Could ED benefit from 'Soft Death' mechanics?

@Lateralus I believe you need to clearly spell out why you think a ship that has been defeated should have a soft death period.

  • It is clearly not to any benefit of the target. You aren't going to convince anybody. It is 100% a bad deal for the target.
  • It does allow the pirate to collect more loot with less chance of target ship blowing up.
  • It does reduce the ability of an unwilling target to logout.

I might give a rational answer that would explain it all:

It's just a case of "I would like the people play this game the way I like lit, and you FD do something to make it happen".

As simple as that.
 
Last edited:
No. No you don't just die. Running out of fuel is a very long drawn-out process. It doesn't just happen. And if it does eventually happen it is a self inflicted incident. And I believe relatively quite rare. Since 2017 I have never had a ship run out of fuel.

That is entirely different from a situation from interdicted by a pirate. Since 2017 I have never had a ship run out of fuel (I have spent a very large % of my time in deep space). But I have been interdicted.
lol I'm not talking about dying because of running out of fuel.. I'm talking about the concept of calling for help when incapacitated away from the bubble. Its the only similarity here... using it as am example of a similar scenario. I don't know why we're fixating on fuel now.
 
lol I'm not talking about dying because of running out of fuel.. I'm talking about the concept of calling for help when incapacitated away from the bubble. Its the only similarity here... using it as am example of a similar scenario. I don't know why we're fixating on fuel now.
If the action of calling for help is the only similarity, why are you using it as an example to support you idea?

It has absolutely NO other similarity, relationship, equivalency, or relevance to the discussion.
 
If the action of calling for help is the only similarity, why are you using it as an example to support you idea?

It has absolutely NO other similarity, relationship, equivalency, or relevance to the discussion.
For the record Robert Maynard brought up the subject... but the similarity is obvious. You need help from a third party to survive the scenario, and you're away from the bubble. I'm not sure what the ambiguity is there lol. It's pretty straight forward...
 
lol I'm not talking about dying because of running out of fuel.. I'm talking about the concept of calling for help when incapacitated away from the bubble. Its the only similarity here... using it as am example of a similar scenario. I don't know why we're fixating on fuel now.

For the record Robert Maynard brought up the subject... but the similarity is obvious. You need help from a third party to survive the scenario, and you're away from the bubble. I'm not sure what the ambiguity is there lol. It's pretty straight forward...

So you believe because the game offers a possible solution to a relatively rare and easily preventable situation elsewhere in the game, a similar solution should be provided to your new game idea that players might be forced into. And this solution requires a 3rd party's assistance.

Even though the situation is completely different. And not relevant for comparison. If its okay there, then its okay here.
 
Nice strawman there, remember to dress him before burning.
Yet the arguments you presented are full of fallacies. I'm talking about your arguments, not you.

Soft death is a placeholder mechanic in Star Citizen
Your reference material for this mechanic is flawed. Soft death was put into that game temporarily until the engineering system is completed. It's not a suitable long term implementation because it bypasses the mechanics of submodules. Elite already has support for this so it doesn't make sense to take a step backward.

Elite already has support for ship disabling
Your argument evaded this by saying it's "messy". This is a skill issue. Soft death would make it easier for you. You haven't justified why the game should be easier for you. Soft death allows you to blindly shoot at the target (any weapon, no sub-targeting) which is much easier than using the correct weapons and targeting the right modules.

Soft death isn't needed to solve the problems you have
The three main issues you seem to have (correct me if I'm wrong) are...

1) Disabled ships don't come to a stop when you disable them. Soft death doesn't solve this problem. In Elite, a ship that's moving from being disabled will continue moving unless some counteracting force stops it. If you want the ship to automatically stop after being disabled that has nothing to do with soft death. This can be solved in all kinds of ways like tractor beams, stasis fields, etc. And it's technically already possible with bump stopping but, like I said, skill issue.

