Player Base Repair Idea

[Syrus]

I know this is probably evil'ly genius but...

How about making the base NOT repair itself AT ALL!



Shock over? Alright, listen.
Let there be turrets which are used to repair a base. These turrets could be mounted on any freighter or transport (not just on repair ships).

Also, the damage dealt to the base would always have to be reduced to 1% or less though. Why reduce the damage at all then?
-> HP is quite limited from what I recall, giving a base 1 billion HP might cause an overflow in the variable or something. And does it really matter if the base has "10 million HP", but you do only .1% damage to it or if the base has "10 billion HP"? Keep in mind, a base does die very, very fast once you get through the repairs: it takes 37 full Cerb Heavy Core BS to get through the repairs of a Core 4 base with all three repairs going. They will take almost 14 hours to take it down. Add 1 BS and it's only about 4 hours. Add another BS - 2 1/4h, take 50 BS - 25 minutes. Sure, it's still quite long, but it's not long enough if the base doesn't repair itself.

It takes 10 full Cerb heavy BS a bit over 5 hours to destroy a Core 4 base (24 mio HP, without repairs) at .1% damage dealt to it for example. Keep in mind: NO REPAIRS! - unless defenders log and ... well, defend and repair it.

The repair turrets should do a decent amount of repairing. Very much depending on the "repair" ship's core, I'd say. Or maybe some other factor of the ship. Or maybe just use freighters and the repairship for repairing bases. (Give the repair ship freighter turrets.) The amount repaired per ship should be somewhat around double the amount of damage a full Cerb heavy BS can do (122'730 dps once the core is depleted). Maybe the amount repaired should increase (10 to 50 times? Should a single repairer take minutes or hours to fix his base?) if the base is not hit for 1-5 minutes, so that repairing is easier after a siege ended.

Not sure if repair commodities should be used in any case or not. That's something that might have to be discussed. I'm not sure about how they could be "implemented" in this idea.



tl;dr?
Bases don't repair themselves.
Implement turret for freighters (and transports) to repair bases.

---

[Eugen]

well you could use one of the eqipment slots or the hangar slot (if the freighter has one) and put somthing in it to repair stuff (maybe even drones) since i know no one who has realy put a stealth generator or a jumpdrive or even a Hanger on a freighter

[Umber]

Did you even tried to get people to log 30 caps at once, shoot a pob, and see if the server didn't meltdown?

8|

[Eugen]

Did you even tried to get people to log 30 caps at once, shoot a pob, and see if the server didn't meltdown?

8|

If u look it that way than it needs a total re-evaluate of the player base system. So why not expand it and make it more native ingame with a full cycle (intigate the world into the system not the system into the world).

Btw, i would be thrilled to se more than just one sort of base like a
( neutral to everyone not to kill with weapons and has no deffensive satlites)
Trade Base,
Research and Productions Base, (civil /militery for tech stuff like hanger moduls )
Militerystrongholds. (basicly waht its now )

XD

[Petitsli]

It would be a nice option I think. Though I think that the Bases should become better in terms of not being that easy to destroy.
Your suggestion would make the bases weaker. You don't think that a single repair ship is able to repair the base while there are people out there shooting it?

Also my personal opinion is that there shouldn't be too many differences between normal bases and POB. A normal base is undestroyable. Why should POBs be that much more vulnerable?
How should one explain that inrp?

[Syrus]

well you could use one of the eqipment slots or the hangar slot (if the freighter has one) and put somthing in it to repair stuff (maybe even drones) since i know no one who has realy put a stealth generator or a jumpdrive or even a Hanger on a freighter

That could be an idea. Repair module for freighters/transports, drains your energy and repairs for a certain (good) amount of hull. Enable via /repair or something and then you see some kind of effect on your ship and it drains your core completly, the repair amount is determined by that core recharge. (Obviously, transports die rather easily, so while they repair more, freighters might be more useful...) The repair amount must be more than the damage dealt by a BS is though - to balance it.

Did you even tried to get people to log 30 caps at once, shoot a pob, and see if the server didn't meltdown?

