New Module: Weapon Service Bay

[Frenotx]

The weapon service bay serves two functions: 1) Keep the weapons in good working order, and 2) keep the weapons stocked.

• Comes in different sizes like the AFMU, with bigger sizes working faster and having more resources.
• When you have at least one weapon service bay in your ship, selecting a weapon from your modules panel with have a "service" option (like how it has a repair option, if you have an AFMU). When selected, the weapon will retract and power down. The weapon service bay will use its resources to repair the weapon at a much faster rate than a generic AFMU, and also re-stock its ammo. Once it's done, the weapon will automatically power back on and deploy (if your hardpoints are deployed).
• If you set several weapons to "service", the service bay will do them one-by-one. Weapons will only power down and retract when the service bay gets to them. Reduces menu-fiddling and cognitive load during a fight.
• If you have several weapon service bays on your ship, several weapons can be serviced in parallel (one per service bay)

Why this is good:

• Gives combat ships another module to bring along, instead of just MOAR DEFENSE STACKING
• Opens up some of the low ammo weapons to more players (i.e. ones looking to kill many ships per-sortie, like res farmers), instead of leaving those weapons relegated to PvP and occasional assassination missions.
• Gives a good counter to missiles blasting weapons off so easily.
  • The missiles will still disable your weapons, but it's only temporary (instead of fight-ending) since you can quickly get them back into the fight.
• Allows weapon synthesis to be simplified, since you can synthesize ammo for the service bay, instead of needing a variety of materials for different kinds of weapons.
• A "weapon service limpet" version could also be added that could repair / rearm a targeted weapon on another ship, better fleshing out the combat logistics role.

 

[V'larr]

Hmmm.

So, my thoughts are that this is similar enough to the AMFU that I don't think we need to introduce a new module like this that kinda just does the same job, but with ammo restoration too.

I think I'd rather perhaps take the already-existing Refinery, and give it some additional functionality - make it useful for something besides *just* mining, y'know? - and give the refinery the means to take on-board rocks & metals and turn them into ammunition (any kind of ammunition).

Thus you'd have the AFMU for repair and the Refinery for ammunition re-supply (and you'd likely want a mining laser or two if you're planning on extended periods away from resupply).

This leaves open the possibility of doing away with the daft synthesis system, going back to more consistent rules with rocks on your ship taking up mass and space, of course to be tied in with a reset of the Engineers update & a means of storing commodities...not that I have reason to expect Fdev to take the leap of faith, I guess.

 

[Frenotx]

Hmmm.

So, my thoughts are that this is similar enough to the AMFU that I don't think we need to introduce a new module like this that kinda just does the same job, but with ammo restoration too.

I think I'd rather perhaps take the already-existing Refinery, and give it some additional functionality - make it useful for something besides *just* mining, y'know? - and give the refinery the means to take on-board rocks & metals and turn them into ammunition (any kind of ammunition).

Thus you'd have the AFMU for repair and the Refinery for ammunition re-supply (and you'd likely want a mining laser or two if you're planning on extended periods away from resupply).

This leaves open the possibility of doing away with the daft synthesis system, going back to more consistent rules with rocks on your ship taking up mass and space, of course to be tied in with a reset of the Engineers update & a means of storing commodities...not that I have reason to expect Fdev to take the leap of faith, I guess.

One awkward thing about using cargo for synthesis (especially ammo) is the wide spectrum of cargo space possible to have on a ship. Trying to find a number that gives smaller ships a practical amount of reloads without giving bigger ships (functionally) unlimited ammo would be difficult. The thing that differentiates this module from an AFMU is largely the speed that it functions (with its specificity being the drawback). Repairing weapons via AFMU in combat isn't terribly practical. You can get the weapon (technically) working again very quickly, but it will be basically useless due to constant malfunctions. The amount of time it takes to repair a single weapon enough for it to actually be respectability reliable is way way too long to be practical in combat. AFMU is still the best (only) option for keeping your modules in good shape, but if you expect to be fighting a lot and potentially exposed to missiles, grab at least one weapon service bay, too.

