Change Disruptors?

[Misunderstood Wookie]

-snip-

You posted before my post.
I was just posting to state that if jump drives were affected there should be a proximity multiplier added to a base % depending on your engine class as to if your drive will be disabled.

This gives no guarantee that a well equipped ship will actually be forced out of Jump. I also stated that shields should not really be affected that badly based on proximity nor should stealth. Every status effect should have a % to apply/ effected based on proximity to the EMP wave with these base %'s lowered further based on your ships class of parts.

For example Shields should not completely get drained if you are outside 3km of the blast that is silly, instead shields should have a gradual drain over the wave distance.

Capitals Shields should be unaffected period.. Those ships are at least 150% the size of standard navy and civ ships thier power plants would almost be the size of some whole ships so it makes no sense to have them effected in any tide turning way, maybe they drop some small % which is again lowered depending on radius.

I expect that stations also not be affected if they are properly constructed stations again like capitals are huge thier power generators would be even larger of than that of a capital ship EMP should basically do nothing to stations maybe they hit the defenses a little like the platforms and what not because those are a not exactly coupled too huge generators. Overall the idea is good but I really don't want to see something like this come out with flat rates to everything.



[Edited on 3/9/2016 by Misunderstood Wookie]

[matchbox2022]

So far I like the main ideas behind this. However I also agree that a well constructed station should be immune

Likewise Capitals should remain unaffected to most extent.

Stealth, now this is tricky,

My two cents on the visuals


[edit]
I am just going to throw this out there and say I feel STRONGLY for warp disable


[Edited on 3/9/2016 by Misunderstood Wookie]

I see what you're saying, adding things to chance though suddenly would give one person an advantage compared to others in a multi-setting....was hoping to avoid that...keep it a Gamechangeup device, not an insta-death one.

BUT, depending on distance, the level of shield drain does make sense....so I suppose if it's not "hard" to do from Vice's standpoint, then it should probably be included.

Have you tried the new disruptor yet?


The animations and sounds are completely new.


I would love to see stealth and stations affected, it only makes sense, even if stations are affected to "shields yellow" and missles offline.


But, it's in Red, because it seems people REALLY don't want it. And I'm just rolling with the tides of opinion .
Therefore I'm very much against having them do anything to stations at all.



Now for capital ships, THAT I think is important it affects them.

Mostly that for gameplay.....it doesn't affect MP like the stations people build would be,..no one on a server gives a **** if a capital ship blows up because now you don't have to worry about its missiles or shields.
Do that to a player built station and ppl will get all pissy.

only SP is really affected...and it will make your life easier by taking out it's seeking weapons and shields on the AI fighters and ships.

To be all about physics, bases and stations would be shielded, anything "out in space" probably isn't, and would get affected.

Even not being about physics...I'm trying really hard to get the ideas to be based on enhancing gameplay, especially Singleplayer (using the disruptor to do harder contracts), appeasing most people and not RUINING multiplayer (player built stations) in any way, not so much "real world physics".



For the record I was totally against blind servers too , but hey! Gotta roll with the tides of what people want as changes.

It's still a great game. And regardless of any changes or ideas, it always needs feedback and tweaks after implementation...or if its a bad idea afterall, then removal!


[Edited on 3-9-2016 by matchbox2022]

[Misunderstood Wookie]

Makes sense, I however did re-irritate on some of my opinions on the post just above your last reply Marvin.

I never said Capitals not be affected I just said said they would succumb to less overall shield drain based on the distance, having them disable parts on capitals I am fine with. For Gameplay as you say, the ideas I had towards stealth and basically having the overall effects based on the distance.

[matchbox2022]

updated main post to include recent points in yellow.

[Rubber Chicken]

@ matchbox:

Your counterpoints to my post are valid for sure. While I was putting out some ideas, I was also trying to state what should be allowed *at most*.

In a more basic opinion, I'll state that I am against any change to disruptors that is going to 'force add' another new piece of equipment. For example, the Shield Battery is an optional piece, but almost 100% mandatory to carry. I don't want another item that falls into that category. If the disruptor becomes a 'harpoon' weapon, then the equipment
item would be a must-have in multiplayer.

I mainly posted the idea to modify the subsystem damage factors, because there already is a damage model affected by Leech, Lynx, and Rage missiles implemented.
Strictly IMO, those subsystem damage factors could have been expanded on even back in EM.

You are right though. The coding headache might not be worth it.

I am also against ship shield damage when hit with a disruptor as it disables stealth devices by default.

----

While I AM for having some sort of 'meaningful' expansion to disruptor functionality, I think (for general purposes) I'm going to be voting "No" in the poll - as I haven't voted yet.


[Edited on 3-9-2016 by Rubber Chicken]

[SamKillitson]

Frame component mandatory for immunity.
Equipment component mandatory only to use the super weapon Disruptor.

Frame component + Equipment component to use and have immunity.

The only equipment cost will be to the user of the super weapon and the frame component is optional for immunity.
The penalty to charge and use the super weapon should be a huge gamble on top of the equipment slot cost.
You could turn the tide of battle against yourself just for charging it. No free lunch.

I voted no in the poll already.

I was just rehashing my thoughts.

[Edited on 3-10-2016 by SamKillitson]

[matchbox2022]

@

I mainly posted the idea to modify the subsystem damage factors, because there already is a damage model affected by Leech, Lynx, and Rage missiles implemented.
Strictly IMO, those subsystem damage factors could have been expanded on even back in EM.

You are right though. The coding headache might not be worth it.

I am also against ship shield damage when hit with a disruptor as it disables stealth devices by default.


[Edited on 3-9-2016 by Rubber Chicken]

Awe. too bad.

Well, what I meant wasn't something that does "damage" to any systems, only disables for a time limit, no repairs needed.

And.....if you're getting an announcement that a disruptor has fired, and you have green shields....you can simply stealth before it goes off........
Your shields would already be at 0% so.......you'd be hit with the leech effect....but you'd still get to stay in stealth. It won't be "doing" damage, so it should NOT be knocking you out of stealth once you plow in.

Yes, you couldn't if you were hit before you had a chance to cloak, it'd be the same as jumping...really think that the announcement idea kinda gives everyone a LOT of warning and options.

If anything stealthing becomes the defensive weapon to it.

Frame component mandatory for immunity.
Equipment component mandatory only to use the super weapon Disruptor.

[/quote]

The idea was never ever for it to be a super weapon. A game rule changer. someone hit by it could still easily kill the person who launched it, especially if they are within the blast radius.
This would predominantly work better in SP than MP, especially with an early warning announcement.

[Edited on 3-10-2016 by matchbox2022]

[meatyalright]

I used those, for the price I was expecting some serious carnage.

[SamKillitson]

The idea was never ever for it to be a super weapon. A game rule changer. someone hit by it could still easily kill the person who launched it, especially if they are within the blast radius.
This would predominantly work better in SP than MP, especially with an early warning announcement.

- Shields lowered to red levels, for all ships, including capital ships for a given amount of time, but shorter than the current jump drive disable time...which would remain.

- STATIONS would not be affected...or only somewhat <<<<< This would be super all by itself.

- Jump drives would still not function for the given time, explosion and effect radius would remain the same.

- Missiles and Guidance systems would be unable to track targets, target locks for missiles and MDTS / Beam weapon locks would not work during the effected time.

- Only Particle Cannons could be fired due to lack of target locks.

vs.

- Disruptors interfere with the Fulcrum Field system of jump drives to prevent them from engaging. The weapon is fired without a lock and will eventually detonate and send out a disruption pulse that will disable the jump drive of any ship within about 5K range.

Yeah, well when compared to its original version or any other current weapon in Evochron, it is a super weapon.
You must consider that and it must be balanced for gameplay.

Perhaps all that really needs adjusting is the price.



[Edited on 3-10-2016 by SamKillitson]

[matchbox2022]

A weapon insinuates it would do damage. Which is something the majority of people are against.


BUT then people load their save, and no consequences, regardless of cost, plus that would hurt singleplayer when people use it for contracts...no profit at all then.

SO.......the price if anything should stay the same or come down.

ON THAT NOTE.
I have another idea to help balance. This thing should have a LOT of mass. So if you're trucking these around, you should be a LOT slower than usual. "aka" making you a much bigger target....that is until you launch the bloody thing....which everyone will have an alert that it's about to happen, AND from where / who.

A temporary game changer evens the odds for everyone in its range, not just the person firing.

It is meant more for singleplayer really.....where it would be the most useful.
Capital ships, AI ships, nobody cares about, it doesn't affect "their" game.
I was mostly worried about player built stations being "too" affected by it, totally allowing a single person to take out a station "yet again"

There may be a way to make it so it "stays" the old way in MP, but changes in SP.

Would you be interested in that?

[Edited on 3-12-2016 by matchbox2022]

[matchbox2022]

PLEASE READ

We have had a lot of time to argue FOR changes, AGAINST changes, and a SLEW of new ideas.

I would ask people who want changes, especially in the "tweak a few things vote" to please comment on the ideas posted in YELLOW AND WHITE on the main page, and if you are mostly for, or mostly against those ideas.

If you don't want changes simply vote to not change a thing.

PLEASE note, the item in BLUE is READY for play testing and ANY positive or negative feedback is welcome.

Attempting to close the polls so to speak and hammer out a final update proposal that embodies what most people would like to see, and attempts to make a compromise with all ideas of effects and penalties.

[Sinbad]

I'm in favour of most of the changes. I like Vice's proposals so far... but I disagree with the need for some kind of specialised defense equipment. I think there are enough ways to defend against this without any additional new equipment.

I like the idea that the increased mass of having this weapon loaded should slow you down somewhat... adds to balancing it out.

I agree with all of the GREEN proposals.
I'm against all of the RED proposals.
I agree with all of the WHITE proposals.
I agree with most of the YELLOW proposals with the following exceptions...

Some kind of "grounding" module could be purchased as part of the FRAME in the SHIPYARD to aid in reducing the time or partial immunity to effects upon detonation.

I don't agree with this idea... as I said above, there are plenty of ways to defend/avoid this weapon. This seems an unnecessary complication and work for Vice.

Announcements in chat AND visually on the HUD of WHICH specific ship is about to launch the EMP disruptor the moment a launch is initiated. Times to launch would increase to 12-15 seconds, allowing time to escape OR engage the "slower" opponent human player or AI attempting to fire.

If the launching player is to be identified, then the warning time should be reduced, not increased. Otherwise it will become virtually impossible to use the weapon effectively in MP. With 12 seconds or more of warning, everyone will jump away, and come and hunt you down, and the weapon will never be of any use. Either have no player id with a long-ish warning (10 seconds is plenty), or player id with shorter warning.

[Marvin]

I have another idea to help balance. This thing should have a LOT of mass.

More mass than ten cargo bays filled with metal?

[matchbox2022]

I have another idea to help balance. This thing should have a LOT of mass.

More mass than ten cargo bays filled with metal?

Well, people seem to want a penalty for having this Nuclear / zeropoint EMP of sorts.

They don't want another equipment slot used, and they don't want either side being too hindered.

But still if that was the case we would have nothing in the game since you can always use something to your advantage (excaliburs to say one thing )

Regardless of that.
I'm trying to find a penalty that hinders, doesn't overpower, compromises, and makes a lot of sense.

This weapon if it's as big as the UI makes it look, and if made of radioactive elements, SHOULD be freaking heavy.

So it makes the most sense that that indeed be its penalty, an early warning to everyone on launch and restriction in the pilots fighting ability until he can launch.

I'm in favour of most of the changes. Either have no player id with a long-ish warning (10 seconds is plenty), or player id with shorter warning.

I have no idea about the player ID or not. But I will write that in, because you're right,

the second people know who's firing they would flock to engage that guy if they don't have the power to jump and he's in range.
But mind you isn't that the point?

[Misunderstood Wookie]

As stated yellow and white only discussion.

"All ships and stations in the vicinity at the moment of detonation would have;"
Stations No, well maybe but only if the station is under developed (technology researched built) again like capital ships I still strongly feel they should be relatively immune to shield damage due to the sheer size of their generators I doubt an EMP carried on a non station or capital would have enough omph to completely mitigate stations or capitals, so I suggest these values only half that of the effect on civilian and military ships. With stations less again 1/4 maybe.

