test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Increased in Damage = Decrease in Strength

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I have noticed when fighting other NPC's and players alike, whenever another ship s heavily damaged, they still have the same power output and are able to inflict just as much damage to you wether they are at 100%with shields or at 1% with no shields.

Is this realistic?

I am just curious as to whether or not you think that there should be a diminishing return from the enemy as more and more of their ship (and yours) takes on damage.

Souldn't it be more along the lines of, if the enemy's hull is down to 50%, that the combined output of their ship is 100% based on the power output levels of 200% prior to the engagement which are:

Weapons
Shields
Engines
Auxillary

Regardless of where you place your stats, the systems affected from the enemy should reflect more on your power output.

Let us say that I put 100% in weapons, 50% in shields and 25% in Engines and 25% in Auxillary.
If my hull is damaged to 50%, then I would surmise that along these 4 categories, my total output would be 100% arriving at 50% Weapons, 25% Shields, 12.5% Engines and 12.5% in Auxillary.

But then so would the enemy, once I got passed their shields which would make for more intersting gameplay and be based on realistic values.

I would presume that if my hull took damage, then the systems power routing would be damaged as well, which would reduce the power feeding those systems, and thus reducing my affectiveness.

The inner core system (such as engines) are not located throughout the ship, but more from the inner ship to the rear, so I would expect less damage to that system during an engagement and more to my weapons since they are routed to the front and rear and are mostly exposed especially in the front section.

In a real fight using the dynamics of shielded warfare, I would say that your most powerful weapons would be at the front for frontal assaults, and once your shields go, your front weapons (including torpedo bays) will take damage along with your hull and therefore, your power to the weapons will be dramatically lower as you take damage and then the remaining systems will follow.

Is this not the more realistic fighting and damage scenario than what we are currently using?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    But once you get below 25%, the system shuts down.

    I understand the concept, but if you allow systems to go offline, you're done.

    Even if you worked around a 25% minimum, It maybe more realistic, but I'm not sure in the end it really makes sense,...it would accelerate the dying process if under attack, and reinforce the need to stay fully healed.

    The damage is supposed to be my cue to heal myself. If I could heal myself I surely would. It would just give me less options in a dire situation (my weapons fire weakly....my sci skills have no affect ....I'm travelling at warp 0.0001 .....and/or my shields have no regen power), I like having all my options available to pull out one of those miracles like Kirk did against Khan.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Maybe more like..............

    StarFleet Command 1, 2 , OP, 3

    The Glory Days of Yesteryear!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I would love to see something like this, would give an extra element to the game
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Vaughnn wrote:
    But once you get below 25%, the system shuts down.

    I understand the concept, but if you allow systems to go offline, you're done.

    Even if you worked around a 25% minimum, It maybe more realistic, but I'm not sure in the end it really makes sense,...it would accelerate the dying process if under attack, and reinforce the need to stay fully healed.

    The damage is supposed to be my cue to heal myself. If I could heal myself I surely would. It would just give me less options in a dire situation (my weapons fire weakly....my sci skills have no affect ....I'm travelling at warp 0.0001 .....and/or my shields have no regen power), I like having all my options available to pull out one of those miracles like Kirk did against Khan.

    Agreed and thats where your Special Skills and your additional power slots work well (power to engines, shields, weapons, auxillary).

    If both ships are weak, all it would take is (increased power to weapons) to put it over the top or if you need to disengage, click the power to engines etc.

    The intended purpose of this would be to add realism and make you sweat a bit more. It could even be random, since every engagement does not have to seriousl affect a system, but there are times when the Enterprise only had 25% shields and 50% power to weapons, torpedo tubes are out, and life support (aux?)was at 100%. etc.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    That would make it more realistic with the shows. I think it would put ships like escorts and birds of prey at a major disadvantage. Since cruisers are made to take more damage.

    It is a very interesting idea I would really like it in PVE. I don't think you could make it work in PVP without completely overpowering cruisers. This would make elite space combat better and give it a more epic feel.

    It could be implemented a few ways your damage could decrease with your hull strength or you could lose weapon slots in combat. This could bring more challenge to PVE.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Englebert wrote:
    That would make it more realistic with the shows. I think it would put ships like escorts and birds of prey at a major disadvantage. Since cruisers are made to take more damage.