The weapon service bay is something that you'd fit on a combat ship. It only works on weapons, but several modules can work in parallel to repair several weapons simultaneously, and they can repair them fast enough to be practical in a fight. Getting blasted by missiles would be a temporary disable, instead of a game-over. The extra ammo would also obviously be of help for a combat ship, allowing them to stay in the field longer, and utilize the low-ammo-high-damage stuff over more of their fights. Imagine if a PvE boat could practically use torpedoes- they'd still only have a few per fight (very slow to reload), but they could use them in far more fights instead of basically only once.

 

[V'larr]

One awkward thing about using cargo for synthesis (especially ammo) is the wide spectrum of cargo space possible to have on a ship. Trying to find a number that gives smaller ships a practical amount of reloads without giving bigger ships (functionally) unlimited ammo would be difficult. The thing that differentiates this module from an AFMU is largely the speed that it functions (with its specificity being the drawback). Repairing weapons via AFMU in combat isn't terribly practical. You can get the weapon (technically) working again very quickly, but it will be basically useless due to constant malfunctions. The amount of time it takes to repair a single weapon enough for it to actually be respectability reliable is way way too long to be practical in combat. AFMU is still the best (only) option for keeping your modules in good shape, but if you expect to be fighting a lot and potentially exposed to missiles, grab at least one weapon service bay, too.

The weapon service bay is something that you'd fit on a combat ship. It only works on weapons, but several modules can work in parallel to repair several weapons simultaneously, and they can repair them fast enough to be practical in a fight. Getting blasted by missiles would be a temporary disable, instead of a game-over. The extra ammo would also obviously be of help for a combat ship, allowing them to stay in the field longer, and utilize the low-ammo-high-damage stuff over more of their fights. Imagine if a PvE boat could practically use torpedoes- they'd still only have a few per fight (very slow to reload), but they could use them in far more fights instead of basically only once.

Could break cargo tonnage down into decimals or hundredths, to allow for cargo that with less mass than a full ton. Elite is definitely a game where, for the most part, bigger just is better no matter what task you're using a ship for (which is why they're so much more expensive than smaller ships) - so I'm not sure there's any helping that in this particular regard.

I feel like AFMUs taking a little while to work is a good counter-balance to being able to repair internals on the fly, weapons oughta be no different in my view.

I think it'd be more appropriate to directly address missile characteristics and whether they ought to do so much damage to external modules - and/or, you could also increase baseline levels of module health for all external modules (perhaps at the same time as doing an Engineer overhaul that doesn't allow us to take any module and make it exponentially better in some characteristic).

 

[Frenotx]

Could break cargo tonnage down into decimals or hundredths, to allow for cargo that with less mass than a full ton. Elite is definitely a game where, for the most part, bigger just is better no matter what task you're using a ship for (which is why they're so much more expensive than smaller ships) - so I'm not sure there's any helping that in this particular regard.

I feel like AFMUs taking a little while to work is a good counter-balance to being able to repair internals on the fly, weapons oughta be no different in my view.

I think it'd be more appropriate to directly address missile characteristics and whether they ought to do so much damage to external modules - and/or, you could also increase baseline levels of module health for all external modules (perhaps at the same time as doing an Engineer overhaul that doesn't allow us to take any module and make it exponentially better in some characteristic).

The problem with current missile damage (to weapons) is that it's a bit of a knife-edge balancing act. If they knock out weapons too quickly (like they do know), then hull strength becomes largely irrelevant since as soon as your shield fails, there's a good chance you're going to quickly lose the fight by virtue of all of your offensive capacity being destroyed. If the external damage is too low, then it becomes pointless since the enemy's hull will explode before you can shut down their weapons. Being able to (effectively) permanently destroy your opponent's ability to fight back is just hugely powerful and fight-dictating. Being able to quickly repair the weapons turns the permanent destruction into a temporary disable. It's still a very strong ability, but FDev can now adjust how long that disable is for such that the effect is attractive, but doesn't decide fights on its own. A temporary disable is less absolute, and thus way easier to tweak and adjust.

