Repairing subsystems - not quite balanced yet

Quineloe

Quineloe
So I've upgraded back to a 7A shield generator on the Clipper.

Lost the shields. Took a few rounds of MC fire before I finished off my target.

Was greeted by this repair bill:

buFtJLC.jpg

let's disregard for now that my hull with military grade armor hardly protected my large clipper from medium weapons fire.

200k for 40% of shield generator damage? When the hull was only 4k to repair?

So I sold the shield generator, and bought it back.

vfvTZ9V.png

Same balance - fixed shield generator.

For the next trip, I replaced the fuel scoop with an AFMU. And being reckless as usual, I managed to lose shields again (it's not very smart when there's a deadly Python and a dangerous vulture to shoot the Python once to make sure it doesn't run away while you take out the Vulture), took another bunch damage to the shield generator and some other modules

aybvUiS.png


So instead of paying that, I repair it with the AFMU and just pay the hull damage I can't repair that way. Surely the reload price for the AFMU would balance this out, right? Right?

5UkzIqC.png


Hah, no.
 

Vertexico

V
I'm a little confused at what you're identifying as the problem here. Seems to me that you shouldn't be able to sell damaged modules for full price, right? And that the AFMU should do something more related to credit value than moving around percentages?
 

Mephane

Mephane
Interesting. If not a bug or oversight, that means above some price point for the internal modules AFMUs are actually cheaper than using the repair facilities in stations.
 

Quineloe

Quineloe
Vertexico said:
I'm a little confused at what you're identifying as the problem here. Seems to me that you shouldn't be able to sell damaged modules for full price, right? And that the AFMU should do something more related to credit value than moving around percentages?
Click to expand...

1.0 and 1.1 we had massive repair bills on big ships for hull damage. People complained that losing shields and even taking 3-4% damage was causing very high repair bills, and losing like 30% could cost hundreds of thousands credits.
Hull armor became irrelevant, as you would use SCB to prevent hull damage at any cost, and would rather pop another 100cr (in 1.0, then 1000cr in 1.1) SCB than risk getting a single stray laser shot on your ship. Because repairing a single laser hit was a few thousand credits on the larger ships.

Also noteworthy was that in 1.0 and 1.1, ship integrity was tied to outfittings. A d-rated trader had considerably less integrity repairs than an A-rated combat ship of the same type.

1.2 changed both. Hull repairs dropped to a fracture of the current costs, and people were happy. Finally the hull armor was also something we could rely on, finally military grade armor wasn't just a huge money sink. Ship integrity repairs were normalized and no longer took outfittings into account. For D rated traders, it became more expensive, but for A rated combat ships it became significantly less expensive to repair ship integrity.

Bigger ships were still more expensive to maintain and repair, but it was no longer the factor 100 up from smaller ships.

1.3 introduced massively increased prices to repair modules. We're back where we started in 1.0 - never lose your shields, lest you pay massive repairs for minor damages. Armor is once again irrelevant, SCB are everything. You fight until you are out of SCB. Then you get new ones.

I'm merely pointing out how to get around this glaring design mistake for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom