Universal Limpet Controller - Yet Another Redesign Idea

[Misty_Dark]

Requiring different types of limpet controllers was a poor design choice. They should have been consolidated into a single limpet controller with context-dependent effects (See here).

With an eye towards how this could be implemented without reworking the whole limpet system, imagine the Universal Controller Hub (UCH): This module comes in sizes 2-8. By itself, it does nothing (like the fighter Hanger). For each size class of the UCH, you can install one sub-module corresponding to the eight traditional limpet controllers. For performance purposes of the sub modules, the Class and Rating of the sub-modules is treated as one lower than the UCH.

Each sub-module has its own line on the Fire Group tab, so they all work the same way they currently do: assign each (sub)controller to a fire-group.

One consequence of this setup is that you could potentially have A LOT of limpets active. If that’s perceived as a problem, you could limit the total number of active limpets to the UCH class (e.g. maximum of 8 on a class 8 UCH). Doing this would necessitate adding the ability to terminate or recall specific limpets (probably from the contact tab like we detonate seismic charges). I like the idea of having limpet controllers run off AMFU-style ammunition.

I am thinking on other things here, what you describe sounds alot like another thing we have in game. The Fighter hangar... A standard module, that fits 1 or 2 fighters and material to 3D print more if needed.
And we can change what model of fighter.... so sounds like a good start to base a new limpet controller module on..


So if model the revised limpet controller after how the Fighter Hangar works. we would get something like a module that hosts limpets, and we have a slot to insert a limpet controller in. So we can now combined more limpet controller in a single module slot, just like we change what SLF we have in out Fighter hangar.
Then we have some material storage for printing new limpets, if the one we have gets lost/destroyed. We also have room for limpets in the limpet module
So we could have material storage to print 10 limpets per slot, this might be to much!

So if we stick to how the current limpets controllers are (and how this could translte to our 3D printer modules)
Class 1 - 1 Active Limpet (1 limpet slot, material for 1x10 extra limpets)
Class 3 - 2 Active Limpets (2 limpet slots, material for 2x10 extra limpets)
Class 5 - 3 Active Limpets (3 limpet slots, material for 3x10 extra limpets)
Class 7 - 4 Active Limpets (4 limpet slots, material for 4x10 extra limpets)


We could also consider to add Class 2/4/6/8 controllers, that are the same as their closest smaller controller, but have double the material, so they can 3D print twice as many limpets, and they could also have room to store 1 extra limpet per slot so you would more stored limpets ready to be used if one is destroyed.


For ease of use, I think it would be prudent for all limpets controller to share the limpets and material storage, so you do not end up an a situation where your size 7 limpet controller have 4 limpets and material to print 30+, but your size 1 controller is totally empty! This is also in the same spirit of the current system, as long as you have limpets available, you can send them out on any available controller. so that means that the extra limpets you get with the suggested class 2/4/6/8 controllers would also be shared.


So this keep us balanced with the existing system, as you have the same limits on how many limpets you can have.
We have reusable limpets, and a way to replenish those if they get destroyed. No need to have actually cargo racks to hold limpets, as these are now stored within limpet controller. There would be a delay from when a limpet is destroyed and a new one have been 3D printed. So being ontop in suicidal limpets would be rewarded.


Now we also get close to having a solution to the prospector limpet situation. For example if we consider these to be a two part product, one is the actual limpet, and the we have prospector payload
The limpet is reusable and flies to the rock, attaches the prospector and then returns to refuel and pick up another prospector. And the prospector we have infinite of (think DSS probes).
And if the limpet misses the rock, it will fly for a while before it will try to return to the ship, if it hits a rock then yeah deliver prospector, or else gets out of range or make it back. .
So having only one prospector controller will have you to wait for the limpet to return to fetch another prospector, so having more than one such controller might be a good idea.



So this have the big potential to not change the existing balance too much, you will get as many limpets as we currently do, but you get a bigger freedom to have more options. as you can now fit 4 different limpets controller in a size 7, which means that you only need to use single slot, to have up to 4 difference limpets, where today you must have 4 slots for limpets controllers to have 4 different limpets.
Also with little changes people could now bring with them more variations, like having refuel and repair limpets with them to take on those distress call signal sources that we mostly ignore because we do not have the right limpet controller, and in almost all those cases I ahve seen those, I was in a ship with Class 7 collector limpet controller, so I could have done 2 collector, 1 repair and 1 refuel. so a little more stuff todo on my way between conflict zones and station. Now I do not really care and ignored those mostly.

You will also not forget to load up on limpets, or be refused to switch ships due to having to many limpets etc. etc.


So with this increased convenience, we have drawback, in that we have a limited re-supply of limpets, So you need to pay attention and actually wait for them to return is now a thing.