"As a consequence of having a VERY heavy device, the MASS of the ship with one or MORE of these devices would increase substantially, creating huge penalties to agility and acceleration until they were sold or launched."

Hmm. I'm going with no again, instead of agility since let's.face it your in space what would weight have to do with anything here provided your thrusters are up to snuff.. Instead firing one of these things penalises the shooter by temporarily cutting energy recharge rate and drains energy to 0 percent making the shooter vulnerable for a short period without the ability to fire main weapons shortly after firing this thing, if you are aiming for a super weapon EMP or a suport class weapon then penalise the shooter this thing does a lot to everything to be worth the temporary risk of being ambushed in mp.

"Missiles and Guidance systems would be unable to track targets, target locks for missiles and MDTS / Beam weapon locks would not work during the effected time.
"

I'm okay with this as it is.

Finally...

"These changes would give the impression that it is indeed a mini-nuclear EMP weapon, designed to knock out electrical based systems, and well worth the price in a capital ship assault with all the shield stacking going on."

If your going this route.. Capitals are effected are effected roughly 30 percent less than light and medium craft. Same reasons as above they have the power plant reserves to mitigate electrical interference, stations should be basically immune as above provided they are well built as in have auxiliary power (more than one power thing attached)

[Marvin]

"As a consequence of having a VERY heavy device, the MASS of the ship with one or MORE of these devices would increase substantially, creating huge penalties to agility and acceleration until they were sold or launched."

Hmm. I'm going with no again, instead of agility since let's.face it your in space what would weight have to do with anything here provided your thrusters are up to snuff..

F=ma ... even in space.

[matchbox2022]

Well
I don't think more than one penalty should exist. Just havent a clue which one ppl would like the most.

Either agility or energy or something else. Not to the point that getting the emp basically makes the ship a potatoe

I will change the front post to show your views about a "single penalty" being that of energy moreso than mass....I'll try out greening some things and erasing others.

thanks guys.

It's been 3 weeks almost, so I think we've gotten a good bias on what people specifically would enjoy seeing change up with this weapon.


Please if anyone has anything else to say about this please do. I'm sure it'll be on going, but this is a "before changes" thing.

I've very much appreciated all the feedback, for better or worse it will hopefully make an already great game a bit better...and it is VERY appreciated, without that, there's nothing to go on.

And I need to be shot down a few times to do double takes on what I pose as ideas


[Edited on 3-17-2016 by matchbox2022]

Vice is looking for a little more consensus and interest before any changes will be made, but I did ask about testing.

[Edited on 3-18-2016 by matchbox2022]

[Rubber Chicken]

I was thinking about ideas for disruptor changes and....

What if disruptors fired energy particles that did no damage but had the same effect as impacting a freshly-destroyed asteroid fragment? Those asteroid fragments can stop you dead in your tracks if you hit them directly, but you can still get going again without an unreasonable amount of work.

The particles would dissipate over distance from the zero-point of the blast, and they would emanate from the center in a relatively thick but uniform shotgun pattern. Even if you do directly stop your target, you'd still have to avoid the particles in order to capitalize on your opponent's loss of velocity. Perhaps the disruptor can generate 2 or 3 'pulses' of particles at 3-second intervals before petering out.

The effect would be similar to walking at a good pace then having somebody follow you and begin stepping on the backs of your shoes.

[captainedwin]

Vice is looking for a little more consensus and interest before any changes will be made, but I did ask about testing.

[Edited on 3-18-2016 by matchbox2022]

Is there a test of this I can use? I don't like the jump drive offline thing its totally useless in Singleplayer, which is what I do, I'd love to be able to go head to head with a capital ship with this.

[matchbox2022]

Apparently there might be, but unreleased.

[meatyalright]

Personally Id love to see this.

[matchbox2022]

Know this has almost died so giving it a heartbeat bump.

Would anyone be interested if there could be a test build with the new disruptor with at least "some" new effects / warning announcements?

[Marvin]

I never even used the old disruptor. And, as long as there is a warning in chat, I'm not worried about any changes. A disruptor is really just the old FT wearing a dress.

[matchbox2022]

Trimmed original post, edited what people seem for and against

Got rid of anything blatantly opposed (Red)

[ZBbaker]

Came here from steam, thought this was a good idea