[VIDEO] "And then I took his weapon... both of them": targeting subsystems :D

[Dejay]

For some reason the video from you wouldn't load for me. Others work fine though, so it's not my connection.

But I found another video about targeting subsystems that is really great by Sam J vs CMDR Snuffler with a suprising end
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkMBrNq6arw

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

wow, talk about let the wookie win! that is some serious rampage you went on there before finally getting taken down.

I hope you are on my team if I ever meet you online

Nice vid too

 

[deusx_ophc]

Guess what guys?
Subsystem targeting is working in alpha 2.2 !

HERE IS A VIDEO that shows me playing with subsystem targeting. It's great to start off with taking their guns away, or maybe their shields... drive... point defence (er what?). Another layer to the already fantastic combat

that is a great vid - thanks for sharing

 

[Commandr Sam]

The one time I managed to get the power plant, I got no bounty too.... Could be a bug, or maybe considered unsporting

Another very devious trick I have found is to disable a Commander by taking out their guns, then destroying the life support.

2 minutes later, no more Commander and no bounty.

PS sorry to all the Commanders I tested this on.

 

[jabokai]

Apologies if someone said this, I've only skimmed the thread - doesn't this subsystem targeting actually weaken combat? By turning it into a "take out subsystem X" and it's game over for your opponent even though they may still be in very good condition (apart from subsystem X)? I can imagine everyone having a macro/VoiceAttack command to target the most advantageous subsystem to disable and it would become the de facto method of combat - target opponent, press Z/say "sub", kill at leisure... except we'd all be doing the same thing (path of least resistance.)

It seems that way from what I've read in this thread, although I've not played MP much so haven't experienced it.

 

[Philip Coutts]

Apologies if someone said this, I've only skimmed the thread - doesn't this subsystem targeting actually weaken combat? By turning it into a "take out subsystem X" and it's game over for your opponent even though they may still be in very good condition (apart from subsystem X)? I can imagine everyone having a macro/VoiceAttack command to target the most advantageous subsystem to disable and it would become the de facto method of combat - target opponent, press Z/say "sub", kill at leisure... except we'd all be doing the same thing (path of least resistance.)

It seems that way from what I've read in this thread, although I've not played MP much so haven't experienced it.

Completely agree. If you have the misfortune to go into Ethics and Credits and get jumped by one of the many bloodthirsty cmdrs they target your power distribution or weapons and that's it game over after 5 seconds. It seems to be far too powerful at the moment and is almost a win button.

 

[Commandr Sam]

Completely agree. If you have the misfortune to go into Ethics and Credits and get jumped by one of the many bloodthirsty cmdrs they target your power distribution or weapons and that's it game over after 5 seconds. It seems to be far too powerful at the moment and is almost a win button.

At the moment on our basic sidewinders shields are very weak. On more "pimped" ships I would expect shields to last much longer, keeping subsystems safe.

I think the ability to kill subsystems is a very important part of the game as otherwise all combat will end in a player death, rather than just weapons disabled and a cargo hold blown open (this is what I expect pirates to do).

 

[jabokai]

I think the ability to kill subsystems is a very important part of the game as otherwise all combat will end in a player death, rather than just weapons disabled and a cargo hold blown open (this is what I expect pirates to do).

It's an interesting addition, but do you think it will end up as I described? A standard method of attack? Why would you NOT target a subsystem seeing as you can only gain from it? Given that, there is (or will be) a standard priority order of attack - weapons, drives, shields, etc...

I'm not against the system but if it's going to boil down to a standard method of attack, that everyone does, it kind of spoils the whole thing, no?

I can see pirates who want the minimum bounty using it differently, as you mention, but in all other cases where you'd rather have a kill (pretty much anyone NOT pirating) then you'd take the easiest path.

 

[Commandr Sam]

It's an interesting addition, but do you think it will end up as I described? A standard method of attack? Why would you NOT target a subsystem seeing as you can only gain from it? Given that, there is (or will be) a standard priority order of attack - weapons, drives, shields, etc...

I'm not against the system but if it's going to boil down to a standard method of attack, that everyone does, it kind of spoils the whole thing, no?

I can see pirates who want the minimum bounty using it differently, as you mention, but in all other cases where you'd rather have a kill (pretty much anyone NOT pirating) then you'd take the easiest path.

I agree, a standard procedure in each fight needs to be something that must be avoided. Each individual ship should have to be fought using specific weaknesses.

A nice addition would be subsystem protection, I am sure I have seen that mentioned some were in the DDF, so the ability to buy extra protection for power dist etc.

 

[Philip Coutts]

The issue I have at the moment is I'm going to be starting with a basic sidewinder and 100 credits. Lots of other people won't meaning I'm basically a sitting duck to having my sub-systems targetted by someone starting with a better ship. Single player on-line is looking pretty tempting at the moment.

 

[Commandr Sam]

The issue I have at the moment is I'm going to be starting with a basic sidewinder and 100 credits. Lots of other people won't meaning I'm basically a sitting duck to having my sub-systems targetted by someone starting with a better ship. Single player on-line is looking pretty tempting at the moment.

Phil, try not to get frustrated with the Alpha, I think in the real game there will be significantly less combat and unless you acquire a bounty there will be no benefit to anyone killing you.