8|

Yeah. Once or twice. The numbers were just theory though, not everyone has a Corsair fleet to spare to attack weird IMG / Freelancer bases in Zoner space. Without automatic repairs even a Starflier, may it rest in peace, could destroy a Core 4 base if it is left unattended. Hm...maybe the standard damage should stay, so that the base takes damage when it runs out of the "current repair goods" (but it won't use them for normal repairs) or something.


Currently only - and I mean *ONLY* - a fleet big enough to do enough damage to outDPS the repairs of the repair commodities through the shield can really damage (and possibly destroy) a base. Everything else can be substituted by a single LF pewing the shield. Because draining the repair commodities is rather pointless overall, for most bases that takes hours if they are even decently supplied.

---

[Haste]

It takes 10 full Cerb heavy BS a bit over 5 hours to destroy a Core 4 base (24 mio HP, without repairs) at .1% damage dealt to it for example. Keep in mind: NO REPAIRS! - unless defenders log and ... well, defend and repair it.

Whoa, whoa. Careful there. It takes one full Cerb heavy BS to kill a core 4 base in 5 hours and 25 minutes if it isn't repaired.

Ten would do it in 32.5 minutes - I think you misplaced a comma there.

(One heavy core BS deals 300,000 * 0.41 * 0.01 = 1,230 of sustained damage-per-second)

Also, this idea doesn't seem like a very good one. Again, attackers can pick and choose when to attack. You can't force base owners to log whenever a bunch of dreads come to shoot it. Why? Because even a group of five players won't be able to cover a base around the clock for YEARS on end. Remember, bases sit there being targets 24/7, 4 weeks a month, 12 months a year.

---

Oh, crap, didn't see that you were talking about .1%, rather than 1%.

---

[Syrus]

Oh, crap, didn't see that you were talking about .1%, rather than 1%.

Of course the idea needs proper balancing. I calculated a bit with my old (yet still up-to-date, I think) siege calculator to see some numbers (public version), ... the problem is balancing how long a base should survive under what amount of fire. 1.0% is definatly too much, 0.1% seemed quite decent to me. On 0.1% a Core 4 will survive the constant fire of 15 full Cerb heavy BS for 3.5 hours. That might seem like a long time, but keep in mind, if no defense shows up - or rather: no "repair ship" - the base does not regenerate. The question is, is that too long? Would 0.2% (~1h 45min) or 0.15% (~2h 20min) be better? Obviously not everyone got full Cerb heavy BS. That'd just be the "worst/best case" - depending on who's side you are on.
Obvious is also, that every ship can add to the damage on the base. Another question would be, should damage below 1 HP be rounded up to 1 HP of damage?
For example, 1 shot doing 600 dmg would be: 600*0.1%=0.6 HPDmg, which is below 1 HP for the base. Is that 0 dmg on the base, or 1? What if the shot did 400*0.1%=0.4 HPDmg? 0 or 1?
Of course, a snub using 6 guns with 8.33 refire (1 HPDmg per shot), would take ~5.56 days to destroy a Core 4 base on his own.

Those are some questions that would be interesting I guess.

I just think this system would promote much more activity around base sieges than what there is currently. Because you CAN damage a base. And you HAVE TO log to actually repair it.



Then again there is the issue of not being around for repairing the base eventually due to RL stuff... so hm... but I guess that also goes for when the base degrades by lack of supplies (though much, much slower). So, a sufficiently large group of players must be behind a base to have people around whenever someone is on vacation or such...as I said, that's an issue now already, but a much smaller one for the moment.

---

[Jack_Henderson]

Hm. Honestly, I do not like it.

Reason:

I am on a lot and I am rather flexible when it comes to logging times, but e.g. I have a job that consumes ~6 hours per day in which I cannot log. Many of us work longer, without flexibility to quickly organise something.

Most of us are from a European time zone, so what would e.g. keep a team of people with too much time on their hands to gather these 10 BS and place them there at a time when everybody of the main zone with a job is asleep?

Then you wake up in the morning, to check your base first... and you have to do "guard shifts", try to include people from other time zones and give international telephone numbers for night attacks to the watch team?

I did that for one game.
And I will never, ever do it again.

I would rather get rid of the bases, than going into that "full RL job mode" that would be required to secure my fictional pixel base.

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Highland Laddie]

Make repairs require commodities: Hull Segments, Robotic Hardware, Industrial Machinery, etc.