    It is a very interesting idea I would really like it in PVE. I don't think you could make it work in PVP without completely overpowering cruisers. This would make elite space combat better and give it a more epic feel.

    It could be implemented a few ways your damage could decrease with your hull strength or you could lose weapon slots in combat. This could bring more challenge to PVE.

    Ships like Escorts or BOP's could have an additional slot for a new device such as "All Hands Repair X"

    X representing 4 various devices (weapons, shields, engines, or Auxillary) that also has a cooldown timer.

    Adjustments can be made to fit these class of ships in a multitude of ways through device slots or Boff skill.

    Even the current hull heal, shields heal, and additional crew, can have affect in getting these systems repaired.

    The dynamics of keeping the shields up so that you won't lose any system will serve a larger role and be more realistic.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Englebert wrote:
    That would make it more realistic with the shows. I think it would put ships like escorts and birds of prey at a major disadvantage. Since cruisers are made to take more damage.

    It is a very interesting idea I would really like it in PVE. I don't think you could make it work in PVP without completely overpowering cruisers. This would make elite space combat better and give it a more epic feel.

    It could be implemented a few ways your damage could decrease with your hull strength or you could lose weapon slots in combat. This could bring more challenge to PVE.

    This.

    The one and probably only thing that escorts have going for them is their dps, by allowing this syetm you would be putting cruisers at a huge advantage. What you're proposing is that if two ships, escort and cruiser, are in battle and begin weakening each other the cruiser is geared to repair itself and put up buffs to water down the damage while the escort will be putting everything into weapon power - but what good is that going to do when they arent really built for healing and damage resistence?

    What this will propose is not only will escort have lower protection (which they currently do) but it will also take away their dps advantage - Their only strength.

    I'm sorry, I play both a eng in a cruiser and a tac in an escort. Cruisers already have much more survivability than escorts, this would only reinforce that and make escorts nearly useless. I like the idea and what you're aiming for but you have to be realistic - escorts would get screwed hard core, not even just a little, they would be a complete joke.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Geoff_484 wrote:
    This.

    The one and probably only thing that escorts have going for them is their dps, by allowing this syetm you would be putting cruisers at a huge advantage. What you're proposing is that if two ships, escort and cruiser, are in battle and begin weakening each other the cruiser is geared to repair itself and put up buffs to water down the damage while the escort will be putting everything into weapon power - but what good is that going to do when they arent really built for healing and damage resistence?

    What this will propose is not only will escort have lower protection (which they currently do) but it will also take away their dps advantage - Their only strength.

    I'm sorry, I play both a eng in a cruiser and a tac in an escort. Cruisers already have much more survivability than escorts, this would only reinforce that and make escorts nearly useless. I like the idea and what you're aiming for but you have to be realistic - escorts would get screwed hard core, not even just a little, they would be a complete joke.

    Read above your post. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I was under the impression that this is very similiar to what happens with battle dammage and the use of Advanced/Elite difficulties. I have noticed many a time ingame that my vessel has become dammaged in several areas and performs weaker in those apects until such is repaired.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    One of the very few things I liked about EvE was that speed aids mitigation. If you're in a super-fast ship, it made it more difficult for others to hit you especially with the bigger guns. it was a pretty sweet system in theory.

    I could see a modified form of "speed tank" working in STO provided it was done right...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I was under the impression that this is very similiar to what happens with battle dammage and the use of Advanced/Elite difficulties. I have noticed many a time ingame that my vessel has become dammaged in several areas and performs weaker in those apects until such is repaired.

    that definitely does not happen. All I play is advanced or elite
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I was under the impression that this is very similiar to what happens with battle dammage and the use of Advanced/Elite difficulties. I have noticed many a time ingame that my vessel has become dammaged in several areas and performs weaker in those apects until such is repaired.

    Yeah me too, but is it working? In some of the skill descriptions it says things like repairs subsystems etc, but I never see systems (especially weapons) from the enemy being reduced in strength, or mine for that matter.

    I use 3 different ships (Defiant, Intrepid, Excalibur) and rarely see any systems go down or drop due to hull damage.

    I can easily overcome any weakness by using current eng, tac, sci heals amongst the other such as emergency power to weapons, emergency power to shields, the engine and the auxillary device slots.