It's kind of like reverb cascade- in its current form, it's either extremely strong (instantly delete your opponent's shield), or useless (do not-quite-enough damage to the shield generator, thus having zero practical impact on the fight). As such, balancing it is basically impossible. If it instead first sequentially to boosters, then finally to the shield generator, it world be far easier to balance. Partial damage could still take out 1+ boosters (thus lowering their shield by some amount each), or wipe everything out with sufficient damage. Instead of just 1 or 0, you suddenly have a whole spectrum of potential outcomes.

 

[Nero Tacitus]

+1. Nice idea.

 

[[VR] CMDR TYRTHEMIS]

Great ideas from everybody!!!

 

[Frenotx]

This sounds immersion-breaking and redundant. You have the AFMUs, which repair your weapons anyway, and then you have ammo synthesis, which rearms them. What are you looking for, a cheat that lets you get ammo without spending materials?

The module would have its own ammo, ala AMFUs. It's far from a cheat, since it takes up precious module space. It's not redundant since while AFMUs can repair weapons, they can't do it nearly fast enough to be relevant in a fight. If all you have is an afmu and your weapons get blasted off by missiles, those weapons are pretty much gone for good int the context of that fight.

 

[V'larr]

The problem with current missile damage (to weapons) is that it's a bit of a knife-edge balancing act. If they knock out weapons too quickly (like they do know), then hull strength becomes largely irrelevant since as soon as your shield fails, there's a good chance you're going to quickly lose the fight by virtue of all of your offensive capacity being destroyed. If the external damage is too low, then it becomes pointless since the enemy's hull will explode before you can shut down their weapons. Being able to (effectively) permanently destroy your opponent's ability to fight back is just hugely powerful and fight-dictating. Being able to quickly repair the weapons turns the permanent destruction into a temporary disable. It's still a very strong ability, but FDev can now adjust how long that disable is for such that the effect is attractive, but doesn't decide fights on its own. A temporary disable is less absolute, and thus way easier to tweak and adjust.

It's kind of like reverb cascade- in its current form, it's either extremely strong (instantly delete your opponent's shield), or useless (do not-quite-enough damage to the shield generator, thus having zero practical impact on the fight). As such, balancing it is basically impossible. If it instead first sequentially to boosters, then finally to the shield generator, it world be far easier to balance. Partial damage could still take out 1+ boosters (thus lowering their shield by some amount each), or wipe everything out with sufficient damage. Instead of just 1 or 0, you suddenly have a whole spectrum of potential outcomes.

Indeed, it's a problem with many influencing variables. But, all these variables can be tweaked, so it's not impossible.

If the case were that weapons were tough to take down to begin with, then your module would be like adding on HRPs - you'd be adding to module hitpoint inflation, in an environment where hitpoint inflation is already a big deal (as you've pointed out yourself with your threads!).

Fights lasting long enough to where repairing weapons right in the middle of combat is a valid concern, is a direct result of that hitpoint inflation to begin with - I don't think I want individual engagements to normally be lasting so long that that is a consideration. Way too much attrition combined with hard-counter gimmickry, I don't think it's a good situation to encourage...and I see this idea as encouraging maintaining this status quo.

It's the same thing with the torpedos (and feedback cascade) really - torpedos became useless the moment they added HRPs, and really weren't designed very well as weapons for Elite Dangerous to begin with; they feel like an afterthought inclusion that is mostly there to be a throwback to earlier games. I don't know what the solution ought to be, but I figure there HAS to be some clever way to make torpedos useful *and* different from missiles.

Trying to make torpedos relevant by giving them hard-counter gimmicks like feedback cascade was a terrible idea, and is precisely the kind of thing I want to see eliminated in an ideal balance update; there's plenty other ways to make special effects interesting without being so brokenly powerful.

