SRV Rebuilds

[sandkid]

Currently, when you lose your SRV it's gone and done - the only way to replace it is by returning to a station with restocking (or outfitting - not sure if there is a scenario where you can buy SRV in outfitting, but restocking is offline). Anyways, way out in the black (especially in smaller ships) this can be a bummer if you have a bad day roaming.

I propose that SRVs can be synthesized with a significant quantity of materials and fuel.

As an example (really, not much thought put into cost yet), synthesizing an SRV requires:
x50 Iron
x25 Sulphur
X25 Nickel
x5 Arsenic
x5 tons of Fuel from the mothership

The cost must be substantial enough to warrant preparation in advance. Obviously, if you lack the materials post-SRV-destruction...you're kind of out of luck if you don't have a backup SRV in a larger vessel to, you know, get materials. I think this falls in line with the idea of Explorers should be prepared for their journey, but can also prepare while on it (or make up for mistakes with enough prior preparation).

Upon making a new SRV, you have the choice of attempting to restock those materials (in case you mess up again) or you could just vow to be much, much more cautious...and risk losing the SRV permanently until you dock.

I also think this mechanic makes more sense than the fighter bay 'rebuilds', which inherently are designed to be fragile - and thus expected to be lost in combat. SRVs aren't expected to be lost easily...but they do get destroyed. With the risks of icy worlds (and volcanic worlds someday) coming, devising a means for replacing the SRV 'in the field' seems sensible.


Thoughts on cost? Time to synthesize (if longer than the current 5 seconds or so)?
Would you rather SRV bays function like Fighter Bays with 'rebuilds'? (Probably a lot less quantity, given their sturdiness)

 

[MBaldelli]

I like the possibility of it. While I am one of those commanders that is extremely cautious with my equipment, this sort of makes sense. Not sure it should be instantaneous though. There are consequences for driving badly which the return to the Bubble for a replacement might be reinforcing.

Not to mention we're still waiting to see whether different types of SRVs are going to be introduced to the game; one that would be more armoured than the current version which might even negate the need for a field rebuild....

Good idea. I'll be taking a wait and see approach.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Costs could do with tweaking, but yeah, good idea.

5t of fuel is to much, the SRV probably doesn't weigh that much in total. Lol, 1t is sufficient. But technically, it doesn't really matter. All exploration ships have fuel scoops, so it's a bit of a pointless cost.

I'd suggest adding some "think ahead" materials, like data and manufactured materials. Not loads, but just a few. That way, you can still only synthesise an SRV if you prepared a little in advanced and doesn't trivialise the loss of an SRV completely.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[MBaldelli]

I'd suggest adding some "think ahead" materials, like data and manufactured materials. Not loads, but just a few. That way, you can still only synthesise an SRV if you prepared a little in advanced and doesn't trivialise the loss of an SRV completely.

Knowing our luck, it'll be something that could only be stockpiled while within the Bubble.

You know... Like heat sinks. *facepalm*

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Knowing our luck, it'll be something that could only be stockpiled while within the Bubble.

You know... Like heat sinks. *facepalm*

Lol

That's actually what I was thinking, sort of.

I was mostly thinking of a data type that is very common in the bubble, but quite rare outside. The kind of data you find at crashed probes, or those pop up data terminals...?
There's still a chance you might find some, but you're better off stockpiling before you leave.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[shreddog]

I don't like the idea of being able to instantly assemble a vehicle, from pile of ore basically. *poof magic*

-Instead there should be a option to retrieve your damaged SRV when it breaks down.
-No more silly exploding death.
-After retrieving it you have to analyze it and get a schematic overview of all parts.
-Parts are colored after their condition, from green(as new condition) to brownish red(completely busted).
-You can then use different spare parts, that you have in storage, to repair the vehicle.
-Each part takes a bit of time to fit.
-If your SRV is completely obliterated from a massive impact then you can still build a new one if you have every part available.

This would give more reason to have a cargo bay or two fitted on your exploration ship. Never go long expeditions unprepared.

 

[sandkid]

Knowing our luck, it'll be something that could only be stockpiled while within the Bubble.

You know... Like heat sinks. *facepalm*

Indeed...although now you can synthesize heatsinks, so...yeah.


