Quite frankly it is rude. These are people trying to make a game that pleases the community. And tbh I think they're doing a bloody good job. Sure some things might work better on paper than in practice but the whole idea for editable configs is so that the community can tweak and influence what the vanilla will end up as.

They are also trying to please the community. Not just MF fleet. Get off your soapbox

Why are we even trying to please the community? The community will never be pleased. I don't have a lot of experience in this area and I've already figured that out. If the point of Starmade is to please the community, the game will fail because the features will be out of sync. No overarching vision, no direction. MushroomFleet will keep on going even if Starmade stops putting out updates. They really couldn't care less. I'm here because I care about the future of this game and I'll be damned if the "so serious" crowd destroys it because they 'like' certain features.

I'll stop being rude when DukeOfRealms stops hiding behind forum rules and discloses all communications he has had with Tomino_sama. The bullshit behind the curtain is hilarious and so dumb that you might just laugh with me when I see features like this HP % disables systems thing.

We've had editable configs for years. It hasn't gotten Starmade out of Alpha. Only Schema, our wonderful cat guardian, can do that.

 

[Lord Daro]

Actually to disable a ship at some point seems abselutely necessary to me in terms of game mechanics.
If i am shooting at a ship i can more or less tell if it's done for, but the AI is not capable of that. It needs something to define a target as dead so it knows when it can stop shooting.
Also, a deactivated ship despawns after reltively short time. If not, servers could have these hulks flying around for hours or days, while tacking up unnecessary resources.