More realistic ship environment

[Ephelemi]

Just a few days ago I thought how about having a tour of that pirate station over there after I shot down its turrets. However, I had to set aside these plans because I noticed you cannot control anything that isnt neutral or in your faction. This leads to very big restriction to an imo large aspect of gameplay: namely hijacking enemy ships. Whil I realize that stuff like faction restriction makes sense, especially on multiplayer servers, I came to think if there maybe was a better solution than just restricting everything. So here is my suggestion:

Please dont condemn me for not knowing how exactly these thing do work, just read how I think they should. In my opinion there should be only the faction module, no permission stuff, which has only two basic functions, to declare dominion over an entity (like a ship or a sector) or a homebase (would it be a good idea not to restrict this to stations?) As you cant await people to be online all day long, Id leave the homebase stuff with its invulnerability, however I would change fundamental aspects on how it works for ships. First of all once a ship is assigned to a faction only members of the same should be able to edit or enter the core, all other options should be open to everybody else, even enemies, meaning mainly they could open doors. As of now all doors can be opened by hand. In my opinion this should be restricted to the standard plex door or if not at least not apply to force fields because that doesnt make sense.
But dont think this would be unfair because it would open up some neat defences as well, mainly booby trap force fields, logic locks etc. which are all possible to build already but cant really put to good use yet. I would really like to see some creative hijacker defences, not just simple doors protected by an unpiercable shield.
I also think this would trigger more interest in outfitting ships with actual interiors.
Now taking over a ship would work by boarding it and finding the faction module. Once that is found the faction can be changed, just like that.
You see, outfitting small ships with faction modules wouldnt really work, theyd be taken over too easily, people would just have to take better care of them, parking them on a homebase, a neutral station or in a friendly carrier should do the trick.
I have more to add to this but before I write it all down (balancing stuff as well) I would like to hear some general opinions, do you like it generally, do you think its the wrong approach or dont you want the system to change?

 

[NeonSturm]

Possible exploit:

• Place/Remove 2 non-door blocks
• On big doors:
  • Put area-triggers in front of doors to disable manual opening
  • Use logic only reachable by a 1-block door covered by a non-walk-through-block in the floor.

For your suggestion,
you need to restrict editing to only work from inside a core or build block.

Then it would be fun if doors open if attacked by a hand-gun (shields don't matter) or "hacker-gun".

 

[jstenholt]

So, you want to make faction protection useless? And every time I leave my ship I should have to worry about my ship being dumb enough to get nabbed? And as a faction leader, I need to vet or place absolute trust in every new members that wants to join my faction?

This forces players into a build style wherein they must devote a significant amount of resources to interior defense, which the devs have repeatedly stated they will not do.

This is a bad idea, in literally every way.

 

[Ephelemi]

I am aware of the many ways such a system could be exploited but seriously, who needs editing from anywhere but a build block or the ship core? Thinking about it, i think there should be only one core block which upon placing asks you if you want it to become a ship or a station and also functions as the faction module.

Blocking the entry to the core could be prohibited easily by making build blocks accessible for anybody. That way you can only effectively block your reactor room from the inside. Any other method would also harm the actual owner.

What do you mean by hiding logic blocks behind walls? If you still can activate them like that, i think that should be referred to as a bug.

As to the other ways of denying entry, if you trigger a door to be always closed, how do you open it yourself? You must keep in mind that the defender doesnt just want a hijacking secure ship, it should still be functional.

Just imagine someone boarding your ship and manipulating your weapons systems because you didnt bother to secure them ^^
[DOUBLEPOST=1428597960,1428597754][/DOUBLEPOST]jstenholt imo your ship should still be protected on its homebase, a friendly carrier or a neutral station.

And dont you think its a bit boring to have effectively no acces at all to enemy ships? Youre only way to get hold of them is by blasting them to smithereens. Boarding would add a new aspect of gameplay and imo having more stress on ship interiors would be a good thing.

 

[jstenholt]

Just imagine someone boarding your ship and manipulating your weapons systems because you didnt bother to secure them ^^

I am imagining it and am unable to come up with a use that isn't immediately exploitable by trolls, people under the age of 16, or megafactions. If you have to rely on the good nature of the playerbase to make an idea work, it is a bad idea.

