Ship Cripple on Death

[SeaFalcon]

Novas would be the only problem. But, be honest, how many people use Novas?

BHG|C- has some double nova bombers :cool:

We use them to Torp equipment of or damage it from Order capitals.
And of course you see them land, and fully repaired undocked.

Lots and lots of people who fly caps these days ain't smart enough.

---

Bombers get quite expensive to fly.
And so does everything above.

All I want is an FLhook on that character to keep it from un-docking for 2hours
no matter if it's a trader or not. Dead = Dead.

But people may swap to a different char to fly somewhere else.
But draining people empty from credits is a bit meh imo.

[cursebg]

Actually it would be great,because now you have to spent some time in making money to keep your fighters/other crafts in a good condition...after all i think capital ships have to be seen more rarely than they are now and this would fix it...and if u don't want to be bomber ganked,don't fly a cap ship without any other protection around you..after all it's not your everyday ship for sightseeing, it's a war machine that must be protected..noone goes out with a tank on the streets like that..

---

[Prysin]

i like the idea, but in my opinion, too much stress on the server

---

DHC Discord

[Varyag]

Finding escorts are about as common as finding hen's teeth.

olololescorts are not the answer to every large ship in the game.

... and yes we do drive tanks without protection on presence patrols on occation.

---

"I looked up and all I saw was green death"

[McNeo]

Voted yes.

I think this is an idea with a lot of merit. However, it should be accompanied by a broad strengthening of capital ship abilities, particularly their ability to protect themselves from bombers. Right now, this issue is most prevalent for medium and heavy cruisers, due to their inability to tank bomber damage combined with their mostly lacklustre precision weaponry.

For those who do whore their caps and 'don't want to pay to use them', I wonder if you heard but capital ships tend to take a lot more resources to keep in working order than a fighter. This is reflected in their cost to purchase, and should be reflected in forced repairs. The fear of a 20 odd million credit death bill should be a great discouraging factor to flying your cap in a silly way without support.

First of all, this policy would encourage the formation of groups around capital ship players who have friends. If we're all about teamwork, as the mining changes seem to imply, then this is only a good thing. Secondly, it discourages lots of them flying around at once shooting everything. Thirdly, the increased risk of taking out a cap should enable them to be slightly strengthened according to the estimated bill of one dying (GBs might not be strengthened at all, whereas battleships may receive a modest buff. Light battleships may receive a lesser buff than heavy ones, as heavy ones have more weapon hardpoints and will thus be more costly to repair upon death). Lastly, it won't simply be a cost that people can absorb like, for example, the ballooning cost of actually buying a cap, because it's the people who fly them who decide how much they pay. Those who fly in safe areas, or with a heavy guard may die very rarely, but those who feel the need to go with a Liberty Dreadnought to New Berlin will find themselves paying the price much more frequently.

The cost of repairs is a poor reason to vote no, as that's the entire point of such a policy. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, on the assumption that the no votes consist mainly of those who can't be bothered to get credits or who fly their cap a lot, that their no vote is misguided and pretty selfish.

Not being able to find escorts is also a rubbish reason to vote negatively. Sina manages to find escorts just fine, to the extent that over the years, he's formed some of the most infamous groups of recent times. If you can't find anyone to play with, then make some friends.

I do hope this proposal is considered (along with a proportional buff to caps according to repair cost), but somehow I doubt it.

Edit: To clarify, until very recently, I owned a few large caps, and had access to a fair deal more. Keeping them safe from exploding wasn't really an issue in my mind (unless it was the Durango, in which case I'd get chewed out by Joe if it died on my watch). In fact, the only thing to act as a discouragement to flying these ships was the impact that dying would have on their "reputation", which is quite superfluous as a reason. Everyone else, without something to protect, would charge. Now, instead of their "reputation", it'll be their wallet. That's a good thing. Promoting caution, prior and strategic thinking and discouraging stupidity are all good things when you deal with caps, and raising the burn rate of credits with even fighters will encourage an increase in trading/mining across the board.

Now, it's almost free to fight in a fighter, and many prefer the razor to the CD. Well what if that razor cost you three million in repairs every time you died eh? Now I can see that balancing the number of razors and CDs I see around, and stop folks in bombers getting involved against an enemy cap with fighter escort (due to the cost of repairing a supernova for example). Sure, the cap might die, but so will most of the bombers, so it encourages each side to pick their battlefield more carefully.

Armour should definitely be exempted from forced repairs though. Just in case that got through by accident.

[Exsiled_one]

How is "high cost of repairs" an argument for "no" side?
That should be the whole point as McNeo says.

It would be lovely to see less of capital ships floating about "just because", oh and the number of people that would have to trade again? That'd be nice.

