Astro Galaxy - a realistic space exploration game
  November 24, 2017, 01:26:24 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: MAU  (Read 6357 times)
sargas
Master Sergeant
*

Reputation: +179/-38
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438


wandering teacher of the bizarre and unusual


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: June 07, 2014, 10:54:11 PM »

to get back to the original topic, I would like to see this:

LOOT, CAPTURE, or DESTROY as 3 different options and not LOOT or CAPTURE/DESTROY...just make CAPTURE harder than DESTROY.

as far as the 'ship-jacked' topic is concerned, I am against it.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2014, 10:57:21 PM by sargas » Report to moderator   Logged
Rostin
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +60/-10
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


Conquer the Stars!


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: June 07, 2014, 10:55:57 PM »

Do you think stations should be capturable? They have the same options as planetary modules
Report to moderator   Logged

Join the Solar Enterprises corporation today!
sargas
Master Sergeant
*

Reputation: +179/-38
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438


wandering teacher of the bizarre and unusual


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: June 07, 2014, 10:58:02 PM »

no


destroyed yes, captured no (unless the above ^ is  implemented)...
« Last Edit: June 07, 2014, 10:59:49 PM by sargas » Report to moderator   Logged
Dadds
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +41/-142
Offline Offline

Posts: 734



View Profile
« Reply #63 on: June 08, 2014, 01:11:53 PM »

simple thing here: if a ship overcomes another ship, and you want to introduce "pink slips" where the one who beats the other one takes all the spoils so be it. There is no way in hell that a tiny vessel should somehow miraculously take possession of an opponents warship without winning the field of battle first based on a die roll.  That is how i read this thread. Perhaps i misread it though the sentiment is there. you want my ship, come and beat me in a fair fight to earn it!
Report to moderator   Logged

___________________________________________
Dadds
Commander-in-Chief [IMG], Galactic Council member
Matamaure001
Staff Sergeant
*

Reputation: +187/-22
Offline Offline

Posts: 448

An empire builder


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2014, 06:22:22 PM »

I agree with your last post Dadds
Report to moderator   Logged
sargas
Master Sergeant
*

Reputation: +179/-38
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438


wandering teacher of the bizarre and unusual


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: June 08, 2014, 07:30:26 PM »

to get back to the original topic, I would like to see this:

LOOT, CAPTURE, or DESTROY as 3 different options and not LOOT or CAPTURE/DESTROY...just make CAPTURE harder than DESTROY.  1

as far as the 'ship-jacked' topic is concerned, I am against it.

this is what the original topic was meant to read.

Ship capture is in another thread, (don't be lazy) re-read and respond to that topic over there where it belongs...


1for example, if looting takes 1X hours, and Capture/Destroy takes 2X hours (as it is now), just add this:

Loot - 1X hours, Destroy - 2X hours, and Capture 3X hours.


(edit to edit my previous statement)
« Last Edit: June 08, 2014, 07:42:29 PM by sargas » Report to moderator   Logged
JoolzVern
Sergeant
*

Reputation: +13/-10
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


Nobody ever listens to Tim the wizard...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 09, 2014, 12:19:21 AM »

to get back to the original topic, I would like to see this:

LOOT, CAPTURE, or DESTROY as 3 different options and not LOOT or CAPTURE/DESTROY...just make CAPTURE harder than DESTROY.  1

as far as the 'ship-jacked' topic is concerned, I am against it.

this is what the original topic was meant to read.

Ship capture is in another thread, (don't be lazy) re-read and respond to that topic over there where it belongs...


1for example, if looting takes 1X hours, and Capture/Destroy takes 2X hours (as it is now), just add this:

Loot - 1X hours, Destroy - 2X hours, and Capture 3X hours.


(edit to edit my previous statement)

I think SirEmi put it like that to make certain you wouldn't be able to choose if you capture or destroy to avoid everyone capturing and few modules being destroyed ever. Even if it's harder people will capture and this throws off the game balance. I also don't think it's lazy to continue to discuss ship capture since lisunken brought it up. Sorry for digressing but it's lisunken's fault lol.


...no way in hell that a tiny vessel should somehow miraculously take possession of an opponents warship without winning the field of battle first based on a die roll.  That is how i read this thread. Perhaps i misread it though the sentiment is there. you want my ship, come and beat me in a fair fight to earn it!

No, what I propose goes something like this:
The first wave of combat wouldn't be combat, but a seperate dice roll to determine if anyone gets caught in a tractor beam provided they have one. Something like combat speed would affect  it, but even the best advantage would still only have a small chance of catching someone and paralyzing their ship- and only one ship per battle.

