Ship systems should wear out on normal use

Louella

Louella
https://community.elitedangerous.com/galnet/uid/565c3a709657baca51303c41

Galactic Circumnavigation
30 NOV 3301
On the 1st of May 3301, an Asp Explorer named 'Skyprowler', piloted by Commander Katejina, left its berth in the Smethells 56 system and began an ambitious expedition to circumnavigate the Milky Way.


During the epic journey, Commander Katejina travelled to some of the furthest reaches of the galaxy, including Sagittarius A* and the distant Aphelion regions. The intrepid commander catalogued data on almost 16,000 star systems, travelled in access of 400,000 light years, and clocking in a total of 201 consecutive days in the cockpit.


Katejina returned from her expedition last week to the congratulations of the galactic community. Her achievements have been catalogued, and will no doubt inspire future adventurers.


Commander Erimus
Click to expand...

Alright.

Okay, so look at those numbers, 400,000 light years, 201 days in space. Asp Explorer.


Now, look at the ideas for maintenance and systems wear that have been suggested. Where things fail and have to be replaced. Where maintenance has to be carried out by the SRV while the ship is landed. Where the AFMU is needed to maintain ship systems.

Which requires a minimum of 6 slots. 2 for the scanners (discovery and surface) that are the reason for going exploring. 2 AFMUs, because they can't repair themselves, so you need one to maintain the other. A vehicle hangar to operate the SRV. And a fuel scoop. 6 slots.

Is it the intention that long range exploration trips should only be able to be carried out in the Asp Explorer, and not in the Asp Scout, the Diamondbacks, or any other smaller ship ? Because the Asp Explorer has more than 6 slots for equipment, but those other ships do not.

Essentially, should other people be able to repeat Katejina's voyage ? Should people have to stop on a convenient planet every 20,000ly ? Should their ships be unable to travel more than say 100,000 ly before irreparably breaking down due to no starport level maintenance ?

What is the intended vision behind modules wearing out ?
 

S. Belmont

S. Belmont
samuelb said:
I think this thread was created to promote another contentious argument. Before we have realistic wear on modules (and in 3300 when manufacturing processes are orders of magnitude better than current ones it should take years not weeks, by which time life in a hostile space will have caused damage, doh) can we please have ways to improve our gameplay with computers, you know the things that in 3300 can do so much, apparently not in a ship though (route planner > 1000 ly, travel history, trade computer, auto create functions, planetary auto pilot, SRV auto pilot, planetary navigation computers, etc., etc., etc.) as well as ironing out all the bugs (large and small). Can we also have more ships, more missions, habitable planet landings, more station designs, more planetary base designs, better BGS (and methods to track and record actions, see above), Thargoids, other life forms, ice ring mining (water is a real commodity in outer space, Hydrogen and Oxgygen don't grow on trees...., er.... well you know what I mean). Can we also have bigger player groups, dedicated comms for groups (yes, yes, I know), monetary transfer systems that are not based on chucking stuff out of your cargo hatch. The list is endless and you want a realistic module damage system which, as I have already mentioned (see the first bracketed comment) would be all but pointless, please, please, please stop this nonsense. We all have our ideas of how things should be but, really? That is your suggestion? Really... well nevermind. I do not mean to be rude, I am just flabbergasted at this suggestion given everything else you could have suggested.
Click to expand...
Well, (sigh) I really don't expect that developers pick this feature to be the next thing they implement, so don't you worry. I honestly thought this was a good idea and wanted to share it and see are there any likeminded. There are, but more are against. And that is ok! But like I said previously, I really am surprized how hostile some responses are.
 

Hatchepsut

Hatchepsut
NO.

But even if this where true and wear and tear come into play. IT WOULD TAKE YEARS of punishment and wear .... not a few days and weeks like we use them.
 