 

[Ephelemi]

Do I? I think my suggestion is preety balanced and not based solely on good will of players. How often do you leave your ship in open space for everybody to see (and the space is wide) without protection from a dock? And for any ships too big to dock it would be really easy to implement a logic security system only accessable by using the right pattern on maybe a 3x3 light square that blocks doors and activates automatic defence systems within the ship.

 

[jstenholt]

Once again, that forces a player into building something they may otherwise not want to, just so they might leave their ship. Some people don't want to be in a faction, some factions don't have a home base, some people just don't like to dock their ships.

Forcing a playstyle = bad.

 

[FullMetalFox]

You can hijack enemy ships, you just need to blow them up a bit first. And that can be done with minimal damage.

While im one of the people who think that the whole permanently invurnable homebase idea sucks, stuff like your suggestion makes it even worse and just allows for to many loop holes, and would pretty much only end in annoyance.

Im sorry, but if you want boarding, for crying out loud at least think of something interesing, like a process of actuall weapons to disable a ship, leech onto it with breachpods or dock onto it, swarm it with NPC/Player Marines or what not, not stuff that makes the already stupid faction security even worse.

 

[jstenholt]

While im one of the people who think that the whole permanently invurnable homebase idea sucks, stuff like your suggestion makes it even worse and just allows for to many loop holes, and would pretty much only end in annoyance.

Faction homebases are not permanently invulnerable.

 

[FullMetalFox]

Unles the factions member have a sudden case of retarded, they will camp in their base to regenerate faction points. and with the large amounts of points stored on older factions.... yeah, thats pretty much permanent protection unles its a new faction with les experienced members, or on a server with modified faction point configs :/

 

[jstenholt]

So, not permanent.

 

[NeonSturm]

I think ships <x mass should be hijack-able.

You should at least have to add a certain amount of blocks to limit hijacking for the sake of efficiency-orientated drones.



Perhaps you could enable/disable security-leaks ingame?
The advantage of enabling security-leaks would be better access to ship functionality or faster-opening doors or some thing like that.

With this players would still have a choice.

 

[Ephelemi]

Nobody is forced to do anything, they would just have to take better care of their ships.

If you havent noticed this is about simplifying factions, there is no faction permission stuff except when docked to a bigger friendly or neutral entity.

Where would this trigger annoyance? Annoying is that you have to blast a hole into any door you want to open.
[DOUBLEPOST=1428599476,1428599169][/DOUBLEPOST]And please have the homebase invulnerability discussion in another thread, this is about something else.
[DOUBLEPOST=1428599597][/DOUBLEPOST]I will edit my ideas in a clear OP once i get home tomorrow.

 

[FullMetalFox]

Where would this trigger annoyance? Annoying is that you have to blast a hole into any door you want to open.

I would find it pretty annoying if my doors, which are there to keep people out, would just let them thru.
If someone brings enough firepower to get thru that, i can accept that, but my door being to stupid to actually do its job? No.

 

[NeonSturm]

Mostly true.
Fact is, that you are not able to have a ship completely safe apart your home-base.

The only thing you need faction permission for is : disabling that everybody can save your ship as a blueprint.


I think we need bombs that only do damage if triggered, not killed by enemy fire.
You can fire a gun at C4 or burn it or both and it won't explode. Only a special trigger can initiate the explosion.

• For the case you want to discourage griefing as a fast way to get resources.

If someone brings enough firepower to get thru that, i can accept that, but my door being to stupid to actually do its job? No.

Did you read my first post here?

What do you think about a hacker-gun which builds up damage for a door-array while it fires at it and finally breaks it if you fire long enough continuously.


Interior shielding is stupid.
Public doors are the counter to this code-wise simplicity.

 

[FullMetalFox]

Yes, and somewhere ive read that area triggers blocking use LOS is a bug, so that might get fixed in the future.
Always removing and replacing blocks to secure your door is annoying.

Hackergun, thats to easy, its just one item and some button holding, if someone brings over a whole ship they first had to build that thing.

I dont give a damn about interiour shielding tbh, but i expect my airlocks and hangar doors to be shielded and lockable. If you want to view it from a realistic point of view, any engineer would make extra sure to shield such structural weak points, and a civilisation capable of faster than light space travel, shields, and using freeking anti matter in cannons, should be able to construct a locking device for a door.