    But as far as losing power and efficiency due to hull damage, I don't see it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    You lose crew the way it is now. I don't think it effects your damage but slows your repair rate. I would like to see loss of weapon slots because of damage. Or damaged weapons with less DPS in PVE I think this would be a great addition for more challenging game play. You could use the repair components we have now to fix them.

    I wouldn't want this in PVP at all because it would have balance issues.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Tribbler wrote: »
    I have noticed when fighting other NPC's and players alike, whenever another ship s heavily damaged, they still have the same power output and are able to inflict just as much damage to you wether they are at 100%with shields or at 1% with no shields.

    Is this realistic?

    I am just curious as to whether or not you think that there should be a diminishing return from the enemy as more and more of their ship (and yours) takes on damage.

    What you're asking for is called a "death spiral" in game design. Anyone who played PnP Shadowrun is probably familiar with it. What it means is you've triggered a game mechanic that weakens your chance of success. Of course, now that you've been debuffed in some way you're essentially making it more likely that you'll trigger the mechanic again, further weakening your chance of success, and increasing your chance of triggering the mechanic again, and so on and so forth. This spiral towards doom essentially continues until you have no chance for success at all. They become very difficult to recover from once your condition begins to plummet.

    STO already uses this mechanic, actually, in the form of death penalties (which, I seem to recall being highly unpopular based on the feedback that had them stripped away from the normal setting when the difficulty slider reached the Holodeck server). Your ship (for example) explodes, it receives a debuff that makes it more susceptible to damage, or weakens the amount of damage you do, or some other unwelcome debuff, which in turn makes it that much more likely that you'll be destroyed again and receive even more debuffs. It's the death spiral mechanic, except we're allowed to use repair devices to instantly reverse the spiral (and we usually do, thereby turning the would-be death spiral into a money sink mechanic).

    What you're essentially asking for is to have the death penalty changed into a "damaged penalty". My own opinions of that aside, I'm just going to remind everyone how controversial those arguments were on the forums when we only had to worry about the mere possibility of receiving a removable debuff when dying, much less being penalized that way for simply taking some damage (which obviously happens a lot more often than dying does).

    I think, done correctly, it could be cool. However, I believe it would also trigger the mother of all QQ storms on the forums.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Combadge wrote:
    What you're asking for is called a "death spiral" in game design. Anyone who played PnP Shadowrun is probably familiar with it. What it means is you've triggered a game mechanic that weakens your chance of success. Of course, now that you've been debuffed in some way you're essentially making it more likely that you'll trigger the mechanic again, further weakening your chance of success, and increasing your chance of triggering the mechanic again, and so on and so forth. This spiral towards doom essentially continues until you have no chance for success at all. They become very difficult to recover from once your condition begins to plummet.

    STO already uses this mechanic, actually, in the form of death penalties (which, I seem to recall being highly unpopular based on the feedback that had them stripped away from the normal setting when the difficulty slider reached the Holodeck server). Your ship (for example) explodes, it receives a debuff that makes it more susceptible to damage, or weakens the amount of damage you do, or some other unwelcome debuff, which in turn makes it that much more likely that you'll be destroyed again and receive even more debuffs. It's the death spiral mechanic, except we're allowed to use repair devices to instantly reverse the spiral (and we usually do, thereby turning the would-be death spiral into a money sink mechanic).

    What you're essentially asking for is to have the death penalty changed into a "damaged penalty". My own opinions of that aside, I'm just going to remind everyone how controversial those arguments were on the forums when we only had to worry about the mere possibility of receiving a removable debuff when dying, much less being penalized that way for simply taking some damage (which obviously happens a lot more often than dying does).

    I think, done correctly, it could be cool. However, I believe it would also trigger the mother of all QQ storms on the forums.

    Great point, I think if your weapons took direct damage and would do less DPS and with enough damage could be knocked offline would enhance combat. If you lost your shields they could take damage the weapons where the shields are down. If they regenerated out of combat on normal and used repair components on advanced and elite I think it would be cool.

    I see no way of making this work in PVP I just don't think it could be balanced.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I remember at the beginning of game development it was stated that the ships would have a "big tall ship with sails" feeling to it and that would be the mechanics of the battle (of course we all know now that it was just referencing the largest ships in the game).