Yeah, the costs aren't that thought out - I'll be in later today and give a good look at materials and try and come up with a more 'calculated' cost to build. Data as a part of the cost isn't a bad idea, but right now data is only really found in the bubble. That counts as a 'prepare ahead', but like MBaldelli said - if the point is to use the bubble as your reason for not messing up...why even have rebuilds if you have to return anyways.

Fuel was a guesstimate and...honestly, just a punishment for messing up. I agree, 1t of fuel is reasonable in cost - if any at all.

The tricky part is finding a balance between 'think ahead' and what's available in the field. Ideally, I'd like the opportunity to rebuild be possible anywhere in the black...pending you gathered the materials prior to destruction (if it was your only SRV). So the materials required don't necessarily have to be easy to find (like Arsenic or Vanadium) but they CAN be found. Preparing in the bubble certainly works, but after a rebuild in the black you can still 'prepare' for the next rebuild...except now you're risking the very SRV you just rebuilt.

If we can get data put into the black (I have a thread on USSs for surface - give it a look) then data absolutely makes sense as a requirement. I am not at all opposed to rebuilding an SRV requiring some effort and time to prepare for.

As for build time...I dunno, 10 minutes? Never checked, can you run synthesis in background while operating ship as normal?

 

[MBaldelli]

As for build time...I dunno, 10 minutes? Never checked, can you run synthesis in background while operating ship as normal?

You can't.. It's always instantaneous as the game currently runs.

Ooh!

I was writing something about it and it dawned on me it might be possible. As the game is currently programmed, we have time limits for a mission to fail and expire. What if that timer is used in an opposite manner? Countdown for the completion of the replacement SRV based on materials committed to the project.

That would satisfy Shreddog's displeasure on instantaneous creation and certainly anyone else that has a problem with it being ready upon commitment.

Heck, the devs can even be sadistic about it: a week or more..

 

[sandkid]

You can't.. It's always instantaneous as the game currently runs.

Ooh!

I was writing something about it and it dawned on me it might be possible. As the game is currently programmed, we have time limits for a mission to fail and expire. What if that timer is used in an opposite manner? Countdown for the completion of the replacement SRV based on materials committed to the project.

That would satisfy Shreddog's displeasure on instantaneous creation and certainly anyone else that has a problem with it being ready upon commitment.

Heck, the devs can even be sadistic about it: a week or more..

Precisely why I asked...it makes sense that something as large and complex as an SRV would require an extended amount of time to build within the confines of a ship. A cooldown to rebuild doesn't make a lot of sense (the bay is empty), but the synthesis taking a long time does.

CRAZY IDEA!

Currently you can only synthesize one object at a time. Ammo takes little time, simple objects a little more (I think heat sinks should take a minute personally).

If the SRV rebuild takes, say, 48 hours? You can't synthesize for those 48 hours unless you cancel the rebuild! That seems a fair trade-off. A week does sound sadistic...but, you know, a week is comparable to flying back to a station too? I personally vote 48 hours...long enough to impact two or three play sessions.

 

[MBaldelli]

If the SRV rebuild takes, say, 48 hours? You can't synthesize for those 48 hours unless you cancel the rebuild! That seems a fair trade-off. A week does sound sadistic...but, you know, a week is comparable to flying back to a station too? I personally vote 48 hours...long enough to impact two or three play sessions.

Seems a fair trade off. As a Deep Space Explorer, the most I've done with my synthesis at the times I've been outside the Bubble has been to replenish my SRV. If I'm without the SRV, I don't do much of anything other than scan, honk & survey...

... Now comes within the Bubble and how that could be exploited.

There would be complaints about the Synthesis/AFMU limitations as it would gum up doing other things while waiting for the SRV to complete. Perhaps the ability to cancel the crafting might be required. With the timer naturally reset when they re-start it. Another sadism would be to lose the materials allocated upon a cancellation.

Other than the probability of purists thinking it OP; it seems moderately sound.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Indeed...although now you can synthesize heatsinks, so...yeah.


Yeah, the costs aren't that thought out - I'll be in later today and give a good look at materials and try and come up with a more 'calculated' cost to build. Data as a part of the cost isn't a bad idea, but right now data is only really found in the bubble. That counts as a 'prepare ahead', but like MBaldelli said - if the point is to use the bubble as your reason for not messing up...why even have rebuilds if you have to return anyways.

