Elaborated ideas on how to improve the Stealth/Jammer/Radar system

    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Warning, long wall of text inbound.

    What we have currently:
    - A Cloaking device that will drain 100Energy/block to disable rendering of the ship (aka cloak).
    - A Jammer device that will drain 50Energy/block to prevent the ship from being marked.

    Issues with current system:
    Due to the excessive energy consumption and the way reactors work, there are only two possible ways of creating 'stealth' designs which incorporate both devices (since you need boith invisibility and jamming for 'true stealth):
    Either you build incredibly large reactors and then attach large weaponry and shieldblocks, creating the skeleton of a large warship. Or you build a minimalistic fighter consisting of >90% reactors. Even if you only go for the jammer it's impossible to create small 'asthetic' ships.

    How it could/should (personal oppinion) be:
    First off, clarification: I will refer to different ship sizes as tiny, small, medium, large, capital in that order.[
    Trivially, it should be easier to hide smaller ships then overly large star destroyers. medium ship should only be able to hide by spending vast amounts of energy and dedication towards it and capital ships shouldn'T be able to stealth at all.
    As well, common sense dictates that a huge capital ship should have trouble detecting a nimble little spacecraft, simply because it's own presence should block out any sensor data from much smaller objects.
    I would like to see a Starmade where building small ships stealthy is actually possible, where stealth actually matters in a gameplay-sense and eventually even approaches realism.

    The concept:
    Implement a signature-based system. Every ship has a 'signaturelevel'. The signature of a ship determines from where it will be marked as an object (using the current mark-system).
    Example: Cube A has a base signature of 500. Any other Cube B (with both cubes being simple ship cores) will be able to detect Cube A (aka, A will show up on B's screen as indicator and be listed in the navigation tab) at a maximum distance of 500m. If Cube A leaves this range again, Cube B will lose track of the ship (though a player could follow A by sight).
    I already suggested a base signature of 500 with the above example. This is much less then the static 2-3km you currently have ingame, but of course there are further modifiers for it.
    Every block on the ship adds 0.2 to it's signature. (aka, 2 signature per point of mass), increasing the range at which it can be spotted. This means your large 5000-block battleship will be marked at a distance of 1500m, whilst that nimble cube will not be detected before 500.5m.
    Additionally, an actually active ship should be easier to detect then a motionless object, let's incorporate this as well: A ship in motion will have a gradually higher signature, depending on it's momentum. Something like 1% signature per km/h (assuming we, at some point, get higher speed caps) could be appropriate.
    Example: The afromentioned battleship, when not in motion, will be same visible (1500m) as a 2500-block battleship moving at a speed of 50. ( ((2500*0.2)+500) *1.5 )
    Of course it should be much less of a trouble to detect a FIGHTING ship. Firing any sort of weapon should increase your signature by a noticeable amount. Later on in developement, stealth weapons with lower impact could be added, but for now something like 200% sounds reasonable to me.
    Example: Did you remember our little cube A? If said cube starts firing wildly (with a newly aquired 1-block-AMC), it will end up with ~1500 signature as well.

    Great, now everybody will light up like a christmas tree whenever you are doing something (or even doing nothing for large ships). How would that promote stealth?
    The answer are the three new/reworked stealth devices:
    -Radar Jammer
    -Radar Enhancer
    -Cloaking Device

    Let's start with the Jammer. Instead of nullifying your marker, as the current Jammer would, the new Jammer will merely reduce your signature. Jammers will stack with dimishing returns, which means that for 'ultimate jamming' you will probably need more of them.
    Every Jammer (when active) multiplies your signature by 0.7 .
    Example: Your ship has 1000 signature.
    One Jammer: 1000*0.7 = 700
    Two Jammers: 1000*0.7*0.7 = 490
    Three Jammers: 1000*0.7*0.7*0.7 = 343
    Four Jammers: 1000*0.7*0.7*0.7*0.7 = 240 ...

    The new jammer will consume noticeably less power then the current one. Something like 2 Energy/Block would be fully sufficient. If you would want to completely remove signature from the ship mentioned above, you would need about 25 Jammers to reduce your signature to 1 (which means you're pretty much jammed). And this amount of Jammers would require 50 Energy/block again.
    However, just utilizing partial jamming, using only a few jammers, will reduce your signature significantly... making small ships hard to mark, without draining their entire energy in an instant.

    But then everyone would just run small un-targetable ships and large ships would be entirely useless? That's where the Radar Enhancer comes in. This device can be activated to increase your own sensory vision. However, as mentioned previously, an own massive ship should realistically block out your own sensors. Therefore here my suggestion:
    Each active Radar increases your sensor range by +(20 - blocks/100)% (or does nothing if the value is lower then zero).
    Example: You put a radar on your large 5000block ship. You now gain (20 - 5000/100)= (20-50) = -30 radar bonus... actually, you don't get anything. Your ship is too large!

    But if you now have a small, 500 block frigate... here you will gain (20 - 500/100) = (20-5) = 15 % radar increase. Let's assume there's a ship with signature 1000 somewhere around. Usually you could only see it from up to 1000m. With your new active radar, you can, however, spot it from 115% of it'S normal siganture. Which means 1150 in this case.
    If you would have two radars, you could spot it at 1300, with three radars at 1450 and so on. (As you can see, the radar bonus stacks additively).

    Each active Radar Unit would drain a static amount of Energy per second, f.e. 2000. Keep in mind, 2000Energy. Not 2000Energy/block.
    Reason? This way, extremely small ships cannot properly use Radars, because they would need large amount of cores to compensate for the energy drain. Though a scout COULD activate 5 radars, draining his energy in 2 seconds, to create a short 'radar pulse'.
    However, permanent radar is supposed to be for larger ships only. But ships past 2000 block can't use radars at all? The solution is the middleground: A 1000-block medium ship can easyly mount multiple radar enhancers, whilst as well providing the energy necessary for those to function.

    This way, you now got three ship archetypes: Small stealthy fightercraft, powerful but blind warships... and medium frigates able to spot targets on large distance due to their radar systems.

    What about cloak? Of course, we wouldn't want to forget about cloaking devices here.
    Cloaking should be the most supreme form of stealth. But right now hiding your ships appearance does literally nothing in any engagement past ~250m, even less so for small ships which are hard to spot either way.
    I suggest following changes:
    A ship can only cloak with a sufficient amount of cloaking devices equipped: A ship needs 1 cloaking device per 20 blocks, otherwise it cannot cloak at all.
    Cloaking your ship reduces your signature to 20 (Means both your base signature of 500 and your mass are ignored, moving will still boost your signature), as well as making you entirely invisible. True stealth. Well, except somebody flies right past you (or is a frigate full of radars and is 'nearby').
    Of course firing will still break your cloak instantly. Additionally, taking damage or colliding with anything will break your cloak, too.
    Upon deactivation, forced or intentional, your cloak enters a recharge period of Cloaking_devices*10 seconds. During this cooldown period, the ship cannot enter cloak again. This means that tiny fighter can stealth relatively easy, whilst that small frigate can be pulled from cloak really easyly.
    Example: If your ship has a size of 400 blocks, you would need 20 Cloaking devices. After you started to fire at your enemy, you cannot cloak again for 20*10=200 seconds. No more 'invisible-ROCKETSTOYOURFACE-invisible' play for anything larger then a tiny strikecraft.
    Now to one of the main factors: Energy consumption. Here I would suggest something radical:
    As long as you are cloaked, you cannot regain any energy. This doesn't mean your energy output drops to 0, it just means that any excess energy (which isn't used for thrusters or radar) will not be stored anymore.
    Additionally, every Cloaking Device will drain 20 Energy per second.
    Example: You got a super-tiny stealth fighter with one cloaking device equipped. After retreating from a fight, you engage your cloak at full energy. You will now be able to last exactly 1000 seconds (assuming you got no external energy storage), which equals about ~15 minutes. After all you're a stealth strikecraft.
    On the other hand, you're 400-block frigate with it's 20 cloaking devices can barely last 100 seconds (unless you bring a lot of storages, which again increase the amount of cloaking devices needed, etc). And keep in mind that more cloaking devices mean longer reacharge-time, etc.


    In total, this means that cloaking is theoretically possible for any ship... But large ships will need to bring countless devices and energy storages to create any sort of useful cloaking duration... and will still suffer from excessively long cooldowns. Yes, you CAN stealth that huge 8000er capital ship... but only for x minutes and after disengaging cloak you need to wait one hour before cloaing again.
    On the other hand, that nimble tiny fighter can easyly pop in and out of cloak every ten seconds, with long lasting durations.




    THAT is the way stealth is supposed to be (in my humble oppinion).

    Feel free to leave comments, critique and improvement.

    PS: Not a native English speaker, please excuse incorrect grammar and spelling.
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Mind pointing me at the location of said search. It\'s not in the Hot Bar and I didn\'t yet find such a button.
     
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    98
    Reaction score
    0
    I like the concept for radar... i would scale some stuff up since \"mid class\" is 3k mass for me at least and big starts at 8-10k... but the idea in general is great. Especially the part of increasing your radar range since it\'s realy hard to find anyone to fight although we are 30 players at peak and use only 3 solar systems at max. A way to fly with a capital ship and some radar-scout ships to find enemies sounds awesome.



    the cloaking stuff is something i just don\'t like at all...
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Hmmm, probably the definitions for \'sufficiently/too large\' differ...
    I probably lack the experience in Starmade to determine which ships are truly large and accordingly the values for the limited sensor enhancing need to be tweaked.
     
    Joined
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages
    2
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    i think this is an absolutely FANTASTIC idea and should be incorporated at once. not only would this make the current system valid, it would give a very good use for small ships. PLEASE implement this for the love of god, this man is a wizard, don\'t make me beg.
     
    Joined
    Jun 26, 2013
    Messages
    41
    Reaction score
    0
    i love seeing well thought out suggestions like this, bravo sir. i hope to see this implemented
     
    Joined
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages
    120
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    I mostly agree with this. A few tweaks I would suggest (personal oppinion):

    I feel the multiplication (.7) on jamming should be higher, somewhere around .9. With the .7, it would be a little too easy to jam radar.



    Cloak: Reduce cloak time per cloak block to 5 seconds, and increase block coverage to 25. Increase energy drain slightly to compensate for this. (10 seconds is easily enough for anyone to destroy a fighter, especially one without armor as the 20 blocks may require)

    Your english is surprisingly good, if it\'s not your native langauge. Congradulations!
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    With the suggest 0.9, the jammer would become much less useful and eventually even useless. To jam a small fighter (assuming an even over-idealized signature of 500) to something like 100, you would need 22 jammers. Which is entirely unfeasible.
    Keep in mind that, as powerful as it may seem, Jammers can be countered by Radar devices and is mainly meant for small ships (who only need a few jammers to drop their siganture significantly) to enforce the presence of radar-escorts for the big warships.
    Though the final values would probably be rather determined byin-game testing and may even left configureable by server admins.

    Yes, 10 second is by long enough to kill a fighter who is idling in your sight. But keep in mind a cloaked fighter will have no issue being whereever your blindspots are, whenever you are not paying attention. Five seconds isn\'t a span you can properly react in. And in my oppinion there needs to be a window, otherwise cloaking would become overpowered.
    Though, on ther other hand, how overpowered can a 25block strikecraft possibly get :P. May you\'re right and extremely tiny craft should be able to stay cloaked near-permanently. In this case, however, I would rather recommend to change the cooldown to (cloakers-1)*10, instead of cloakers*5. The multiplicator needs to be high in order to discourage giant ships from utilizing cloak.



    Thanks for the contructive feedback.

    @English: Well, it probably helps that I write English novels in my free time, but I still make way too many \'foreign speaker\' mistakes and crappy translations :P
     
    Joined
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages
    7
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    You, my good sir, are a genius. Kudos. This is brilliant, and solves many frustrations I\'ve had with stealth myself. I find it utterly ridiculous that the current stealth model means a stealth ship has to be big enough to contain the energy required and unarmored to lower the energy requirement in order to stealth; unarmored makes sense for a stealth shuttle, but it\'s supposed to act as a scout vessel, and thus the clumpsy big size is rather unreasonable.
     
    Joined
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages
    60
    Reaction score
    0
    By Alblaka? perish the thought *all the sarcasm*

    I approve of this idea whole heartedly, as it is now stealth is practically useless.

    Also the search bar is very well hidden, its on the forums page that lists ALL the subforums, Eg, general discussion, suggestions, bugs
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Ah, there it is. Thanks for the pointer. Sort of a miss-design to have it only visible in one specific page of the forum, opposed to, f.e. in one of the main navigation bars.. but I\'m not webdesigner, probably it got a reason (like not utilizing BBC has probably it\'s reasons).
     
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    98
    Reaction score
    0
    My prime problem with the cloaker is, that a small ship without a radar signature is already hard to fight. I had a dog-fight with two about 150 mass ships or less and if I hadn\'t had the radar spot on it i\'d lost it dozens of times. With a giant ship of 5000 mass i wouldn\'t even try to trun for it. So while a small radar singature would cloak you already nearly invis (only optical sight helps) a real cloak device just goes over the top.

    Some scenario assuming the small ships have a signature low enough to not appear on the opponents radar.

    Scenario 1 - Small vessle dog fight:

    Both have to fight by sight. If one leaves the FoV of his enemy he get\'s a massive advantage. So manoeuvring skills as a pilot are what makes you win the fight. If one ship can cloak and the other can\'t one of both is an idiot... if both can, the fight won\'t happen because they are cloaked and won\'t see each other ever again if not both stick to the exact same position and wait for his opponents cloak to run out.

    Scenario 2 - Small vs Mid-Class:

    The small ship tries to circle the bigger one since that one can\'t dog fight as fast caused by slower turning rate. Perhaps the Fregate has 2 turrets but those can\'t lock on the smaller. You don\'t need a cloak in this scenario since the fighter can stay in the bigger ships back and fire until it\'s shields break. If you have not enough fire power you die the moment you try to flee and the frigate finally has turned around and opens fire to you.

    Scenario 3 - Small vs Dreadnaught Class:

    HAHAHA! You couldn\'t even scratch hte shields... you can follow it out of sight as a scout to lead your fleet. The huge ship has a signature so high you could follow it out of render distance either way so what would you give about beeing not rendered because of an active cloak device.

    In the end the only way i see where a cloaking device that renders you invsibile could be usefull is when you want to escape a fight you lost. But your enemy has no way to keep track of you. It\'s not enhancing gameplay in anyway it just adds a lame way of trolling people by attacking them time and time again and fleeing with your lame cloak. I like the Idea of radicaly reducing your signature though.

    PS: if i\'d get a dollar for every time i wrote cloack instead of cloak i had 10 dollars -.-
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Hmmm, quite a few valid points.

    How about cloak turning a ship only invisible if said ship is not moving (or moving slowly?). In a dogfight this would still be unuseable (as stopping your engines fully takes a moment and makes you a target... and since your cloak disengages when getting hit), but it would permit a strikecraft to sneak upon people in honest.
     
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    98
    Reaction score
    0
    Perhaps i have strange habits as a pilot but i\'d never detect another ship without a radar marker if it doesn\'t fly directly in front of me. For me having no radar marker is nearly the same as invisible. That\'s why i like your idea of giving cloaked ships a very very small radar signature.

    For example, im building a carrier atm. And if 20 signature means i can detect it only if his core is less than 20m away from mine (since i can\'t use radar enhancement due to my size) it could land in my hangar bays ... plant a bomb (cool idea we should suggest by time) and fly away and i would never detect it. (have to say it has 5.5k mass atm and im still far from finished).

    A compromiss for cloak could be some semi-stealth like a camouflage-transparency effect. Something like the Jem\'hadar infanterists in Star Trek or the Infiltrator from Planetside 2. It\'s like 80% transparency with some refraction effects. This way a ship that was detected could be seen. But as long as you are only seen from the corner of one\'s eye you won\'t be recognized. And if you are fast enough and leave the FoV for only 1 second it\'s nearly impossible to find you. In addition it would be stronger more distance you have.

    This way it is very fucking hard to see someone of whom you don\'t know he\'s near you. And even if you know it, it\'s still hard. But it is not impossible. And for me that is a HUGE advantage.
     
    Joined
    Jun 26, 2013
    Messages
    58
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    So many letters and numbers and calculations.. i had a hard time reading the lot xD

    But your system is great, it took me a while to grasp but now that i see it, it would be a great system to implement :D it all makes a lot of sense and you have balanced it out and eliminated any opportunity for OPing due to the balanced system you have suggested.. well done :D FULL SUPPORT :D
     
    Joined
    Jun 27, 2013
    Messages
    26
    Reaction score
    0
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Legacy Citizen
    Yes,. this could be a valid idea, but, from a coders PoV, I\'m not sure whether transparency is trivial to implement for ships that aren\'t massive. And I didn\'t want to suggest something that would prove to be an potentially high amount of workload.

    Other then that, I usually use the side-indicators and N to find other nearby ships, opposed to going for in-my-sights and F.
     
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    98
    Reaction score
    0
    Yes,. this could be a valid idea, but, from a coders PoV, I\'m not sure whether transparency is trivial to implement for ships that aren\'t massive. And I didn\'t want to suggest something that would prove to be an potentially high amount of workload.


    Hm... i can see your point here since this would generate many layers of semi-transparency for the rasterization if you have many holes in your ship. Dammit, i like that kind of visual effect.


    Other then that, I usually use the side-indicators and N to find other nearby ships, opposed to going for in-my-sights and F.


    But if it is cloacked/radar jammed and thus has a very low signature you can\'t do that. That\'s why i meant rendering it complet invis would give you no (like in not even when hell freezes) way to follow it when it flees. I like the idea of engaging invisible. But I don\'t like it as a way to retreat if it\'s 100% fail-proof.