Offline defense system

[GRHayes]

People seem to often have an issue with not being able to defend ships and bases when they are offline.
Defending Undocked Ships

We could take a lesson from another game KoC Kingdoms of Camelot. There people had castles and so on and would go on vacation and could put enact a state in which while offline they couldn't be attacked. This allowed people to go on vacation and so on.

It may not need to go that far though. Simply making alternate bases invulnerable while the player is offline could work allowing fleets to dock at other bases so a huge lag fest isn't created when the player joins and everything being at the home base.

Another option is any base or ship the player is off line goes into an 10X mode. In short shields, power, weapons all become 10 times more powerful. Sure some will attack for the challenge. They will also get damage and it hurt a bit more. But like everyone knows parts and items are easily replaced in this game. Maybe if some items where actually harder to come by that would be different but in effect the most you are really out is some time in replacing something or repairing it.

If such an option was created the admin of the server should be able to select the type or even if it is on or off at all.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

Would be nice if fleet commands were persistent and chained. Then you could leave your fleet defending itself properly based on what orders you give it. But only if a player loads the sector. Don't want to tie up the server with needless processing.

 

[wizardoftrash]

People seem to often have an issue with not being able to defend ships and bases when they are offline.
Another option is any base or ship the player is off line goes into an 10X mode. In short shields, power, weapons all become 10 times more powerful. Sure some will attack for the challenge. They will also get damage and it hurt a bit more. But like everyone knows parts and items are easily replaced in this game. Maybe if some items where actually harder to come by that would be different but in effect the most you are really out is some time in replacing something or repairing it.

This would create way too much disincentive for attacking players, since they already stand to lose as much as they gain when attacking a fleet.

As a player we have a handfull of tools to protect our stuff while we are gone as it is.
-Bases with lots of turrets: Any base apart from your home base needs to protect itself. A huge upside of bases is that they never need to fly, and can't use many on-board systems that ships typically need that draw power. This means you can DECK IT OUT with REALLY HEAVY TURRETS. I'm talking turrets with big guns and advanced armor plates, plenty of shields, and recessed systems. Building a non-home base fortress would be a fun and worthy project for a pvp server, and would create some great player interaction situations if someone discovers it. Plus a well-enough armed base can effectively protect a fleet by stationing the fleet well-within turret range.

If you already have a large AI fleet to defend, contratz you are already in end-game territory there. Maintaining and protecting your fleet becomes the main way the game is played at that point, and that includes finding ways within the game to protect said fleet. You don't need more invulnerability and base protections in this game, because if bases are arbitrarily protected while you are logged off, it incentivizes players to log-off when they get attacked. Instead of giving people more walls to hide behind, we should encourage the Devs to continue improving the AI system so that our fleet and bases can more competently defend itself while we our gone.

Plus there is a lot we can do as it is with a single invulnerable base. Nothing prevents your Home Base from being decked-out with heavy turrets as well, and by ordering your fleet to hang out in the sector when you are logged off, the base being there creates a solid deterrence from attacking your fleet.

 

[GRHayes]

This would create way too much disincentive for attacking players, since they already stand to lose as much as they gain when attacking a fleet.

As a player we have a handfull of tools to protect our stuff while we are gone as it is.
-Bases with lots of turrets: Any base apart from your home base needs to protect itself. A huge upside of bases is that they never need to fly, and can't use many on-board systems that ships typically need that draw power. This means you can DECK IT OUT with REALLY HEAVY TURRETS. I'm talking turrets with big guns and advanced armor plates, plenty of shields, and recessed systems. Building a non-home base fortress would be a fun and worthy project for a pvp server, and would create some great player interaction situations if someone discovers it. Plus a well-enough armed base can effectively protect a fleet by stationing the fleet well-within turret range.

If you already have a large AI fleet to defend, contratz you are already in end-game territory there. Maintaining and protecting your fleet becomes the main way the game is played at that point, and that includes finding ways within the game to protect said fleet. You don't need more invulnerability and base protections in this game, because if bases are arbitrarily protected while you are logged off, it incentivizes players to log-off when they get attacked. Instead of giving people more walls to hide behind, we should encourage the Devs to continue improving the AI system so that our fleet and bases can more competently defend itself while we our gone.

Plus there is a lot we can do as it is with a single invulnerable base. Nothing prevents your Home Base from being decked-out with heavy turrets as well, and by ordering your fleet to hang out in the sector when you are logged off, the base being there creates a solid deterrence from attacking your fleet.

I can attack any base you build and never take a single hit and destroy the base.
All I need to do is stay out past the targeting range. I then enter fire a long range salvo and back out. I move and fire another one. Just keep repeating it.
Lets say your able to send out AI ships while off line. I simply am going to lure them away or into a trap then come back and hit again.
If the AI in this game where actually somewhat smart that might be another story. They aren't though.
Everyone can hit N and see when a base and ships show up on it. When they drop off they can't see you and don't attack.
On my system the sectors are 5K that seems to happen at 8k, Anyone one can do that.
Using that method any ship capable of taking shields down is capable of destroying anything you have there.