2) Disabled ships can repair themselves and fly away. You're asking for a new ship state that doesn't make any sense with how modules and subsystems work in this game. You're also asking for this state to be irreparable without outside help. But if that's the goal then it can easily be solved by specialized weapons that will never explode the ship. Just like how distortion weapons work in Star Citizen. That way you can keep shooting the ship to keep it disabled causing reboot/repair sequence to not work. Soft death just isn't needed to solve this problem.

3) Players can combat log to avoid being pirated. This is solved by a longer logout timer and has nothing to do with soft death.
 
So you believe because the game offers a possible solution to a relatively rare and easily preventable situation elsewhere in the game, a similar solution should be provided to your new game idea that players might be forced into. And this solution requires a 3rd party's assistance.

Even though the situation is completely different. And not relevant for comparison. If its okay there, then its okay here.
what?

Yet the arguments you presented are full of fallacies. I'm talking about your arguments, not you.

Soft death is a placeholder mechanic in Star Citizen
Your reference material for this mechanic is flawed. Soft death was put into that game temporarily until the engineering system is completed. It's not a suitable long term implementation because it bypasses the mechanics of submodules. Elite already has support for this so it doesn't make sense to take a step backward.

Elite already has support for ship disabling
Your argument evaded this by saying it's "messy". This is a skill issue. Soft death would make it easier for you. You haven't justified why the game should be easier for you. Soft death allows you to blindly shoot at the target (any weapon, no sub-targeting) which is much easier than using the correct weapons and targeting the right modules.

Soft death isn't needed to solve the problems you have
The three main issues you seem to have (correct me if I'm wrong) are...

1) Disabled ships don't come to a stop when you disable them. Soft death doesn't solve this problem. In Elite, a ship that's moving from being disabled will continue moving unless some counteracting force stops it. If you want the ship to automatically stop after being disabled that has nothing to do with soft death. This can be solved in all kinds of ways like tractor beams, stasis fields, etc. And it's technically already possible with bump stopping but, like I said, skill issue.

2) Disabled ships can repair themselves and fly away. You're asking for a new ship state that doesn't make any sense with how modules and subsystems work in this game. You're also asking for this state to be irreparable without outside help. But if that's the goal then it can easily be solved by specialized weapons that will never explode the ship. Just like how distortion weapons work in Star Citizen. That way you can keep shooting the ship to keep it disabled causing reboot/repair sequence to not work. Soft death just isn't needed to solve this problem.

3) Players can combat log to avoid being pirated. This is solved by a longer logout timer and has nothing to do with soft death.
OK... but disabling a ship doesn't prevent combat logging, so your wall of text doesn't invalidate this concept.
 
So you believe because the game offers a possible solution to a relatively rare and easily preventable situation elsewhere in the game, a similar solution should be provided to your new game idea that players might be forced into. And this solution requires a 3rd party's assistance.

You are claiming your "call for help solution" is your idea as the only way for a defeated cmdr to save their ship because a similar solution was used somewhere else in the game. This is a terrible line of logic. You are comparing completely different things that are just.... different. And anyway, when you are low on fuel you can exit the game without losing your ship. Its just not equivalent. Or similar.

Trying to force a solution from a completely unrelated part of the game into your new idea makes no sense. Its a terrible idea. I'm not sure why I'm discussing it because its just not gonna happen. There are too many problems with it.
 
I don't really have a problem with OP's suggestion per se, it ain't that bad. The way I understand it, it's just another layer of protection before the rebuy screen. Ultrasoftcore if you want... Or something like being downed in a team BR. As long as the CMDR is willing to wait in this disabled state and not do anything else in the game, he can be rescued by other players and avoid the rebuy. Cool, I guess. Could make for some epic rescues for people with lots of explo data, freshly farmed titan drive components etc.

The rest is just glazing on the top: how to make the ship stop, how to "give up" without existing to menu, how to exit to menu without exiting the disabled state, instance stuff etc.