---

<span style="color:#33CC00">I AM GIVING AWAY MONEY TO CREATIVE MINDS*</span>

[Varyag]

If you wanted to go the route of more realistic resource requirements and such, Navy captains do not have to buy, replace, beg for escorts, pay for upkeep, or stay in port 99% of the time. To say that a nation controlling multiple SOLAR SYSTEMS cannot support a couple dozen caps that are only about a 1k long at most is pretty lulzy.

Also, bombers can kill most light caps before fighters can kill them if they have any skill at all. I don't ever fly battleships so the stubborn armor that they enjoy and that also gives them time is not available on cruisers and battle cruisers. Sure, I am positive some pilots will say olololicanhaz bomber kill in 5 seconds with 1337 pwnage get escort n00b, but if the only time you get to play is when there are 60 people on the server and 90% of the time your escort consists of new players who you are trying to help get setup, lolbombers are going to pick you apart pretty quickly.

Honestly, I feel I am just NO-Uing at this point and need some sleep and this semester to end. Then my adittude will improve.

I will continue my lolwuttery if this becomes a sirius proposal.

---

"I looked up and all I saw was green death"

[75th Mosquitos]

oh wow, nice post McNeo.

everyone saying that the damage should be made to be 50% or 40% is having a laugh, your ship just exploded, like KABOOM, its gone, nothing left, you would not find a part of the ship with only 50% damage, especially since all your guns also explode from your hull when you die.

so that arguement is just void. everyone else moaning about "having to grind just to fly the ship" seriously, how often do you get killed?? by the sounds of it you just are planet diving for the fun of it, just undocking and heading to camp in the nearest star.

if you die that often, you are doing it wrong.

and normally, if you save up to buy a dread or whatever, a battleship. you dont save to get that single exact amount of credits, you will save to get a little more for repairs and guns and armour, unless you purposely calculated it so that you have the credits right to the decimal point, seriously stop moaning.

Bombers would find themselves paying around what.. 4 million for repairs on death, if not more including all the mines and CD's and CM's you just lost. im sure a more experianced bomber pilot could tell you how much a snac is to repair.

Fighters also as McNeo said, mini razor repairs... ouch, codename weapon repairs... ouch, cheeta thruster repairs... ouch!! people with think before they enguanage, and if they are engaged they will be more inclined to run away, rather than fight to the death because well, you wont lose anything.

If you fly a cap and lose it, you are gonna lose alot more than 4 million, because you should be much more intelligent as a character in charge of a possible 1bil credit attack platform.

sometimes you may get caught with your pants down by bombers in a capital ship, its gonna happen, RP it out and just do your best. its happened to me many times.

this idea also incourages TRADING, and we all know the cycle of trading in this game

Trader > Pirate > Police/bounty hunter > Merc > Terrorist > Millitary

[Diomedes]

I see merits to both sides of this. One note however is that implementing this will pretty much mean that I never get a cruiser, liner or above. I trade and smuggle enough as is to support trying out new ships, loadouts and just for the fun of it. Freelancer is a game not work. I'm taking a long time to find the bankroll to even consider a cap, let alone pay for repairs any time I lose at PvP.

RP wise, I see the point and adding some fear of death is a good idea. However, in RP the captain of the capital ship doesn't pay for it, the state does. Moreover, snub pilots for most factions would get a salary. Most have argued the point that the RP advantage is a fear of death with will drive trade. But the driving of that trade is OORP. In any case, the point is the state will produce however many capital ships it feels its war machine needs, and will punish rash use of them through military discipline. Heroic and admirable use of the ship however, usually gets rewarded even if the ship is lost (not often, but does happen) or severely damaged.

I guess my point is that I can see this change limiting as much good RP as it creates. What if someone plays a suicidal or thoughtless character that is supposed to engage anything he sees. The SCRA SCUD squads were pretty fun to encounter, why should we punish that with the bill for repairing their nova launchers? I've had one or two positive responses to my Marauder Hegemon (inspired and adapted from the Reavers in Firefly), which if it came across a battleship would very clearly attempt to pirate it and attack (unsuccessfully I'm sure).

My final point, and perhaps more of a consideration than anything else I've written is simply about the server atmosphere:

Any change must consider the player base. Any change that favours established players with big ships and bankrolls will lessen the intake of new players and lose more casual players. And I'm talking about RP worthy players who could contribute something interesting, but aren't interested in spending 60% of their time on Disco trading. It's a balance that has to be kept in mind.

Finally, personal stress level on the server is a good thing to keep low. This may not be the worst thing, but surely won't help.

---

[Pingu!]

A-a. Just no. I dont want to traid few hours a week, just to support repair bill, or replacing weapons (in case of codenames, that would be pretty much $$). In my case, it's just matter of time, about trading, which I don't have. That much realism is not good, but if you want that kind if realism, there are more important things to fix about disco realism then.

---

But you either follow our rules here and work with us - or STFU and GTFO.