Fuel was a guesstimate and...honestly, just a punishment for messing up. I agree, 1t of fuel is reasonable in cost - if any at all.

The tricky part is finding a balance between 'think ahead' and what's available in the field. Ideally, I'd like the opportunity to rebuild be possible anywhere in the black...pending you gathered the materials prior to destruction (if it was your only SRV). So the materials required don't necessarily have to be easy to find (like Arsenic or Vanadium) but they CAN be found. Preparing in the bubble certainly works, but after a rebuild in the black you can still 'prepare' for the next rebuild...except now you're risking the very SRV you just rebuilt.

If we can get data put into the black (I have a thread on USSs for surface - give it a look) then data absolutely makes sense as a requirement. I am not at all opposed to rebuilding an SRV requiring some effort and time to prepare for.

As for build time...I dunno, 10 minutes? Never checked, can you run synthesis in background while operating ship as normal?

Only combat interrupts synthesis I believe. But the time to build an SRV is mostly irrelevant.
Explorers have endless time on their hands. So a timer is simply for immersion purposes only. Most will trigger the synthesis and then scan planets while it completes.

Data does appear outside the bubble, usually in surface POIs, but they are rare.
I found this about 6,000ly out.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[MBaldelli]

Only combat interrupts synthesis I believe. But the time to build an SRV is mostly irrelevant.

Keep in mind, while we explorers wouldn't have a problem with this -- given the game's current build people inside and outside the Bubble will use and utilize this suggested feature.

 

[sandkid]

Keep in mind, while we explorers wouldn't have a problem with this -- given the game's current build people inside and outside the Bubble will use and utilize this suggested feature.

Great points all around. If synthesis is given a go-over on timers a few considerations would be in place (as already mentioned):

1) Synthesis of one item at a time
2) Synthesis time is based on the item's size and/or quantity and quality of materials used
3) Synthesis can be canceled for the purposes of prioritizing a different synthesis or because the need is no longer present

4) *Canceling Synthesis loses the materials (some or all). Purists be darned, this is just bad gameplay. There isn't a need for material sinks in the game as of yet and the only folks canceling an SRV will be explorers because nobody in colonized space should be bothering with a 48 hour timer when they can just fly to the nearest station and restock it. So my personal vote is a resounding 'no' - but this does technically provide a material sink should materials ever play a greater role in the ED economy than they currently do.

The AFMU point is important to consider, so some more considerations...

1) Within the bubble, synthesizing an SRV is essentially pointless except for RP purposes at best...and even then, in RP it wouldn't make sense with a station so close by unless you're REALLY getting in deep on your story. As these are fringe cases, I wouldn't expect any complaints.

2) The (working example) trade-off of 48 hours cuts off all other synthesis...so, yes, AFMU replenishment will be off-limits unless you cancel the SRV build...which further delays you having it. That said, if you've lost the SRV and initiated a rebuild, one would think it fair that the commander should be a bit more careful in their flight knowing that the synthesis is tied up from their most recent bumble.

3) AFMU synthesis would need its own balanced timing...explorers have all day to get it done, combat pilots do not. Fact is, a low AFMU synthesis cycle is likely in order to keep the peace. Explorers win either way, so this is really about keeping combat folks happy and not penalizing them for something that is inherent to their playstyle (taking module damage).

 

[MBaldelli]

Purists be darned, this is just bad gameplay.

Keep in mind, I used to be a DM, so sadism is par for the course. I positively lived and breathed by this attitude:

But seriously...

You took what you were given and able to work out the possibilities and abilities. Particularly when it comes to what the devs said about the AFMU here: Given its very slow rate of repair AFMU is generally considered to be ineffective to counter combat attrition.

I any case commend you for the effort.

 

[sandkid]

Keep in mind, I used to be a DM, so sadism is par for the course. I positively lived and breathed by this attitude:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-...cZA4/s615/tumblr_m351i7TDKS1ql55zvo1_1280.jpg

But seriously...

You took what you were given and able to work out the possibilities and abilities. Particularly when it comes to what the devs said about the AFMU here: Given its very slow rate of repair AFMU is generally considered to be ineffective to counter combat attrition.

I any case commend you for the effort.

Oh...I didn't know that. I thought it was for combatants so they didn't have to dock often (not actually use mid-combat). I don't have an AFMU on my Diamondback Explorer. Never needed one to be honest. Have one on the asp...but I just love my little DBE. Someday I'll get around to funding an anaconda. I've had to resist the urge to kit my Federal Drop Ship for exploration...love that ship so much, the looks and everything. Just a lousy jump range. I'm patient...but I'm not THAT patient. ANYWAYS...


Ok...so if the AFMU is really meant for deep-space travelers (not necessarily explorers only) as a back-up for mistakes, a cancellation cost may be warranted. The ultimate question when it comes to punitive measures is: what sort of gameplay does it derive?

So if we set synthesizing to be a "commitment" of resources (with the understanding that backing out costs you something), the larger that commitment the larger the cost reasonably follows. Backing out on replenishing your life support should be relatively minor since the cost is. Backing out on the SRV should be a major cost then.

You know, it creates an interesting dynamic - punitive or not, I guess it works. If I was in a scenario where I had to cancel the SRV synthesis - possibly at the cost of not being able to restart it - it makes the decision to start the synthesis to begin with more meaningful...as well as the preparation that went into it. Fact is, things happen. I may really need that AFMU or heat sink or whatever RIGHT NOW...and now my earlier mistake with the SRV just became even more costly.

It really builds on the whole 'actions have consequences' - makes for good gameplay when viewed that way. It may result in you driving your SRV more safely from then on, but it also adds a level of thrill to 'risking' it and your other assets. You're awfully far from help, but risks are part of the reward, no?

 

[MBaldelli]

Oh...I didn't know that. I thought it was for combatants so they didn't have to dock often (not actually use mid-combat). I don't have an AFMU on my Diamondback Explorer. Never needed one to be honest. Have one on the asp...but I just love my little DBE. Someday I'll get around to funding an anaconda. I've had to resist the urge to kit my Federal Drop Ship for exploration...love that ship so much, the looks and everything. Just a lousy jump range. I'm patient...but I'm not THAT patient. ANYWAYS...

For the longest time, I ran in a DBX without the use of an AFMU if only because I didn't see the need for it. When I had graduated (of sorts) to an ASPX I have it and a modified power plant on board to allow me to run everything I own without having to juggle what could and couldn't be on at any given time. This includes shields because I never trusted the thought that being that far outside the Bubble, Thargoid wouldn't exist. After all, if we're out there in the Deep Black, why wouldn't they be as well?

Since it's pretty much proven that Thargoids are only happening in one small part of the sandbox, carrying shields has pretty much been superfluous. I'll keep them on anyway if only because I know programmers and developers can throw curveballs at any given time, and I personally hate the thought of being caught with my (figurative) pants down.

I'm not sure when the idea of the AFMU was pitched let alone used, but I do know of several explorers that circumnavigated the Milky Way Sandbox that carried it on their ships. It's a good thing to have for those moments where you suffer from fat fingers, derpy moments or simply the issue where this game simply doesn't play as expected and want to keep going.

When I came into the game (about this time last year) I had big issues with the limitations of the AFMU at the time I joined (around update 2.1) as I believe such a unit should be a panacea for 99% of the issues that could befall an intergalactic explorer. Even the possibility of repairing the cockpit canopy (which wasn't part of the current package). The stories of Amelia Earhart came to mind as I was campaigning for the improvements as this was supposed to be the 34th century and not the early 20th century and creature comfort would be more in place than it is now in the 21st). In fact, I remember back around the time an acquaintance of mine was pushing a campaign he called "The Year of Hell" (his own circumnavigation of the sandbox), and got a rather distinct impression that suggestions of these sort were falling on deaf ears.

Hell, I even had massive issues with structural intergrity wear & tear as back in 2.1 the costs for those repairs were close to the cost of a rebuy (which didn't make any sense to me either). Since that was fixed however, I've been satisfied with the cost, even if I'm finding it sort of unbelievable that the almost alarming rate it disappears. But I'll take the costs as a win and move on from it.

Since then, I've been pushing longer and longer forays out into the Deep Black and noticing that my over-caution is nothing more than my typical response to unknown circumstances in an environment. Heck since I've gotten infinitely better at speed skimming scoopable stars, the only time I used heat sinks was the time I was doing the continuing mission to explore strange new worlds in an overtired state. I might have cursed myself of the attempt, but I never once needed them on my mad dash back to the Bubble after unlocking Professor Palin.

My sadistic suggestion on the loss of materials for the SRV rebuild if it were cancelled is one of those sort of aspects of the game that I think should be there and remain in play. This game's lifeblood is often "decisions and consequences" and without it in place, people often don't think things through. I still vividly remember my friends during many of the gaming sessions where I would be sitting there enigmatic as a cat yet internally balking that these intelligent people would be "YOLO'ing" through campaigns without so much as a second thought. If my friends could do this -- I guarantee you it'll happen with an even larger gaming community. And sometimes we even see it here in suggestions with what's being suggested and how it's being presented.

Overall, this and your other idea on POIs outside the Bubble are great ideas. Because they come with it the necessary levels of complexity to both entertain the casual tourist right down to the hardcore explorer. They offer a level of comfort and perhaps the costs for those capable of expending the necessary materials for both the over-cautious and the cavalier. And best of all they don't seem to be thrown at the player base as a bone to gnaw on while other projects are worked on. They demonstrate careful understanding and perhaps a sort of love that lacks the elements of selfishness I often catch from some suggestions.

Whether the devs utilize these suggestions of yours remains to be seen. I'm still getting used to the speed for which FDev makes changes and improvements to the game based on user suggestions. It's not at all like Digital Extremes where I can be guaranteed improvements to the suggestions and bug reports I make being incorporated within 3 hot fixes. But then again I think that's also because I've been with them a full 4 1/2 years and my voice is often one of lot of voices being used to get something changed/fixed.

If they (Braden and the Development team) don't, I know I will be disappointed.

 

[sandkid]

*snip*

Overall, this and your other idea on POIs outside the Bubble are great ideas. Because they come with it the necessary levels of complexity to both entertain the casual tourist right down to the hardcore explorer. They offer a level of comfort and perhaps the costs for those capable of expending the necessary materials for both the over-cautious and the cavalier. And best of all they don't seem to be thrown at the player base as a bone to gnaw on while other projects are worked on. They demonstrate careful understanding and perhaps a sort of love that lacks the elements of selfishness I often catch from some suggestions.

Whether the devs utilize these suggestions of yours remains to be seen. I'm still getting used to the speed for which FDev makes changes and improvements to the game based on user suggestions. It's not at all like Digital Extremes where I can be guaranteed improvements to the suggestions and bug reports I make being incorporated within 3 hot fixes. But then again I think that's also because I've been with them a full 4 1/2 years and my voice is often one of lot of voices being used to get something changed/fixed.

If they (Braden and the Development team) don't, I know I will be disappointed.

I appreciate the support! It's pretty easy to come up with suggestions that are short-sighted and selfish...hehe...I'm probably doing that at least 50% of the time. That said, I agree that features need to drive actual gameplay rather than be just hold-over gimmicks. I'm a huge fan of little details, especially immersion related (I turn my external lights on/off constantly) but these sorts of details are just that - details. Details are important! They make good games into great games...but details necessitate the presence of a larger piece of content.

I'd love to see more details in terms of exploration - especially in the form of (no pun intended) detailed scan data that better informs me of the environment. But such details need content to be applied to. Knowing a planet is X temperature with Y weather and Z geological stability is nifty, but meaningless if I can't use or interact with that information.

In terms of the SRV rebuild, it's more feature than detail as it offers up a means - through gameplay - to be more confident in exploration. The SRV isn't very fast to begin with, but particularly for small-ship pilots (the most likely to be flown by rookie explorers) there is an intense fear associated with using the SRV in the black OR, after losing an SRV in the black, there is a sour taste left for that explorer that will either result in redundancies in their future builds that decrease player satisfaction...or they'll wholesale swear off exploration. The last is most important: we know future updates involving planets, especially for exploration, will heavily revolve around SRV use - not ship use.

Creating the feature sooner (granted, sooner being a relative term for the glacial pace of FD...hehe) rather than later hedges off such a problem. Ultimately, though, features should never be designed to solve problems. They should be designed to create gameplay or options to that gameplay in the form of actions, consequences and...the best...choices.