 

[jayman38]

I'd like breaking-and-entering to be more substantial than just holding down a button on a hackergun or knocking on a door. However, this may be a subject for a mod. I'm thinking mini-game like Simon(says) or Loopz that gets more complex with each order-of-magnitude of blocks in the blueprint, making doors on bigger ships more-involved to "hack" (1.2 million blocks results in a random 8 digit "code") while giving small-to-medium sized ships a decent "code" to break (4k blocks = 5 digit "code", 50k blocks = 6 digit "code") either through memory or brute force, to simulate the scene in Aliens where someone has to hardwire an override console to a door control box to get it open.

 

[Criss]

I feel like boarding mechanics will allow a better solution that straight up removing the faction permissions. Just a quick though, but maybe players can get a handheld item. This item can be expensive. It allows them to board and the game recognized that they are attempting to board a ship if they enter the bounding box of an enemy ship. How easy boarding can be is based on several factors such as

- How many enemy ships are nearby vs how many friendly ships are nearby
- Distance enemy is from homebase
- Number of crew on boarded craft vs number of boarding party members
- Ship security measures.

It's not even a fleshed out idea and I prefer it over the idea of just allowing players to board a ship so easily, as this thread suggests.

 

[NeonSturm]

Hackergun, thats to easy, its just one item and some button holding, if someone brings over a whole ship they first had to build that thing.

I dont give a damn about interiour shielding tbh, but i expect my airlocks and hangar doors to be shielded and lockable.

If somebody builds such a ship with some shield stacks, he captures over and over again - not just once.

If the door is bigger, it takes longer for you. Maybe long enough that the natural hack-degeneration is too big for your tiny little hand gun and you need a hacker-gun -ship which you have to build first.

I'm thinking mini-game like Simon(says) or Loopz that gets more complex with each order-of-magnitude of blocks in the blueprint, making doors on bigger ships more-involved to "hack" (1.2 million blocks results in a random 8 digit "code") while giving small-to-medium sized ships a decent "code" to break (4k blocks = 5 digit "code", 50k blocks = 6 digit "code") either through memory or brute force, to simulate the scene in Aliens where someone has to hardwire an override console to a door control box to get it open.

I don't know these games, but it sounds interesting.
Just don't use digits. Use something smoother like available bits for a password - the last character's bits may be ambiguous.

IRL it is possible to hack a 4-digit padlock in about 1500 seconds (1.6 seconds for one number-slot) = 25 minutes (if the last number is the right one).
IRL the evil class-mates from my 7th year in school hacked a 3-digit padlock in about 1 minute by trying possible combos.

But shouldn't a hacker-gun on a ship which is big enough be able to hack a single door just like it could blast through it?

 

[FullMetalFox]

If somebody builds such a ship with some shield stacks, he captures over and over again - not just once.

If the door is bigger, it takes longer for you. Maybe long enough that the natural hack-degeneration is too big for your tiny little hand gun and you need a hacker-gun -ship which you have to build first.

Do i want to build ships with traps an stuff? No, i could even just plaster the entrance with some turrets in the ceiling. Still would be annoying to be forced to do this.

Hacker-Gun-Ship... urgh, why did i knew you would come up with that?
1: You wouldnt be able to open a second set of doors with that as it wont fit inside.
2: If you now come again with "but the hacker gun would open those", no, i dont want to be forced to build huge ass airlocks.
3: and honestly, why waste 2 of the precious 1024 block IDs for a highly situational "weapon", if you could just do the same thing with any other weapon and replace the destroy blocks after capturing the ship.

If you guys want to get around on NPC stations more, you could just ask for the addition of Faction Permission Modules on all doors in naturaly spawned stations or something similar that does not need the implementation of additional items/blocks and does not mess with faction security.

If you guys want to be able to board enemy ships and take them over, then think about a fun way that does NOT fail instantly at the prerequierements, aka getting on that kicking ship in the first place.

Your ideas so far would do nothing else than make faction security an even bigger nightmare and encourage griefing or simply lame stealing.
And also, no game developer out there would ever listen to something like this, heck its even rare that they listen to community ideas at all because of the absurd amounts of small unrefined "what if" ideas like this. Want to change something? Want some feature? Have an idea? Think about it, think about its pros and cons, view it from different point of views, think about the whole process, think about how it could be implemented, refine it, then make a nice big post explaining your idea in detail, all its pros and cons you could think about, how it could be implemented and how it could benefit the game. Then, maybe then some dev who isnt feed up by reading random unrefined ideas, might take a look at it and like it.

...

Sorry for the rant.