Decommissioning and Deserting

posted on March 6th, 2011, 11:31 pm

I find it a bit stupid at the moment it is possible to decommission a station while it is under attack. Could decommissioning be changed to work like re-crewing, so a station under attack couldn't be decommissioned?

A desert option for stations: Deserting would be quicker than decommissioning and it would be possible to begin while under attack. The difference to decommission would be the station would end up intact, but without crew, hull damaged and with severe subsystem damage. Deserting would also return less funds than decommissioning.

If a player captures a deserted structure, the player would need to invest some resources to get it back to operational condition, naturally more resources than received from deserting but less than building a completely new station.

posted on March 6th, 2011, 11:33 pm

I like the 'Abandon Station' option. Calling it 'deserting' makes the crew sound like traitors deserting their empire.

posted on March 6th, 2011, 11:37 pm

I like the idea of "abandon station", but there needs to be some incentive to do so.  Right now decommissioning grants you some resources returned.  Abandoning would have to offer some sort of use as well.


  If Decommissioning was removed entirely in favor of "evacuating" there might be some use in it.  There just has to be some reason to want to do it, savvy?

posted on March 6th, 2011, 11:38 pm

on no decom while under attack: 100% like it, crew have to escape with loads of stuff, no way to escape if under attack, just like with no way to recrew.

on desert option: i like this too, the cardassians did it to deep space nor, trashed the place, stole some stuff, and left. its kinda like self destruct though, and every station having self destruct would be pants, but only being able to desert might be nice. heavy subsystem/hull damage sounds good, maybe the money that deserting gives should primarily be supply, as that seems what they would take first, stuff like torps and valuable things. not the tritanium in the hull lol.

deserting could happen under combat as we saw the dominion abandon deep space 9 while sisko's defiant was shooting it. they rushed out fast, but surprisingly didnt damage anything. how kind of weyoun to leave sisko a perfectly operational station lol.

im not sure on how fast it should repair though. as it seemed ds9 would take a while to repair after sisko hurt it. maybe if you can pay a little res for double speed repair. so it still takes a while to get back online. not that stations get captured often lol. the borg are best at capturing, and they would really only take a station to do decom and get res. and taking a deserted station seems like it would cost more than you gain lol as u gotta repair it. maybe if u can decom an already deserted station for the remaining res.

the only station worth keeping is a yard, and borg can only use them for damaged assimed ships.

good ideas zebh.

posted on March 7th, 2011, 4:15 am

i would think that deserting the station would transfer its crew and cargo (supplies and some di and tri) to ships that can be transported to the main base for reuse

posted on March 7th, 2011, 1:16 pm

A great set of ideas 
Would love to see recouping losses from 'decommissioning' become more interesting

posted on March 7th, 2011, 5:26 pm

Probably would be called deserting tho because if a military base deserts then they are running from their own government too. Maybe an evacuation that can go quicker then the decommission but you only get supplies since they cant really take the hull or the power core

posted on March 7th, 2011, 5:28 pm

Did Sisko 'desert' from Starfleet when he abandoned DS9? There's a big difference between abandoning a station and running like a Talaxian.

posted on March 7th, 2011, 6:14 pm

This is an excellent idea. structures could be replaced by a knackered version of the station that can be upgraded to the proper version for a price but still works. this would be great for tactically withdrawing from a mining operation. You'd either have to risk weaker and slower stations getting owned in hit and run attacks or invest and gamble your enemy doesn't return to destroy them before you make a profit

posted on March 7th, 2011, 6:40 pm

No Sicko didn't desert because he was ordered to hold the station until the fed and klingon fleet could counter attack

posted on March 7th, 2011, 6:42 pm

This is a game mechanics related idea. Whatever it would be called isn't the point of this thread.

posted on March 7th, 2011, 6:47 pm

It's not the point of the thread, but when has that stopped it before? It's related to the idea though, since the ingame version would have a name.

No Sicko didn't desert because he was ordered to hold the station until the fed and klingon fleet could counter attack

So you evidently know the difference between orders and cowardice/deserting, but claimed they were both the same thing before?

posted on March 7th, 2011, 8:56 pm

Good idea to be honest, the Decom Station while under attack is really kind of an exploit so to see it go is kinda cool.

posted on March 7th, 2011, 9:32 pm

i dont think decomming under attack is a terrible exploit as if u stay nearby while it is decomming u can still fire on it (ai does so automatically) and stop them from getting res and u get a rank. unfortunately it does stop you capturing it, that is the only thing it does. which i would be happy to see go away.

posted on March 7th, 2011, 9:45 pm

If decomming is made to work more like Recrewing, then I think that causing damage after the process has begun should reduce the resources you get back (if you complete it). Hull damage would be metal that is no longer useful.