    The spiraling death mechanic is a good phrase to coin this as, but so does the other player. But....if the other player (or NPC) puts more emphasis in other areas instead of heals, they will meet their demise quicker as is now.

    The gameplay would not change drastically if the HP of the weapons and the strength of the armor (which can be altered with the different armor types) can be altered in a small way.

    The most significant bonus to this is just the realism. You can target the 4 systems already with the skill enhancement. But it puts the system offline, instead of weakened.

    A weakened system can be repaired by your crew, but they do not focus on the system unless directed by the captain and thats where the 4 new device slots would come in handy as mentioned above.

    Not a major game changer, but just a more realistic one. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Tribbler wrote: »
    Yeah me too, but is it working? In some of the skill descriptions it says things like repairs subsystems etc, but I never see systems (especially weapons) from the enemy being reduced in strength, or mine for that matter.

    I use 3 different ships (Defiant, Intrepid, Excalibur) and rarely see any systems go down or drop due to hull damage.

    I can easily overcome any weakness by using current eng, tac, sci heals amongst the other such as emergency power to weapons, emergency power to shields, the engine and the auxillary device slots.

    But as far as losing power and efficiency due to hull damage, I don't see it.

    I can not say if they actually reduce your combat effectiveness when damaged, as I have not seen any evidence of this. I have several systems damaged in advanced mode that said they effected variuos characteristics of my vessel but can not say how badly they may have been effected or compromised
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Summit wrote: »
    that definitely does not happen. All I play is advanced or elite

    You have never seen any damage on your vessel when you open the vessel UI? The dammage to individual systems happens, the question is wiethr or not the damage acrued effects the system at all and reduces its ability to function.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    You have never seen any damage on your vessel when you open the vessel UI? The dammage to individual systems happens, the question is wiethr or not the damage acrued effects the system at all and reduces its ability to function.

    I believe it is aestheticl damage only and does not have any affect on weakness or effectiveness of the system itself, which is basically just superficial damage without depth.

    When my ship is down to 15%, it looks like swiss cheese, and the damage should reflect on the systems abilities like swiss cheese.

    Mind you the gameplay is fine, and I am not on a rant, just wondering about the feel of the game.and working on realism.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Very interesting idea.
    Sometimes fun trumps realism I think.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    VennJammer wrote: »
    Maybe more like..............

    StarFleet Command 1, 2 , OP, 3

    The Glory Days of Yesteryear!

    I miss those games sooooo much......
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    This kind of damage system basically results in a "death spiral" - you get in one solid punch at the begining and your opponent is progressively weaker and more incapable of hitting back. It puts way, way too much emphasis on chaining up all your skills for the optimal alpha-strike, then mopping up.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    nileight wrote: »
    Very interesting idea.
    Sometimes fun trumps realism I think.

    And I do believe in that right there to some degree.

    Thats one reason I do not understand the hype about reality shows. I see and hear about all these things literally everyday being a manager all my life of anywhere from 10 - 200 people at any given time.

    The nonsensical drama brought into living rooms are over the top and I am not surprised by the sillyness that takes place. I do not understand the draw they get because of my de-sensity (sp?) to it.

    To me I would rather have fun than realism, but sometimes things do need to be put in perspective and there are consequences to actions. After all, your avatar does take a little damage when they jump off of balconies in ESD. This is no different. :)

    Hmmm this is a conundrum to say the least.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Tribbler wrote: »
    I believe it is aestheticl damage only and does not have any affect on weakness or effectiveness of the system itself, which is basically just superficial damage without depth.

    When my ship is down to 15%, it looks like swiss cheese, and the damage should reflect on the systems abilities like swiss cheese.

    Mind you the gameplay is fine, and I am not on a rant, just wondering about the feel of the game.and working on realism.