Then you'd have the normal battle 'based on a die roll', only where the paralyzed ship could not attack. This doesn't mean you'd lose, or lose the ship necessarily. You could endure the battle, and just take some extra damage. But there's a small chance that when paralyzed even a big ship could still get commandeered. So if say with the best odds of like 20% on your tractor beam you paralyze the enemy. You then have maybe a 10% max chance for your marines to capture the crippled ship in battle.

With those odds, this setup would mean that your overall chance of capturing/being captured under optimum conditions would be 2% and the max buff could be capped to bring it to maybe 1-1.5% where at best Raph would have a 2 in 100 chance of capturing a ship per battle and at worst you'd have a 1-1.5% chance to get his. Big players would have only a marginal advantage, and smaller players would have a very slim chance to luck out and win despite what would otherwise be overwhelming odds.

And Mata, I think it is unfair if there's practically no chance of a ship losing simply because it's stats are very superior and no chance of anyone losing a ship regardless. There should be a chance for your ship to lose anyway. I mean granted in a fight between David and Goliath the big guy usually wins, but not necessarily as in the story of David and Goliath. The fact you CAN'T lose as the proverbial Goliath, is unfair and unrealistic. Sure I could build myself up past you, but that's beside the point entirely. This is about realism, balance, and introducing real loss to the dynamic, not the fact that you're big and I'm not.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2014, 12:50:17 AM by JoolzVern » Report to moderator   Logged

offnow.org <-Stop the NSSA's subversion of your security
Prism-Break.org <-Ways to secure your data as much as possible
EFF.org <-Electronic Frontier Foundation
Stopkillerrobots.org <-Stop autonomous drones designed to hunt people
Antilak
Corporal
*

Reputation: +18/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 139



View Profile
« Reply #67 on: March 01, 2017, 03:19:09 PM »

I know this thread is 2.5 years old, but....

I like Sargas's idea. I encountered this many times where I wanted to just capture some miners and then send them to owner, or at least send a payment to them of comparable sum. Capturing their miners would allow you to either send them or to pay the other player for most of the loss of their miners. The best option would be a way to mail/send the miners after you capture them.

I would expect capturing should require more marines and/or more time for the mission to complete.

I understand JoolzVern about how it disturb game balance since capturing miners is easy and miners can be expensive, so most players might choose to capture. Perhaps one way to get around this is not allow the capturing player to use the module, but instead can only sell or send it to the original owner. This actually might make sense, since modules might have encryption codes only the owner possesses.

Also if a player is placing extremely valuable modules on a planet then why would they also leave them defenseless? I started protecting my prospector missions with combat-capable ships. I know it's inefficient, but otherwise I risk another player destroying them. Prospector missions aren't balanced since combat CAN be involved via PvP--so the reward SHOULD be higher than it's now. Nonetheless, highly valuable miners on planets aren't going to (and shouldn't) easily be captured if they're defended.

Another thing worth pointing out is currently autoloading is capped at 6 hour intervals. So how much your station will autoload from the planet is limited by the load size of the miners and hte number of miners on the planet. For normal miners, this is about MK 165. You don't need better miners if you're relying on autoload. So any hypothetical capture isn't going to net much better unless players are using the universal miners (making advantage of the larger load size) or are loading between the 6 hour intervals.

This idea has less significance now that stars nova, but it could still be useful for players who do prospector missions.

One problem--I guess--is you need to donate at least $5 to send payments to other players. Would need to be another option for froobs. Perhaps allow non-paying players to send items/QP to other players in a limited amount? Or to send captured things free?

EDIT: I want to be clear about what JoolzVern said. Essentially, if miners are easy to capture and tend to be high MK or valuable, almost every player will choose to capture them. This could mess up the game balance by greatly increasing the incentive to attack planet modules. Imagine finding a universal miner someone dumbly left behind? Wouldn't you capture it? You absolutely would, especially if capture was 100%, even if it required double or triple the time. Currently, universal miners are only purchasable with QP.

When I was doing prospector missions, my biggest liability were gas giants, since they tended to have more module space. I might be able to put 40 atmospheric miners on a gas giant, or even more. For 40 slots, that's 741855 x 40 = 29,674,200 solars. For advanced it's maybe 42 million solars. This is why I started protecting my prospector missions with combat-capable ships.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2017, 04:07:14 PM by Antilak » Report to moderator   Logged

"Lots of things happen after you die - they just don't involve you." - Louis C.K.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!