Random Damage to Subsystem - Making Serious Damage Felt

[Rylos]

posted on March 17th, 2012, 11:58 am

Last edited by Rylos on March 17th, 2012, 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dear Fleet ops volks,
I played Startrek fleet Ops and all armada games as well as a bunch of mods for once and a while during the last decade and I noticed the following:

In comparision to the original game and other mods, the ships are far more damage resistant with regard to subystem in Fleet ops. Its not like in the film where a ship has received critical hull damage and life support gets destroyed. Of all things, I keep missing this aspect very very very much. I thought about reasons why this aspect was changed. Perhaps your idea is playability in e-sport character as it I imagine to be a game changer if a ship with low hull suddendly looses engines or life support but wouldnt it be far more realistic ?.

It is like in the original game and in the films so much fun to have a ship really making you felt that they received critical damage. As it is now ships feel almost total fully normal even when hull integrity is at 10%. Isn't  odd that a full ship with full health exactly behaves like one thats close to destruction and that received a ton of damage ? Why not give the damage system this aspect, if even for very low hull values ? (I know that special weapons affect the systems but this kind of damage is special and not in relation to serious overall ship damage)
Fleet ops nearly shows no ships drifitng around with 0 crew for example. But this is soooo star trek and you would be really in a hurry to get your ship back to repair before crew dies.
I'm hoping that other fleet ops fans also miss this aspect in the game, the same as I do. Otherwise I really love this mod and please continue your good work 

posted on March 17th, 2012, 12:06 pm

subsystems can go down in fleetops, just less often. i personally prefer this style, as fleetops take place in a war, so all the ships will be really prepared to take damage without losing systems. a lot of the battles we see in trek were not in wars, so the ships weren't prepared for taking much damage, hence systems going down a lot. at leas that's my take on it.

of course there's also a gameplay approach, subsytems dying often is really annoying imo as your hull value then means a lot less, as a ship with no engines is only 1 thing: dead. also weapons that pass through shields would be more powerful.

in trek we saw that 1 photon impact can destroy an entire unshielded ship. so to me hull values are the strength of the war armour and a polarised hull, rather than a measure of how much of the damage has been done to the actual hull. hence the "hull" in fleetops is really just a second shield, and when it is depleted, that's then like a ship in trek having no shields, and hence dies really quickly.

welcome to the forum

[Rylos]

posted on March 17th, 2012, 1:03 pm

Last edited by Rylos on March 17th, 2012, 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thanks for the welcome.

I see your point regarding gameplay, in particular on the engines in multiplayer where tractor beam or other holding abilities are crucial to not let the enemy escape with a damaged ship (sure kill). On the other side is this in my eyes a question of setting the value right so e.g. 10% hull.

Regarding the "prepared for battle argument" however I really diagree.
I recall a scene from DS9 where a whole fleet goes prepared to battle and as they gathered, some ships were already falling out because having problems with engines etc. Defintely, subsystems in star trek battles even prepared ones are dieing out with low hull values. There are multiple battle scenes across series where you see the bridge while being in an prepared battle and you here "Weapons are destroyed sir, Life support is critical, etc..."

Another thing, consider real world ship battles. For example the Bismarck received a random torpedo hit and lost its ability to manouever. Sure, ships can take damage before such things happen but even the most prepared ships will encounter subsystems being destroyed if hit badly.

I think it is a trade off between gameplay and realism but perhaps a bit more realism wouldnt totally offset the balance  and enhance the Damage feeling of Fleet ops ships a bit at least.

posted on March 17th, 2012, 1:41 pm

Regarding the "prepared for battle argument" however I really diagree.
I recall a scene from DS9 where a whole fleet goes prepared to battle and as they gathered, some ships were already falling out because having problems with engines etc. Defintely, subsystems in star trek battles even prepared ones are dieing out with low hull values. There are multiple battle scenes across series where you see the bridge while being in an prepared battle and you here "Weapons are destroyed sir, Life support is critical, etc..."

most battle scenes weren't in war though, so subsystems going down can make sense.

the ships not making it to battle in ds9 was probably ships that weren't repaired properly in the hasty assembling of a fleet.

i'm wary of having extra subsystem failures, look how annoying the dode/diamond can be if you keep losing systems. any ship with low hull would be vulnerable to all weapons fire hurting systems. i think it would basically make 10% hull the new 0% hull.

posted on March 17th, 2012, 5:03 pm

I know when playing vs AI as a Fed, Centaurs are really frustrating. This "military chassis" has such a low system value that it usually loses something as soon as it starts taking hull damage. Now imagine if your entire fleet was similarly fragile.

posted on March 17th, 2012, 5:32 pm

In my experience subsystems go down all the time. I have had a vorcha take one hit without shields and lose its engines completely. I think in AI games its hard to see because the AI will always go for the kill and there ships don't retreat very often. But in multiplayer games I find that subsystems go down all the time as you try to micro your ships away. Sometimes its life support and engines. Other times its just sensors.