Of course, we're talking here about mechanics like deceleration limpets or grapple hooks. that FDEV haven't bothered to implement for the current game state. So I don't really see this happening. But I have nothing against the idea itself...

Besides, in my headcanon, there's always a ship husk floating about when I get killed. How else would I be getting my engineered modules back at rebuy? The rescue rangers found them and towed them back to base, right? Too bad they can never find my blackbox. Anyway, it has to be the rescue rangers. Don't tell me Felicity Farseer has copies of my egineered FSD, which I deliberately painted mint green, in some underground bunker somewhere.
 
The problem is there’s no protection for the CMDR. Maybe the murder hobo is feeling generous today, maybe they fire a few extra shots and ship goes boom!

Maybe the pirate strips the cargo and then kills the poor CMDR who can’t log out and can’t repair their own ship and was waiting patiently for the ordeal to be over. 😞
And....

The defeated cmdr can:

a) Take an early rebuy. Sounds like the only reasonable option.
- a duplicate ship is created so when the defeated cmdr respawns elsewhere the pirate still has the disabled ship to rob, shoot-up, whatever.

b) Sit there helpless and do nothing, while alarms and warnings are flashing, while life support is draining, watching the pirate steel the cargo. The defeated cmdr can call a friend to come in a ship with repair limpets to make the ship function again. Because everybody has a friend nearby flying a ship with repair limpets. And if the pirate is lucky they can also defeat the helpful friend when they show up. And of course the pirate can destroy the disabled ship at any time. All this so you can maybe save yourself the rebuy on your ship and any cargo the pirate didn't take. Do this all before life support runs out. Sounds like a great idea!
 
Last edited:
Honestly, with you insisting so much on disabling combat logging being a central issue there doesn't seem to be much more in that idea than "I want my victim completely helpless and unable to escape even if it (legally) menu logs. Sounds like a ganker's wet dream.

As for that bad comparison: Unless they completely drain both fuel tanks, an explorer out in the black almost always has multiple ways to get out of their misery. Calling for help is only one of them. As has been said before.

Also: Drats! I've been roped into another Hotel thtead. All I wanted to do is be that guy and poimt out that destroying a PP doesn't disable a ship. Which a seasoned pirate should know.
 
Drats! I've been roped into another Hotel thtead.
It isn't quite the Hotel, just the Annexe
All I wanted to do is be that guy and poimt out that destroying a PP doesn't disable a ship.
Nah, you got all wrong mate...
It's zero% hull, you know, the ship is dead with that, so goodness knows how I managed to land successfully during the Thargoid war quite so often!

It is just another CL rant...

At least the OP has Scam Citizen to play, after all, it must be considerably more stable now than in December last year! (Yes, I paid to be robbed too)
 
b) Sit there helpless and do nothing, while alarms and warnings are flashing, while life support is draining, watching the pirate steel the cargo. The defeated cmdr can call a friend to come in a ship with repair limpets to make the ship function again. Because everybody has a friend nearby flying a ship with repair limpets. And if the pirate is lucky they can also defeat the helpful friend when they show up. And of course the pirate can destroy the disabled ship at any time. All this so you can maybe save yourself the rebuy on your ship and any cargo the pirate didn't take. Do this all before life support runs out. Sounds like a great idea!

What an exciting way to spend gaming time!
I'm sure everybody would like to play the role of defeated cmdr, it sounds like fun! And he/she would repeat it over and over again, always in Open, cause rebuy is free. Oh joy!
 
Don't know if my sarcasm meter is broken, but just in case: In the beginning OP claimed destroying the PP would disable a ship. Which roped me in as I am, as you know, a pedant for those kid of things. But the goalpost shifted a lot in the course of this thread.
It used to, 100% doing PvE piracy when Low Temp diamonds were first introduced into the game... Something was tweeked later and it stopped working. Maybe NPC power priorities were fixed or something like that. But it did used to work around 2016/2017ish.
 
Back
Top Bottom