Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Westy

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #1 
Chas and I were speaking the other night about warp restriction when in combat - he had some interesting points for consideration (sorry to steel his ideas, but I want to add a couple for consideration).

- make coming out of warp add a small amount of heat. I know when I am helming I often go in and out of warp 1 repeatedly... the consequence of this should be additional stress on the engines. Engineering can deal with it easily unless it is excessive. 

- an additional point I want to add is - 
- Warp should not be engaged unless the system is at 100% - without risking further damage or additional heat problems. The rational to me is - what engineer would say to their captain, sure hit the warp, were still trying to fix the last coolant/core breach, but hell what can it hurt. If there is damage to this system there should be more than just a reduction of warp capability or efficiency - it should not work. 
But what about times when you REALLY need a warp but the engines are damaged? have the engines work, not very efficiently but say have them heat very quickly... so it requires more cooling than can be accomplished. 

Just ideas - crap on them if you wish ;-)

Westy
Badgeguy

Registered:
Posts: 316
Reply with quote  #2 
That is actually not a bad idea.  There are only a couple of limitations that would need to be worked around to allow it to be implemented into any combination of stations.  The premise you propose is based upon the assumption that there will always be an engineer station, when the requirements for a game are only Helm and Weapons.  A few points to consider:

Without an engineer, the "below 100% energy" concern is negated as it will never occur.  The less than 100% operational systems, though, can occur, but the automated repair crews should be able to resolve that in time, but that doesn't mean that warp shouldn't be able to be engaged, but rather it should generate more heat for lower speeds.  At 100% (Stasis)/100% (Operational), using warp should generate a small amount of heat at warp 1, more at warp 2, a good deal of heat at warp 3 and gobs (a technical term) of it at warp 4.  These amount should go up by the amount of damage the system has taken as well as the energy levels set for the system.  The only problem I see with this situation is notification of heat issues and cooling of the system when the engineer is not active.  Perhaps an indicator of heat levels for warp on the Helm's station, maybe with the ability to apply one point of coolant if the engineer station is not connected to the server.  This would allow for cooling, but not at a rate so great as to quickly override the heat issues, but make jumping to sustained warp above 1 for anytime without damaged systems something that must be considered in regards to the ship's safety.

The only other downside I see to all of this, including my own additions to this idea is the problem with resolving the heat containment issues with overcharged batteries.  Warp is a critical function in controlling the situation and having it add to the problem, rather than help resolve it, makes it something difficult to weigh.
Westy

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #3 
the more I play, the more I think an engineer is a must!

But your right - if the ship is flown with only two positions that would create an issue. One way of dealing with it without adding another job for helm, is if there is no engineer have the default setting for that station put all available coolant into warp. Helm would only need notification of the engine heat - no need to control. Then if anyone is flying or so badly damaged that the warning light comes on... well they are probably done already. 

Isnt that why they put warning lights in cars... let you know when you have already caused irreparable damage :-)


Westy 
Dharmansible

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 4
Reply with quote  #4 
I can't upvote these ideas enough.  I would love warp to be more significant than simply being the "afterburners".  And the effects - and conequences - should reflect that.

Maybe that's where jump drives are supposed to come in.  But aside from the charge and learning curve on precision, even jumps are a little lacking in significance and consequence at times.
AdmlBaconStraps

Registered:
Posts: 41
Reply with quote  #5 
+1 to those ideas.

Hell, just that same idea spread across all systems would be kind of awesome and make damage control a little more interesting..

Of course, I think the ship layout display for the damcon teams would need a slight re-working to display system components a bit more clearly instead of having them blend into things like corridors though..
BIdderlyn

Registered:
Posts: 18
Reply with quote  #6 
Showing my support here - such details and little features are exactly what takes gameplay to a different level of fun for me. Thumbs up :)~
__________________
Lt.Cdr Bidderlyn Echo. Engineering, TSN Falcon.
janx

Registered:
Posts: 460
Reply with quote  #7 
interesting idea.

It certainly plays to my view that the ship should not drop out of warp near the enemy, drop a weapon off, jump into warp for 5 seconds to clear the area, come about, and repeat.

At least not as a standard no-consequence action.

In this way, the ship COULD do that, but it'll have a consequence if you do.

That seems fair, and more in line with what we see on Trek.  Crazy maneuvers put a strain on the ship.


janx

Registered:
Posts: 460
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westy
the more I play, the more I think an engineer is a must!

But your right - if the ship is flown with only two positions that would create an issue.


Westy 


side question:  who launches the game without all the stations assigned to 1 or more PCs?

Personally, regardless of how many PCs I have, every station will be distributed to the PCs I have.

So, I would never play Artemis with just Helm and Weapons on one PC each.

I would put Comms, Engineering, Helm on one PC and Science, Weapons on the other PC.

this way, while the 2 players may focus on their primary station (Helm or Weapons), they have the ability to manage the other features when and IF they need it.

I am baffled why anybody would lock themselves out of game screens because they didn't have enough PCs or players.


ltcolumbo

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #9 
Bump.  AWESOME game-play balance idea.
Westy

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by janx


side question:  who launches the game without all the stations assigned to 1 or more PCs?




It came up in a bvbvb game a week or so ago... with 3 ships and intense fighting we agreed to not make any engineering changes... it was to balance out a game in that case. if it can happen, it always does... sometimes



GetDaved

Registered:
Posts: 14
Reply with quote  #11 
Any thoughts on how jump drive would fit into this?  Right now it is pretty significantly inferior to Warp already.
Simplician

Registered:
Posts: 22
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by janx
side question:  who launches the game without all the stations assigned to 1 or more PCs?


Every potential player who is trying out the demo.

Although, since Thom hasn't revealed his plans for a V2.0 demo, this may or may not be the case in the future.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.