And nothing significant would change from a player perspective on how limpets work or how they



Anyway, just trying to combine several suggestions, without trying to change the balance to much, and reuse existing game mechanics we already have.

 

[Tividar]

i disagree
it's almost like saying having different ship types is a poor design choice, different weapons is a poor design choice and so on... you get the idea

I don't mind the idea of having purpose-built ships, but if you're going to analogize weapon types this is more like designing lasers so they only affect shields (so you'd need to equip an entirely different weapon system to damage the hull). This is no more logically coherent than the module slot and tonnage requirement for different types of limpets (whose function is obviously software dependent).

Having this forced specialization limits the ability to participate in a number of game-loops that aren't as predictable as the blow-ship-up game-loop. Even with multi-function limpets, you're still giving up at least 2 module slots for the controller and the cargo to carry the limpets - so purpose built ships are still a thing.

 

[Northpin]

I don't mind the idea of having purpose-built ships, but if you're going to analogize weapon types this is more like designing lasers so they only affect shields (so you'd need to equip an entirely different weapon system to damage the hull). This is no more logically coherent than the module slot and tonnage requirement for different types of limpets (whose function is obviously software dependent).

One word: Cytos.
I do agree that tonnage and synth costs are big, but i can also agree with the design choice behind those decisions (prevent infinite synthesis, impose penalties to the benefits limpets have and so on)

Having this forced specialization limits the ability to participate in a number of game-loops that aren't as predictable as the blow-ship-up game-loop. Even with multi-function limpets, you're still giving up at least 2 module slots for the controller and the cargo to carry the limpets - so purpose built ships are still a thing.

Everyone would want to have an universal ship, universal weapons (*), universal limpets and the likes.
But in the end, all these will remove game loops instead of adding. And will make the game boring to put it gently.

Everyone will fly the same ship, with the same weapons and always ready for everything.
No more choices to make, no more planning in advance, no more costs of opportunity.
And no more Damn! I wish i had packed some research limpets!



*(there was a suggestion some time ago to remove the mountings for fixed, gimbals and turrets and replace them and universal mounting and switch so people can change the way their weapons function on the fly)

 

[Tividar]

One word: Cytos.
I do agree that tonnage and synth costs are big, but i can also agree with the design choice behind those decisions (prevent infinite synthesis, impose penalties to the benefits limpets have and so on)

Everyone would want to have an universal ship, universal weapons (*), universal limpets and the likes.
But in the end, all these will remove game loops instead of adding. And will make the game boring to put it gently.

Everyone will fly the same ship, with the same weapons and always ready for everything.
No more choices to make, no more planning in advance, no more costs of opportunity.
And no more Damn! I wish i had packed some research limpets!

*(there was a suggestion some time ago to remove the mountings for fixed, gimbals and turrets and replace them and universal mounting and switch so people can change the way their weapons function on the fly)

Cytos are a non sequitur. Having an option to do something vs. it being the only way to accomplish said thing are not the same thing. No one is being forced to equip Cytos to take down shields.

Universal Limpets doesn't turn every ship into a multi-role ship, nor does it reduce all viable ships to a single ship everyone will fly. You're still planning in advance: which two (or more) module slots to devote to limpets and cargo? how universal do you want your limpets vs. how large of a module slot are you going to sacrifice. I think your strawman is sliding down a slippery slope...

On the comment regarding removing game loops, I don't see how you get there. Certain game loops are only possible with specific limpet controllers. S&R in particular is dependent on the POI triggering and you having the right gear. Slightly relaxing the gear limitation would increase participation in those game loops, not remove them.

 

[T200]

One word: Cytos.
I do agree that tonnage and synth costs are big, but i can also agree with the design choice behind those decisions (prevent infinite synthesis, impose penalties to the benefits limpets have and so on)



Everyone would want to have an universal ship, universal weapons (*), universal limpets and the likes.
But in the end, all these will remove game loops instead of adding. And will make the game boring to put it gently.

Everyone will fly the same ship, with the same weapons and always ready for everything.
No more choices to make, no more planning in advance, no more costs of opportunity.
And no more Damn! I wish i had packed some research limpets!



*(there was a suggestion some time ago to remove the mountings for fixed, gimbals and turrets and replace them and universal mounting and switch so people can change the way their weapons function on the fly)

The Mechanics surrounding Limpet Controllers specifically are pretty awful. Too many limpet controller varieties leads players to just ignore most of them, unless they're miners or maybe "roleplaying" as fuel-rats.. The Attempts to add additional uses to Limpet controllers mostly just results in frustration.

 

[Northpin]

On the comment regarding removing game loops, I don't see how you get there. Certain game loops are only possible with specific limpet controllers. S&R in particular is dependent on the POI triggering and you having the right gear. Slightly relaxing the gear limitation would increase participation in those game loops, not remove them.

it's very easy for a designer to implement shortcuts and get in the game the universal limpet, universal weapon and universal ship.
But this would remove the cost of opportunity with each loadout, the planning around certain activities and ultimately will remove and entire level of decision making process

Imagine you could fit on a single multicannon all the engineering effects. It woufd be neat, isn't it? Well, actually it won't
The game will not benefit at all. So the game designers will not implement such shortcuts.

The Mechanics surrounding Limpet Controllers specifically are pretty awful. Too many limpet controller varieties leads players to just ignore most of them, unless they're miners or maybe "roleplaying" as fuel-rats.. The Attempts to add additional uses to Limpet controllers mostly just results in frustration.

Players usually are ignoring the activities they're not interested in. And frustration comes from lack of knowledge or patience or (more often than not) both.

People interested in running the fuelrats will not ignore fuel limpets, hull seals will not ignore repair limpets, megaship mission runners are not ignoring recon limpets and hatch breakers, pirates are not ignoring hatchbreakers and collector limpets, miners are not ignoring collector and prospector limpets, the scientist and the collectors are not ignoring research limpets and the axi guys are not ignoring the decontamination limpets.

 

[Tividar]

it's very easy for a designer to implement shortcuts and get in the game the universal limpet, universal weapon and universal ship.
But this would remove the cost of opportunity with each loadout, the planning around certain activities and ultimately will remove and entire level of decision making process

Imagine you could fit on a single multicannon all the engineering effects. It woufd be neat, isn't it? Well, actually it won't
The game will not benefit at all. So the game designers will not implement such shortcuts.

The only person "advocating" universal weapons or universal ships is you - and they way you do it strongly implies a strawman. You're advocating by analogy, and the analogies are not persuasive in the sense that omni-multicannons, universal ships, and universal weapons are not "universal" in the same way the proposed "universal" limpets are universal.

An Example: all of your sited universal items would be able to complete all the their relevant functions at the same time: in parallel. where as the universal limpet completes its tasks in series (e.g. a limpet can be a repair limpet or a fuel limpet, but not both at the same time (exclusive "or"), and it must be either recalled or destroyed with a new limpet launched to change the function). A better analogy would be a multicannon that could "synth" at no cost Anti-Xeno, Corrosive, Emissive, Incendiary, Smart or Thermal Shock rounds. To the extent that this could be stacked with existing Experimental Effects that don't duplicate specialized ammo this would be a Buff, but not necessarily an unreasonable one. I'd actually be in favor of something like this (with a 20% reduction in ammo capacity to represent the plasticity of the ammo before its synthed to its live form).

"But this would remove the cost of opportunity with each loadout, the planning around certain activities and ultimately will remove [an] entire level of decision making process."

Reducing the opportunity cost of limpet modules from one limpet module per slot to "n" limpet functions per module where "n" is dependent on the size of the module slot is not "removing the cost of opportunity" its reducing it. Reducing opportunity cost in any activity does not "remove entire level of decision making process." Generally, it increases the complexity of the choice because more choices are viable given the reduced opportunity cost. Your argument is both hyperbole (because you overstate the degree of change, and slippery slope (because you claim a small change in the opportunity cost of equipping limpets will result in a the large change of of entire levels of decision making processes being removed).

Your argument would be much more compelling if the suggestion were instead to convert Limpets/Limpet Controllers as they are now to a single size 1 module universal limpet controller with functionally infinite non-cargo space consuming ammunition. In that case there would be virtually no cost associated with equipping the omni-uber-limpet system, and that would reduce a typical ship building choice to "do I want to have all limpet functions" or "do I want to use the extra Class 1 Module we got for Supercruise Assist for something other than limpet control." Even though the omni-uber system would fit with what we know about limpets and AFMU ammunition, I don't think it would be good design.

I hear that you don't like the idea of universal limpet controllers. Fair enough. To the extent that that's personal preference, you do you. To the extent that you think it would negatively impact the game, I think you are mistaken.

 

[Lacika2000]

The Mechanics surrounding Limpet Controllers specifically are pretty awful. Too many limpet controller varieties leads players to just ignore most of them, unless they're miners or maybe "roleplaying" as fuel-rats.. The Attempts to add additional uses to Limpet controllers mostly just results in frustration.

I think it is high time for FDev to introduce the Limpet Controller Controller, which is mandatory to anybody who has at least two Limpet Controller modules already in the cargo. It would be a min class 5 Controller Module of 150 tonnes to make sure the other Limpet Controller actually do anything close to resembling something useful.