Members | Sign In
All Forums > Development

Suggestion for Version 2.0

posted Dec 31, 2012 18:47:44 by RussJudge
After having examined a lot of the different Mods and Missions that are out there, I think a good enhancement to see for Version 2 would be a way to include a vesselData.xml file in the mission folder that might add special ships and be merged with the stock vesselData.xml file, but not affect the stock vesselData.xml file. I've stumbled onto a few missions where all they want to do is add some special ship, but have to modify the vesselData.xml file to do so (and thus making it a Mod, instead of just a mission).
Author of Artemis Mod Loader.

Sign up for a free Dropbox account.
page   first prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next last
218 replies
jtmarcure said Feb 26, 2013 20:43:34
Where does the "boarding party" concept come from? It doesn't seem like a good tactical move considering the speeds the ships are going. I don't recall it being something used during the World Wars. I don't recall any stories of a ship sending over an assault force to capture or destroy another ship. Especially a ship that is actively involved in combat with you. At least as a standard practice in ocean warfare which is the best parallel for Artemis. I'm just trying to get a handle on why the boarding aspect seems to be a game changer or enhancer to others. Think of it this way. Would people be asking for boarding parties if this was air to air type combat? Is it just because Trek always seemed to be hand to hand rather than ship to ship? Except in the case of the greatest space battle which was between Kirk and Khan or for that mater between Kirk and Chang.
Captain said Feb 26, 2013 20:52:55
I think the reason people are so into the boarding party is the aspect of taking another ship. When you defeat ships you get no viable benefit from it. Well besides eliminating a threat. However if you take the ship you get an asset you can use later. I think that's the reason most people support it. Also in sea battles taking ships was common practice. Not as much in the world wars because of advancing tech. however before that ships were fought over. Where do you think marines came from?
To Mankind
And the hope that the war against folly may someday be won, after all

Isaac Asimov
1955jt said Feb 26, 2013 23:37:46
I under stand that in the days of square riggers boarding a ship and hand to hand was a common practice but, I mentioned the world wars because it is more modern day and star ship to star ship battles are even more advanced.

Maybe Thom should consider changing the whole concept to a retro steam punk type of thing where the ships are more akin to square riggers or steam ships that use close range canon style weapons and boarding parties as the primary weapons system. To me that would seem to satisfy the desire for hand to hand combat that lots of people want. Maybe change everyone's consoles into a first person shooter type of game once the "boarding" takes place. That would also add to the whole adventure as you have crew die and you then have to struggle to man all the stations.

As far as rewards for taking out the enemy goes it my opinion that it's not needed. Again, we have no examples of ships salvaging booty from a ship they just had a battle with. What type of booty could be salvaged? I wouldn't expect that all the races in the game have all the same plug and play equipment just upgrades of weapons systems or power systems from the wreckage of the enemy ship would be hard to beleive.

I guess it just comes down to people like me that like a ship to ship combat simulation and others that want more of a WOW experience while playing the game.
MichaelMesich said Feb 26, 2013 23:51:52
I've seen several different agreements between Helm/Weapons and Captain directed to solve the viewscreen/shield issue.

I think having it on both is a feature not a flaw. It encourages coordination and can also provide for inadvertent entertainment. :)
TaigiaReilly said Feb 27, 2013 00:23:37
The boarding party concept is probably coming from the popular game FTL, which also has the player controlling a spaceship. The problem with that is FTL is more of an arcade game while Artemis is a sim.

In FTL you are controlling the whole ship from a top down godlike point of view. You can also pause the action to decide what you are doing and set up your plan of attack. And the canon of that series has teleporter technology.

This doesn't match up with what we know about the Artemis universe and would not lend itself to a game like Artemis where at any given moment every member of the bridge crew is just as important to the effort of survival and winning as any other member.
[Last edited Feb 27, 2013 06:35:47]
ZacharyDanielBringham said Feb 28, 2013 22:06:56
Well, boarding parties make a ton more sense when you can teleport crew members to and from enemy ships. Obviously if you have to come along side and create some sort of bridge between ships, it would be extremely ineffective.
If you have a sizeable boarding force, you could warp in close enough to drop off the troops, then get your ship out of harm's way. The boarding party doesn't have to worry about the strength of the ship, just the strength of the internal crew. This would be a great tactic for a fast troop carrier, and would definitely complement a fleet, since you could capture ships relatively whole, or at least with minimal damage.
Jim Johnson said Mar 01, 2013 04:43:38
I think dropping off the boarding parties then getting out of harm's way might make sense within the confines of the game; however, tactically it would be a mistake. Historically, the ship has always stayed close until the boarding action was complete, thus making a boarding action a risky affair. The ship provides support in the form of reinforcements, fire support, not to mention morale support by providing a place to run back to if the assault fails. How would you like to be the XO, leading a boarding party, while your captain says "We'll just be over here in the next sector - call us when it's safe to come back and pick you up!" I think I'd say "Up yours, sir!" and take over my own bridge!

Boarding a ship meant the entire crew (except those hands manning the guns) usually went over to the enemy ship, while the marine sharpshooters stayed behind to pick off people with their muskets. Because of the high risk and element of uncertainty involved, captains usually didn't attempt boarding actions unless they either had a clear advantage in manpower or crew quality, or were in a desparate situation and were trying a hail Mary pass. Therefore, I think that boarding actions, while they could get you another ship if t goes well, could also lose you yours if it goes badly. So, grappling hooks (er, I mean tractor beams) away, me laddies!
ZacharyDanielBringham said Mar 01, 2013 23:28:52
Right, but that was before the days of teleportation, and I think that's the main difference. Your team doesn't run the risk of falling into space and your ship doesn't run the risk of close range cannonade. Now, in Star Trek, as has been mentioned, the shields have to be down before a boarding party can be beamed aboard, so that adds an element of difficulty to the idea. You'd have to take down the shields before you could send over boarders.
Perhaps there could be some risk factor of getting out of range, like decreased efficiency. OR, cool idea, since the boarding party is run by the AI anyway, you could make it so boarders are robots, and if you get too far away from the enemy ship your bots shut down.
TaigiaReilly said Mar 02, 2013 00:45:42
Then why bother having the engineering boosting power to energy weapons and torpedos once the robots are on board? You could just have your helm circle aroumd the enemy ship or ships outside of their firing arc until the job is done and the ship is eliminated.
Then you just leave the hull adrift because you aren't getting other ships to add to your own. You are a TSN crew that are trained to operate TSN craft. Not a Torgoth or an Arvonian. And outside of a Kralien Dreadnought you wouldn't want their ships anyway, either. After all how many of their ships does it take to destroy one TSN Artemis class Light Cruiser? At least two depending on level of difficulty and competency of the crew.

Salvage may be possible but as long as space stations are a part of the core gameplay the rewards would be minor least we start to ignore DS01 all together.
[Last edited Mar 02, 2013 01:05:18]
Jim Johnson said Mar 02, 2013 05:02:53
Actually, the whole idea of boarders is a little outdated, especially in the Star Trek universe, with transporter technology. Why beam a boarding party onto an enemy ship, when you can beam a tri-cobalt device into a remote area of the ship (the captain's toilet, for example), and press the "Boom" button? Works a lot better, and it doesn't risk your crew's lives!

In most of the Trek episodes I've seen, the boarders come over usually to steal something (or someone) from the enemy ship - not to capture it. So, I'm thinking that boarding parties ought to be mission-specific events that are coded into the individual missions - not something that would be available for normal invasion scenarios.

TaigiaReilly has a good point about the crew not being familiar with the alien technology, and therefore probably wouldn't be able to use captured ships (certainly not to their full potential). So, nuke 'em all from orbit - it's the only way to be sure . . .
TaigiaReilly said Mar 02, 2013 05:10:25
Jim is correct. And you wouldn't be porting a bomb over to the enemy ship because the designer has no reason to add that. It would make homing torpedoes/nukes/mines redundant.
ZacharyDanielBringham said Mar 02, 2013 16:22:45
Not necessarily. Since you can't teleport through shields (in the Star Trek universe, at least), a teleported bomb would be kind of a coup de grace once you've lowered your enemy's shields using conventional weapons. Teleporter range would probably be shorter than typical missile range, so once again, it balances risk and reward, since a teleported bomb could be more damaging with a smaller effective radius, making it ideal for finishing off a ship near friendlies.
I realize that currently there is no provision for using captured ships, but this is a development forum. Perhaps "captured" ships could provide resources like energy or ordnance, maybe devices that could be adapted to work with TSN technology to boost shields or something.
Captain said Mar 02, 2013 16:30:53
I posted in an earlier thread the idea of resources. Things you can get and trade for that allow you to speed up production increase efficiency etc. You could have those aboard ships. that gives a reason to board.
To Mankind
And the hope that the war against folly may someday be won, after all

Isaac Asimov
TaigiaReilly said Mar 02, 2013 16:43:42
A teleported explosive device still makes the other explosive weapons with exception to the ECM redundant. All enemy ships have 70 hull HP. The Kraliens, the most common enemy in the game, have one ship with only 40 shield HP and another with 80 shield HP. A player ship could easily use ECM and boosted energy weapons to destroy the enemies shield then just close the distance for a teleported bomb.
Why be careful and strategic when you can be bold and headstrong by rushing in and teleporting explosives like your giving away halloween candy?

It's too much of an upgrade from the current standard munition there by making the MK1 homing obsolete. For an example of a good way to add new weapons look at TF2. The new weapons are always sideways to the original. They have advantages but also weaknesses that make you decide 'is it worth it? can I play in a way that this is a good choice?'
Captain said Mar 02, 2013 16:49:33
then use boarding shuttles to get on other ships. You can still board that way without worrying about all these bombs.
To Mankind
And the hope that the war against folly may someday be won, after all

Isaac Asimov
Login below to reply: