Read by Council Hull Regeneration Module

[AnthonyAnderson]

I read through DISCUSS! Hull Repair/Regeneration and liked the idea, but want to suggest something totally different, and I think many players may like it.

The aforementioned thread (which I'll leave for y'all to read) has the same idea of a Hull Regen computer and module, but instead pulls from storage and a blueprint. My idea isn't to replace blocks, but only repair them, and would only be practical on smaller ships (fighter, smaller "large" ships), as there are some balancing factors in place.

Working it: The Computer is toggled on or off like a radar jammer. When toggled on, the modules linked to the computer begin repairing the blocks on the ship (direct entity only and those connected by rails (no turrets, though).

Each block could take between 20 seconds and a minute to repair to full strength, depending on current health/state and its type (advanced armor taking longer than a hull block), and each module can repair x amount (not 1, of course, but maybe up to 4 simultaneously. Even if all blocks (remaining, no blocks are replaced) are repaired, the system will continue to draw power and enact its balances.

The Balancing:
- While active, engines are disabled, rendering the active ship unable to move via thrust, or turn/rotate. This would prevent players from using it on ships mid-combat (unless combat is stationary). The effects remain for 5-10 seconds after the module has been deactivate. Inertia could still be maintained, though, allowing for drifting repairs. Careful, though, about drifting into a star, planet, or pirate base.
-- Alternate to Engine Disabling : Incoming damage is increased by a certain amount (double, 1.5, 3? etc)
- The effectiveness is only at 100% until at a specific module:mass ratio (determined only by the direct entity's mass, no docked ships are included), after which point the effectiveness decreases by 10% for every 3% of the mass it's over. This prevents entirely block Regen ships from being designed and built, but still allows block regen ship roles from being filled ( fighter and drone carriers)
- Power requirements also begin increasing at an exponential rate (and increase by 25% once over the module:mass ratio limit), limiting its use on any massive ships.

Why this is important:
This type of system would favor small ships like fighters, scout ships, corvettes, and small frigates, as well as carriers (for fighters or drones, or factional super carriers that can carry corvettes or frigates). Massive ships, titans or battleships and the like, would still need to visit their local shipyard for full repairs after a battle.




Including the linked thread from above:

If the computer is linked to a storage module with the blocks needed to replace a destroyed section and the blueprint is included, then such repairs would be possible as well. However with a penalty. All blocks repaired must -
a) have all immediately connecting blocks in 100% health condition
b) start with 5% integrity

Even if the block is replaced, it would need to be repaired (constructed?) before the next one could be done, slowing repairs to a manageable and balanced level.

 

[NeonSturm]

What stops it to be invincible like shield regen after a broken patch?
Perhaps only hull blocks should regenerate and have a regeneration delay of a few seconds? Inverse destruction after delay.

During delay, you can punch through and kill system blocks (not regenerating) or turn your ship to face the enemy with not damaged armour.

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

What stops it to be invincible like shield regen after a broken patch?
Perhaps only hull blocks should regenerate and have a regeneration delay of a few seconds? Inverse destruction after delay.

During delay, you can punch through and kill system blocks (not regenerating) or turn your ship to face the enemy with not damaged armour.

It wouldn't as effective on large ships (Which can afford to use just their turrets to attack), and any turning is disabled.

 

[NeonSturm]

It wouldn't as effective on large ships (Which can afford to use just their turrets to attack), and any turning is disabled.

I agree, large ships have smaller armour blocks (relative to their length/width/height), thus it is easier to dig a tunnel toward the essential blocks.

However, instead of disabling thrust, make it more efficient the less thrust was used during last 5 seconds - this is more seamless and easy to control by the player.​

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

I agree, large ships have smaller armour blocks (relative to their length/width/height), thus it is easier to dig a tunnel toward the essential blocks.

However, instead of disabling thrust, make it more efficient the less thrust was used during last 5 seconds - this is more seamless and easy to control by the player.

perhaps, but as you said it wouldn't be right to turn your ship as you're repairing to protect a damaged side.


It also isn't meant to be used during combat. Meant to be used after combat, or after any dangerous situation.

And also meant as a slow, but eventually effective alternative to crawling back to a shipyard.

 

[SuperWookie]

Unless you're flying a Wraith Hive I don't see why your ship should be able to use space magic to repair itself out in the middle of space.

 

[Blaza612]

Oh shit, this became an actual thread. Well I'm going to vigorously shove me 2 cents from chat into ye faces.

(Note; have not read thread, am guessing the same is from what was discussed in chat)

I feel that the repair module should be able to repair the blocks HP without using TOO much power, or forcing x systems to shut down, but doesn't repair too much. It'd be a nice buff that could definitely help in battle, and possibly change the outcome if evenly matched, while not being so overpowered that it'd be impossible to out-damage it. The way it's proposed, the suggestion asks for the thing to be VERY powerful, and also using a massive debuff to balance it (The shutting down of systems), ultimately removing it's purpose in battle, and thus making the entire new computer and modules (That's 2 of the limited IDs) not largely used. It would probably be used by the few people who can't repair at a shipyard, but even then it's not that effective.

Overall, making the regen repair a large amount of BHP, with such a big debuff to balance, will render it almost useless, thus we change it to not be that powerful, with of course less of a debuff, allowing it to be more widely usable in battle.

EDIT: The not practical votes have a pretty good chance of demonstrating the problems I raised. :p

EDIT2:

"This isn't meant to be used in combat"

Then what the fuck is the purpose of it? To provide a way to half-ass repairs on ye ship? Seriously, without it being able to be used in combat, then the point of it is null! It's useless! THERE IS NO LOGICAL REASON WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE USED IN COMBAT!

 

[Heillos]

Even supposing that large ships could get some use from this, it'd never matter, because large ship weapons destroy advanced armor in single blows. So, as you already stated, this is pretty much only of use on small ships.

If it's debuffed enough that it only works out of combat, I must agree with Blaza in that it simply won't be used. If you're in a small ship and are retreating from combat, why would you stop on your way home to buff out some scratches? There are 4 logical outcomes to a fight, A: you die, B: they die, C: you run away due to critical damage, D: they run away due to critical damage. In none of these cases will a reasonable player stop and use a very slow hull repair tool. They will return to their HB as quickly as possible to repair or otherwise replace their ship.

As to using it in-combat, no. Definitely not. Small-ship combat is slow due to the relatively low damage at play, as well as the high maneuverability of involved parties (hard to break blocks and hard to hit blocks), not to mention how the HP system requires a significant portion of that tiny hitbox to be destroyed. Adding something that can repair scratches mid-combat will only serve to further slow down the gradual chipping away of armor, leading to a less entertaining small-ship meta.

 

[kookster]

Not a bad idea, but I wouldnt make it so you cant repair while moving. I would make it so if you take damage it actually multiplies the damage taken, to shields as well. So using this while in combat would be a bad idea.

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

@Blaza then perhaps you should read the thread?

Heillos You're absolutely right, crawling back to a shipyard is probably the more preferable method to fully restoring the damaged ship. But if you survived and a lot, or most, of your systems have been damaged and thrusters are down to a quarter strength, you'd want a way to get them operational again to make that trip back quicker. And no, I don't want this seen used in fighter-fighter combat for the reason you said.

kookster I like that, gonna edit the original post

Also Edit: No comments on the idea for replacing blocks? Adjacent blocks present and fully repaired, then new blocks starting at 10% health? Makeshift mobile repairs.

 

[Blaza612]

@Blaza then perhaps you should read the thread?

Perhaps you should read my full post?

kookster I like that, gonna edit the original post

Been thinking more about what he said, and the more I do, the more I don't like. Again, we come accross the issue of the regen thingy becoming completely useless. If it just multiplies the damage dealt when active, then what's the point of using it in combat? You'll just be giving your opponent an edge over you. This just becomes an unnecessary way to force people to not use it in combat.

Having a repair module that's simply there to assist in your ability to be lazy, is a waste of at least 2 IDs and time, and is already redundant, while attempting to make a PRE-EXISTING feature redundant, thus making the entire thing a waste of everything. Shipyards are meant to be used, to build, design and repair ships, not sit there and collect dust. If you wish to repair a ship, do it by hand or use a shipyard, do NOT try to get a redundant feature into the game.

If we're going to make it NOT redundant, as I've previously stated, it should be allowed to be used in combat, so it wont shut down any systems or use up too much power, BUT, it wont repair as much as if it wasn't allowed in combat. It'd only be able to provide an edge in combat, rather than creating an impenetrable tank, while still leaving the ability to make an impenetrable tank, if one chooses to specialize a ship within it. The % of the ship's mass/blocks that's made up of the modules, will determine how much repair is done to x amount of blocks, per tick. Again, this creates a useful system, that would be seen throughout combat ships, as it'd become something actually USEFUL.

Also Edit: No comments on the idea for replacing blocks? Adjacent blocks present and fully repaired, then new blocks starting at 10% health? Makeshift mobile repairs.

Again, shipyards. I can see Capitals, anchoring and then performing repairs, but not just any ship.

 

[kookster]

Perhaps you should read my full post?


Been thinking more about what he said, and the more I do, the more I don't like. Again, we come accross the issue of the regen thingy becoming completely useless. If it just multiplies the damage dealt when active, then what's the point of using it in combat? You'll just be giving your opponent an edge over you. This just becomes an unnecessary way to force people to not use it in combat.

Having a repair module that's simply there to assist in your ability to be lazy, is a waste of at least 2 IDs and time, and is already redundant, while attempting to make a PRE-EXISTING feature redundant, thus making the entire thing a waste of everything. Shipyards are meant to be used, to build, design and repair ships, not sit there and collect dust. If you wish to repair a ship, do it by hand or use a shipyard, do NOT try to get a redundant feature into the game.

If we're going to make it NOT redundant, as I've previously stated, it should be allowed to be used in combat, so it wont shut down any systems or use up too much power, BUT, it wont repair as much as if it wasn't allowed in combat. It'd only be able to provide an edge in combat, rather than creating an impenetrable tank, while still leaving the ability to make an impenetrable tank, if one chooses to specialize a ship within it. The % of the ship's mass/blocks that's made up of the modules, will determine how much repair is done to x amount of blocks, per tick. Again, this creates a useful system, that would be seen throughout combat ships, as it'd become something actually USEFUL.



Again, shipyards. I can see Capitals, anchoring and then performing repairs, but not just any ship.

I thought the point was for it not to be used in combat?

 

[Blaza612]

I thought the point was for it not to be used in combat?

For the third time, that makes it redundant/useless.

 

[kookster]

For the third time, that makes it redundant/useless.

No. It's very useful. Outside of combat. More of after combat cleanup.

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

Blaza cool it a bit man, this is a discussion forum, not a place to express how big of a dick you are. Or have.

 

[Blaza612]

No. It's very useful. Outside of combat. More of after combat cleanup.

Shipyards
[DOUBLEPOST=1453785251,1453785145][/DOUBLEPOST]

Blaza cool it a bit man, this is a discussion forum, not a place to express how big of a dick you are. Or have.

This is what happens when I have to repeat stuff so many times. BTW I can't be showing off any big dicks, it's too small.

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

Shipyards
[DOUBLEPOST=1453785251,1453785145][/DOUBLEPOST]

This is what happens when I have to repeat stuff so many times. BTW I can't be showing off any big dicks, it's too small.

And you've had this attitude since your first reply.

If you disagree with something fine, be civil about it. Your points are valid and I've been trying to think of ways to address them. It's probably a dead-end idea, but I wanted to see what could come out of a discussion about it. If you feel like it's a waste of your time, then don't waste it.

 

[Blaza612]

And you've had this attitude since your first reply.

Actually that was my third, I thought editing the post instead of merging might make it look neater, it did not. :p

If you disagree with something fine, be civil about it.

I have been, there have been a couple of key sentences to show my aggravation.

It's probably a dead-end idea

It ain't, just needs some tweaks to prevent redundancy.

 

[AnthonyAnderson]

Actually that was my third, I thought editing the post instead of merging might make it look neater, it did not. :p



I have been, there have been a couple of key sentences to show my aggravation.



It ain't, just needs some tweaks to prevent redundancy.

Then suggest tweaks and contribute.

 

[Blaza612]

Then suggest tweaks and contribute.

I kind of did. :p

Again, make it that it doesn't use as much power or shuts down any systems, or multiplies damage, but it doesn't repair as much as it would with those debuffs. This will allow the repairer to be used in combat, to prevent it from being redundant as well as providing a new fitting to improve ship versatility.

The repair amount will not be fixed either. The amount that's repaired is dependent on the % of mass/blocks that the modules make up. Thus, if a ship wishes to specialize in tank, then they can do so, but it will be at the cost of other system space, thus providing the balance.