    I'm not speaking to the graphical changes that are displayed on your vessel as you take damage ingame, but to the damage that will be visable on your ship UI if you have suffered dammage while playing under Advanced or Elite difficulty settings.
    I have suffered damage to several systems that is constant until repaired while playing under these difficuylty settings. Each individual system damaged has a modifier listed in its description and is suppossed to affect said systems performance ingame.
    What I want to know is do they actually erode performance until healed or are they purely for show?
    Next time it happens to me (and when I finally get my PC out of repair shop) I will take screen shots.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I'm not speaking to the graphical changes that are displayed on your vessel as you take damage ingame, but to the damage that will be visable on your ship UI if you have suffered dammage while playing under Advanced or Elite difficulty settings.
    I have suffered damage to several systems that is constant until repaired while playing under these difficuylty settings. Each individual system damaged has a modifier listed in its description and is suppossed to affect said systems performance ingame.
    What I want to know is do they actually erode performance until healed or are they purely for show?
    Next time it happens to me (and when I finally get my PC out of repair shop) I will take screen shots.

    You're talking about Ship injuries that you get after you die. The OP is talking about getting injuries to your ship during normal combat. I can get behind the idea, as long as they are a temporary debuff, a debuff who's timer is affected by the subsystem repair rate skill.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    So basiscly turn the game into who can burst who first?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    SpaceFork wrote:
    So basiscly turn the game into who can burst who first?

    Isn't that more realistic?

    I want everyone to have fun (which is the bottom line), and to make it too realistic may be more hassle and grief than more relaxation and harmony. :D

    Seems like in an MMA fight, the one that gets in first "burst" and does the KO punch, gets his hand held up by the ring announcer....No? :D

    In battles with ships, you would expect that the first salvo hitting an engine (slowing turning and speed) or a weapon (causing loss of attack ability) usually determines victory unless the weapon damaged is just one of many others.

    That is why I said earlier that it would slightly change the fundamentals of the game to keep your shields up so your systems could'nt take damage unless of course by a sci ship.

    In Star Trek, it was always imperative to keep those "Shields UP". Also why every few seconds of battle the crew would tell the captain what the shield level was. Why Ursa and B'Etor in their BOP used Geordi's Visor to show them the frequency of the shields so they could match them with their torpedos since it was the only way to bring down a Galaxy Class with a BOP.

    More reasons to focus more on shields than anything else, and once the enemy lowered your shield, your vulnerability increases 10 fold. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Part of the problem is how PvP games are measured...and resultant game mechanics.

    Respawning is really a bad mechanic....the victory results should be measured by...last side standing.

    You get one death and your out of the match. This could easily be the same death spiral mentioned above. After a while - 5 v 5 then 5 v 4 then 5 v 3 etc...5 v 1 just hurts.

    But I also think the Carrier should be able to launch all pets...one time only. It will take time to get them all out...but once out they stay out till victory or death.

    Actually having to have the enemy within a certain distance is REALLY a poor mechanic for a carrier. But having an endless chain of pets is just as rediculus.

    Same as having 10% hull and still doing Full Buffed damage is rediculus. Not a single system got hurt taking all that damage?


    BUT....this is a game...not a simulation...simulations can be NOT fun...at times.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I'm not speaking to the graphical changes that are displayed on your vessel as you take damage ingame, but to the damage that will be visable on your ship UI if you have suffered dammage while playing under Advanced or Elite difficulty settings.
    I have suffered damage to several systems that is constant until repaired while playing under these difficuylty settings. Each individual system damaged has a modifier listed in its description and is suppossed to affect said systems performance ingame.
    What I want to know is do they actually erode performance until healed or are they purely for show?
    Next time it happens to me (and when I finally get my PC out of repair shop) I will take screen shots.

    I know on ground combat my BO's have died and a few injuries reduced their damage by 5%. I would say there is something similar for space. I really didn't die very much when I was playing on elite and had plenty of repair components from drops.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I really think taking damage to weapons systems and weapons being able to be knocked offline is good idea. The OP likes the idea of it scaling to hull damage.

    I like the idea each weapon slot would have hit points. If your shields are down then the weapons at the exposed area could take damage. They wouldn't take damage if your shields were above 50%. If the weapon hit points dropped to 50% then that weapons strength would do 50% less damage. When it reached 0 it would be knocked offline and would regenerate at the same rate as your hull.

    If it was a torpedo or a mine slot they would have a chance not to fire when they reached 50%. Like a 50% chance not to fire.

    The normal game play space combat offers no real challenge in this game unless it's PVP or a STF. Knocking weapons system offline could add another element into it.

    I don't know if it could be done it PVP but it would add a little more challenge to game play. It could make maneuvering more important part of game play than it is now.
Sign In or Register to comment.