Figuring this stuff out is going to be really damn difficult so long as hitpoint overinflation exists, though.


All that said, in the environment we have currently, if we are to assume that hitpoint inflation is here to stay, Engineers is here to stay, and that balance is going to continue being uneven and vertical and full of gimmicks and power creep, including missiles that can wipe out external modules in a volley or two....

In *that* case, your idea here does bear merit, in my view.

 

[AimForAverage]

I don't think we should "fix" missile damage to weapons like this. There are after all counters already available--engineer for sturdy & double braced and you move a med weapon from an integrity of 40 to 184 for example (256 for a large weapon). Of course there's a big loss in dps (or increase in heat/energy use depending on the more common mod) , but a module with that kind of integrity is going to be very difficult to knock out. You can also fit point defence(s), at the cost of shield resistances or strength, as you're likely replacing shield boosters.

No-one likes not to have the efficient /overcharged/double shot or whatever, but you do have choices to counter the missile fiends.

 

[V'larr]

I don't think we should "fix" missile damage to weapons like this. There are after all counters already available--engineer for sturdy & double braced and you move a med weapon from an integrity of 40 to 184 for example (256 for a large weapon). Of course there's a big loss in dps (or increase in heat/energy use depending on the more common mod) , but a module with that kind of integrity is going to be very difficult to knock out. You can also fit point defence(s), at the cost of shield resistances or strength, as you're likely replacing shield boosters.

No-one likes not to have the efficient /overcharged/double shot or whatever, but you do have choices to counter the missile fiends.

You're not wrong, it's just...those Engineering choices are bandaids covering up the underlying flaws. I feel like a broken record saying it as often as I do on the forums, but I'd rather see those flaws directly addressed together with a full reset button hit on Engineers & what the Engineers feature achieves.

Bandaids are comfy and can be pretty and all, but...leave them alone too long and it'll decay, fester, the adhesive will become gross and unreliable, and oftentimes the longer you leave them on the more it'll hurt when you take it off - best to get it done sooner rather than later.

 

[AimForAverage]

You're not wrong, it's just...those Engineering choices are bandaids covering up the underlying flaws. I feel like a broken record saying it as often as I do on the forums, but I'd rather see those flaws directly addressed together with a full reset button hit on Engineers & what the Engineers feature achieves.

Bandaids are comfy and can be pretty and all, but...leave them alone too long and it'll decay, fester, the adhesive will become gross and unreliable, and oftentimes the longer you leave them on the more it'll hurt when you take it off - best to get it done sooner rather than later.

I hear what you're saying about engineering- imho it's too powerful; you couldn't possibly compete in a non-engineered ship against an engineered opponent, and you get silly DPS and therefore have to have silly defences. But I think the fact is it can't be reset now. Can you imagine the crying if G5 overcharged autoloading multicannon are removed?

 

[Frenotx]

I hear what you're saying about engineering- imho it's too powerful; you couldn't possibly compete in a non-engineered ship against an engineered opponent, and you get silly DPS and therefore have to have silly defences. But I think the fact is it can't be reset now. Can you imagine the crying if G5 overcharged autoloading multicannon are removed?

Why is it a problem if some people cry about a change, despite it improving the game's health?

 

[V'larr]

I hear what you're saying about engineering- imho it's too powerful; you couldn't possibly compete in a non-engineered ship against an engineered opponent, and you get silly DPS and therefore have to have silly defences. But I think the fact is it can't be reset now. Can you imagine the crying if G5 overcharged autoloading multicannon are removed?

Just like with bandaids, it's going to cause a bit of pain one way or another.

 

[Mickey Cohen]

i'd rather have a service bay that switches out weapons u bring from ur storage with equiped ones, with a repair maybe. So u can adapt on the fly (probably out of combat). maybe make em for small and medium hardpoints only on a class5-6 optional internal?