Trekari

T
S. Belmont said:
Well, (sigh) I really don't expect that developers pick this feature to be the next thing they implement, so don't you worry. I honestly thought this was a good idea and wanted to share it and see are there any likeminded. There are, but more are against. And that is ok! But like I said previously, I really am surprized how hostile some responses are.
Click to expand...

Why would you be surprised? You're the one who said, "...players will hate it..."

As it turns out; you're correct. Players think it's a stupid mechanic to add MORE grind on top of the base gameplay, which is Grinderator Model G1000.

If you want your crap to break, roleplay it. Maybe take a hammer to your PC while you're at it, and roleplay that it just "broke down" all on its own, like you want our ships to do.
 

Nitek [pl]

Banned
N
Trekari said:
Why would you be surprised? You're the one who said, "...players will hate it..."

As it turns out; you're correct. Players think it's a stupid mechanic to add MORE grind on top of the base gameplay, which is Grinderator Model G1000.

If you want your crap to break, roleplay it. Maybe take a hammer to your PC while you're at it, and roleplay that it just "broke down" all on its own, like you want our ships to do.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When I hear the stupid nerf +more grind ideas the only thing I want to hammer is people :]
 

CMDR_UberDude

Banned
CMDR_UberDude
Trekari said:
Why would you be surprised? You're the one who said, "...players will hate it..."

As it turns out; you're correct. Players think it's a stupid mechanic to add MORE grind on top of the base gameplay, which is Grinderator Model G1000.

If you want your crap to break, roleplay it. Maybe take a hammer to your PC while you're at it, and roleplay that it just "broke down" all on its own, like you want our ships to do.
Click to expand...

+rep for the laugh. :D
 

S. Belmont

S. Belmont
Trekari said:
Why would you be surprised? You're the one who said, "...players will hate it..."

As it turns out; you're correct. Players think it's a stupid mechanic to add MORE grind on top of the base gameplay, which is Grinderator Model G1000.

If you want your crap to break, roleplay it. Maybe take a hammer to your PC while you're at it, and roleplay that it just "broke down" all on its own, like you want our ships to do.
Click to expand...
Oh no, where did I say "players will hate it"?
 

shambles1980

shambles1980
"the following is called satire. i am disclaiming it for the benefit of those who fail to grasp satire"

Hello, I play elite, the game is very shallow and needs to be better, personally id ont know what i mean by shallow so i will just say shallow. if any one mentions ideas that would ad diversity or depth to any part of the game then i will say it is a bad idea because it is not in the game i play now. I used to make 50mill an hour before they nerfed it.. elite now sux. it used to be so easy to just fly from one place to another. i could take 200t of slaves, and was impossible to fail the mission.. maybe i would get a fine. if i was killed i could just get my ship back and re buy slaves to finish the mission.. this was better because "reasons" They also increased npc armaments giving them plasma accelerators and rail guns. and interdiction rates if i stack missions are now ludicrous.. I mean if this was real life and i was running 20 different smuggling runs for all the major cartels i dont think all the police would be after me like they are in elite. this sux.
i don't want them to add any in game dynamics because like i said this is a bad idea.
i would like the game to go back to how it was with npcs that never interdicted and exploits every where so i could make 50-100m an hour, but the ai was stupid and flew in to rocks and the game was shallow.. So if you could make the ai better but not make them better. and make the game less shallow by not adding any depth or features to it that would be swell.
Signed
An Elite Player
 

S. Belmont

S. Belmont
shambles1980 said:
"the following is called satire. i am disclaiming it for the benefit of those who fail to grasp satire"