 

[wizardoftrash]

I can attack any base you build and never take a single hit and destroy the base.
All I need to do is stay out past the targeting range. I then enter fire a long range salvo and back out. I move and fire another one. Just keep repeating it.
Lets say your able to send out AI ships while off line. I simply am going to lure them away or into a trap then come back and hit again.
If the AI in this game where actually somewhat smart that might be another story. They aren't though.
Everyone can hit N and see when a base and ships show up on it. When they drop off they can't see you and don't attack.
On my system the sectors are 5K that seems to happen at 8k, Anyone one can do that.
Using that method any ship capable of taking shields down is capable of destroying anything you have there.

That DOES seem like a bit of an issue. If turret targetting range were further would that solve the issue? (I suspect not, Space Engineers has a similar problem with turrets in that any fairly agile ship can attack a base armed to the teeth with turrets and sustain no damage because they just don't track fast enough).

Yes, I'd agree that fleet AI should continue to improve, that would be a satisfying change.

 

[GRHayes]

That DOES seem like a bit of an issue. If turret targeting range were further would that solve the issue? (I suspect not, Space Engineers has a similar problem with turrets in that any fairly agile ship can attack a base armed to the teeth with turrets and sustain no damage because they just don't track fast enough).

Yes, I'd agree that fleet AI should continue to improve, that would be a satisfying change.

It doesn't matter, how far the range is. I can still get passed the issue.
Scenario 1: targeting range and missile range are equal at a much longer distance. So then are the ones on my ship. Just means I shoot from further back.
Scenario 2: targeting range is further than missile range giving turrets a heads up earlier before something enters territory. All I do then is set dummies out beyond the missile range inside the targeting range to occupy the turrets. It becomes even less difficult.

AI would need to be modified a lot to scan targets and recognize them as different levels of a threat. Then it needs methods to deal with various types of threats. It would also need a priority system to avoid being lured into traps and other issues.
Until AI is improved to that level or greater no base or home base is ever going to be safe.

 

[lupoCani]

It doesn't matter, how far the range is. I can still get passed the issue.
Scenario 1: targeting range and missile range are equal at a much longer distance. So then are the ones on my ship.

Are they? Some sort of station-only range-increasing system seems like a perfectly valid solution.

 

[wizardoftrash]

Are they? Some sort of station-only range-increasing system seems like a perfectly valid solution.

His retort was that he could launch a drone decoy for the station to target if the station had longer range. Giving the turrets some more AI options would fix this as well.

If the turret AI (or other AI) function had the following drop-down menu...
Target Priority
-Mass
-Weapons
-Proximity

Then you would be able to tell the turret to focus on offensice ships over close ships. On the flip-side, an anti-fighter turret on a capital class ship could be told instead to focus on proximity, it would ignore the other large ships it isn't built to hit.

Ideally there could be several categories that could be "dropped in" to a column that would look more like this.
EDIT: formatting sure chewed up this "table" I tried to make lol
Target Priority
-Ships
-Not Missiles
-Weapons
-Mass
-Players
-Stations
-Proximity

Possible Targets (I wanted this column to appear to hte right of Target Priority but it didn't format cleanly)
Current Shields
Missiles
Not Players
Not Ships
Not Stations
Any

By default the Target Priority would have the Any and Proximity priorities at the top, and Possible Targets would have each prioritization category available. The player would just drag them left to right to add them to the priority list, and drag them up or down to increase or decrease how the turret prioritizes the target.

 

[GRHayes]

Are they? Some sort of station-only range-increasing system seems like a perfectly valid solution.

This is a scenario showing one potential change and that it wouldn't make any difference.
My point is right now the range is 8K if we change it to 10K I will simply do the same thing just at 10K.
[doublepost=1493332500,1493331730][/doublepost]

His retort was that he could launch a drone decoy for the station to target if the station had longer range. Giving the turrets some more AI options would fix this as well.

If the turret AI (or other AI) function had the following drop-down menu...
Target Priority
-Mass
-Weapons
-Proximity

Then you would be able to tell the turret to focus on offensice ships over close ships. On the flip-side, an anti-fighter turret on a capital class ship could be told instead to focus on proximity, it would ignore the other large ships it isn't built to hit.

Ideally there could be several categories that could be "dropped in" to a column that would look more like this.
EDIT: formatting sure chewed up this "table" I tried to make lol
Target Priority
-Ships
-Not Missiles
-Weapons
-Mass
-Players
-Stations
-Proximity

Possible Targets (I wanted this column to appear to hte right of Target Priority but it didn't format cleanly)
Current Shields
Missiles
Not Players
Not Ships
Not Stations
Any

By default the Target Priority would have the Any and Proximity priorities at the top, and Possible Targets would have each prioritization category available. The player would just drag them left to right to add them to the priority list, and drag them up or down to increase or decrease how the turret prioritizes the target.

You are correct to an extent. that would make a positive difference. Just not going to be a guarantee.
If I set weapons on the drones or just park other ships out there equal size. It would leave the system targeting those. The current systems do not break off of a target once on it unless it moves out of range. They would need to have them refresh and then coordinate targeting and a lot more. They would also need to react faster. Even if they do react faster. I can move before most rounds will get the chance to lock on and hit. So systems would have to greatly increase in speed along with targeting. That is really just a start.

Then that doesn't cover AI in ships just the base.
It also doesn't deal with stealth vessels, docking, using a torch... bringing in a ship and using their own layout for cover, something as simple as moving a ship cloaked and detonating it full of warheads.

There is an old saying any target can be hit by someone willing to dedicate, time, money and their life. In games it is even harder to protect stuff like this.