As a trader/explorer the worst we should expect would be pirates demanding our cargo. In the event of engaging in combat with these pirates, from my point of view I would rather the pirates just disabled my combat abilities and took some of my cargo than blew up my ship completely.

 

[Oss133]

It's an interesting addition, but do you think it will end up as I described? A standard method of attack? Why would you NOT target a subsystem seeing as you can only gain from it? Given that, there is (or will be) a standard priority order of attack - weapons, drives, shields, etc...

I'm not against the system but if it's going to boil down to a standard method of attack, that everyone does, it kind of spoils the whole thing, no?

I can see pirates who want the minimum bounty using it differently, as you mention, but in all other cases where you'd rather have a kill (pretty much anyone NOT pirating) then you'd take the easiest path.

As a counterpoint to what you are saying, get rid of subsystems and you are in the same position, surely. A standard attack procedure. Shoot until shields gone. Keep shooting until hull gone. I don't see how this is better.

 

[jabokai]

As a counterpoint to what you are saying, get rid of subsystems and you are in the same position, surely. A standard attack procedure. Shoot until shields gone. Keep shooting until hull gone. I don't see how this is better.

It's not really a counterpoint - I'm saying the system needs to be enhanced exactly because of what you're saying. I don't want to get rid of subsystems, I just don't want it to become a default routine to target X, Y, Z.

But one advantage of the "simpler" system in your example is that combat lasts longer and not (for all intents and purposes) until one of the players disables the other guy's guns, for example.

 

[Philip Coutts]

Phil, try not to get frustrated with the Alpha, I think in the real game there will be significantly less combat and unless you acquire a bounty there will be no benefit to anyone killing you.

As a trader/explorer the worst we should expect would be pirates demanding our cargo. In the event of engaging in combat with these pirates, from my point of view I would rather the pirates just disabled my combat abilities and took some of my cargo than blew up my ship completely.

Beyond frustrated with it to be honest. I don't want to play it anymore because it's just a handful of better pilots making it miserable for me. I go into Ethics and credits and fly for about 10 or 20 seconds then I get attacked for no reason other than "testing", sub-systems targetted and game over. Utterly pointles to even try and play it.

 

[Zieman]

. I go into Ethics and credits and fly for about 10 or 20 seconds then I get attacked for no reason other than "testing", sub-systems targetted and game over. Utterly pointles to even try and play it.

Griefing.

 

[Razorwire]

Its based very much on the location of the part of the ship...
...The problem as I see it is that the critical systems are in the bum meaning its difficult to make a run for it without losing shields.. life support (makes me giggle) or power...

On the sidewinder...
Other ships may be laid out differently.

 

[ianw]

It's not really a counterpoint - I'm saying the system needs to be enhanced exactly because of what you're saying. I don't want to get rid of subsystems, I just don't want it to become a default routine to target X, Y, Z.

But one advantage of the "simpler" system in your example is that combat lasts longer and not (for all intents and purposes) until one of the players disables the other guy's guns, for example.

I have to say at the moment I'm kind of on the fence about sub systeming.

(Obviously this is subject to testing/balancing it's an alpha etc.)

But at the moment if you are not sub systeming and using gimbals you're dead in the water against someone who is.

It seems to have gone back on the improvement re knowing when your shields are hit and having time to respond to surprise attack.

Now you can have your lasers shot off before you can get your act together - which has shortened combat again and put it in favour of the surprise attacker once more.

Still - early days yet...

 

[Dr Wookie]

Beyond frustrated with it to be honest. I don't want to play it anymore because it's just a handful of better pilots making it miserable for me. I go into Ethics and credits and fly for about 10 or 20 seconds then I get attacked for no reason other than "testing", sub-systems targetted and game over. Utterly pointles to even try and play it.

Maybe I'm lucky that I am 5 hours behind most people, and hardly see any other players. I don't usually shoot the ones I do meet unless they attack me first; I prefer to play ID when it's stable. A couple of times, I've been killed twice in a row by some guy in a minute or so and that was very frustrating!

I think that vital systems should be MUCH better protected. As I said before, the hull usually goes before the power plant for me, and I think that should be true for life support too. Shield generators, hard points, drives, and cargo hold doors are fair game, because they have to be on the outside.

Since sidewinders are small, I can see that much of their workings could be lining the walls of the ship. However, I would expect bigger ships to bury their internal systems deeper, with armour.

I could see targeting subsystems as a favoured tactic for people with gimballed weapons, but gimballed weapons aren't always going to be the best option. I doubt that multicannons will be gimballed, or rail guns, so stealthy types might avoid them. Also, for straight up killing, more powerful fixed weapons can do the job faster.

 

[Oss133]

... I don't want to get rid of subsystems, I just don't want it to become a default routine to target X, Y, Z.

But one advantage of the "simpler" system in your example is that combat lasts longer and not (for all intents and purposes) until one of the players disables the other guy's guns, for example.

Fair points. I don't want to remove subsystems either. As for the length of the combat, I would hope that further tweaking and game mechanics will address this. I am still expecting the whole idea of the ship simply going BANG to be replaced with ships with holes in them.

 

[G.T]

So what's the difference between selecting 'Silent Running' and reducing energy output of various modules? Do they both separately reduce the visibility of the ship to radar, gimballed wpns etc?