Hello, I play elite, the game is very shallow and needs to be better, personally id ont know what i mean by shallow so i will just say shallow. if any one mentions ideas that would ad diversity or depth to any part of the game then i will say it is a bad idea because it is not in the game i play now. I used to make 50mill an hour before they nerfed it.. elite now sux. it used to be so easy to just fly from one place to another. i could take 200t of slaves, and was impossible to fail the mission.. maybe i would get a fine. if i was killed i could just get my ship back and re buy slaves to finish the mission.. this was better because "reasons" They also increased npc armaments giving them plasma accelerators and rail guns. and interdiction rates if i stack missions are now ludicrous.. I mean if this was real life and i was running 20 different smuggling runs for all the major cartels i dont think all the police would be after me like they are in elite. this sux.
i don't want them to add any in game dynamics because like i said this is a bad idea.
i would like the game to go back to how it was with npcs that never interdicted and exploits every where so i could make 50-100m an hour, but the ai was stupid and flew in to rocks and the game was shallow.. So if you could make the ai better but not make them better. and make the game less shallow by not adding any depth or features to it that would be swell.
Signed
An Elite Player
Click to expand...
Thank you for this, could not put it better my self :D
 

Mephane

Mephane
Hatchepsut said:
NO.

But even if this where true and wear and tear come into play. IT WOULD TAKE YEARS of punishment and wear .... not a few days and weeks like we use them.
Click to expand...

Considering how unrealistically fast reputation decay works, we'd end up having to replace any module after two weeks of moderate gameplay.
 
Last edited:

[VR] Deggial

[VR] Deggial
I think, the OP's idea has potential.

Some of my thougths in no particular order:
- Module prices are not necessarily carved in stone. Who sais that, should something like this be implemented, the large modules won't be reduced in their price in order to allow affordable replacements?
- Module malfunctions wouldn't be necessarily all-or-nothing events. Maybe a damaged frame shift drive doesn't stop working completely, but needs 50% more time to charge (if the module is malfunctioning). The probability ot the malfunction and the increased chargeing-time might correspond to its repair status. Permanent loss of 5% max speed with damaged thrusters would be another example of gradual damage effects. Many, many others are thinkable.
- Permanent module decay could be linked to its health status reached, not to its time used. Every time a module is damaged more than (for example) 50%, one percent might stay "unfixable" after repair, leading to a slow degeneration - but only IF the module got heavily damaged! The damage could occur in a fight or after long neglegted wear-and-tear damage (if re-introduced to a certain extend).
- Another possibility would be that there is always some permanent damage, when modules are repaired. However, the amount of permanent damage is related to the chosen method: 0,2% decay for every 10% damage, if repaired in a professional dry dock / 0,5% per 10% damage if the player does the repair personally (in a future expansion, maybe already with the upcoming crew members) / 1% per 10% damage if the AFMU is used.

I see multiple benefits for the gaming experience:
- The player is confronted with an interesting choice: risk a malfunction (or just a reduced effectivity) vs. the possibility to save money for future investments.
- Immersive gameplay: 'Firefly' and various other Sci-Fi films/books feature space traders and their ships always balancing at the edge of a disaster.
- New possibilities for missions: "Oh, I have heard you are in dire need for a pair of new thrusters, but lack some credits, right now? Hey, this is your lucky day! Incidentally, I have exactly what you need in my storehouse and I am willing to sell it to you for 1/4th of its usual price... there is just this little favour I ask you for in return..."
- Another mission reward could be the affordable service of a skilled engineer who is able to repair otherwise unfixable module decay.
- All the possibilities Sleutelbos mentioned some pages above: purchasing second-hand ships and flying halve-wrecks of types, you couldn't afford otherwise.
- A feature in the upcomming addition of crew members could be the tweaking of otherwise sub-optimal working modules - and how could this be worthwhile, if everything always works with 100% effectivity anyway? (Interesting mini-games are necessary in order to achieve fun gameplay, but this is a completely different topic.)

Really, there are MANY reasons, this idea is worth an unprejudiced consideration!
 
Last edited:

Kryoten

Kryoten
This is a great idea... for later. After the ability to get up and do maintenance and fix your ship yourself is in, this is an awesome idea. But until a person can get up and replace their hydraulic flux boosters, it's too frustrating for them to break down in the middle of space... ESPECIALLY if you're thousands of light years away from any station to get them fixed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom