SE5 Poll on Slot Layout, take 2

[Markavian]

How about an option - plainly - I did not ask for slot layouts based on the Starfury design, I thought SE4 system worked just fine.

[Will]

The way ship design works could probably have a big impact on the population of players that SEV would appeal to. If things are just like they are now in Starfury, it would likely be very interesting to the more hard-core set that likes to dig down into the nitty-gritty details, and would turn off casual players who would rather not spend five mintues designing one ship.

What would be really nice is "have your cake and eat it too". List out a bunch of components you would like to include, and the game will generate a design based on that list. Those who are interested in the details of design can then shuffle around the placement of components. Otherwise, the design can just be accepted as-is.

[Captain Kwok]

Although Fyron's poll is obviously biased, you should also consider some features that slot layouts have such as directional damage, a bit of eye candy to overcome spreadsheet feel, and in Star Fury's case moddable weapon arcs etc.

On the other hand, there has to be some caution for use of slot layouts, such as having them attached to individual ships as in Star Fury, if you are transferring such a system to a Space Empires type game.

And for the record I can design ships equally fast between both systems. The primary reason why it might take longer to design is a ship is not necessarily click and drag, but because you need to take more caution in where you place items - which sounds like a strategic decision to me...

[Fyron]

Captain Kwok said:
Although Fyron's poll is obviously biased...

Erm... how is the poll biased? It covers all the opitons: yes and yes, yes and no, don't care, no and yes, no and no. The descriptions are not slanted or anything. It covers both extremes, having changed your mind, and the middle ground.

[Slick]

The unknowns for non-beta testers are:

- (from the recently posted interview with MM) component placement affects damage in a similar way that Starfury handles damage. i.e. damage from the front hits shields, then armor, then outer hull then inner hull; internal damage is more likely to hit components placed in the front. With the AI handling multiplayer combat, how much does that affect gameplay? The real question is that for ships with identical components, how much does component placement matter in combat? My gut feeling is that this is a good thing that doesn't make a huge difference but adds another facet to ship design. I would think from a reality standpoint (let's not argue about reality in this game) it makes sense that damage should be taken this way.

- How much of a pain is it to design or re-design ships with this method? Time spent designing ships would probably go up, but personally that doesn't bother me because proportionally time spent in ship design is small. Additionally, if component placement has in-game effects, so much the better for game detail. Also, if I modify a design by only moving a component, I would assume that this would be considered a new design and as such previously constucted ships would have the old layout. Would I have to "upgrade" the ship to relocate components?

- Are there exploits to this method or are they not considered exploits at all. What if I shielded my bridge with cheap components. Exploit or smart design? I'd say the latter and also would point out that most Navy combat vessels have more vital areas shielded by both armor and less vital components. What if statistically more damage is taken from the front? A smart player would shield his vital components from the front with less vital components in between.

- I played a lot of Star Fleet Battles (SFB) in the '80s and that's how I eventually stumbled upon the Space Empires series around the time of III transitioning to IV. Each game has good reasons for its mechanics but I have always wished for some of the SFB aspects to be in SE such as weapon arcs and side-specific shields. Starfury has weapon arcs and side specific shields (armor too), I'm guessing SE:V probably has them too. SFB handled internal damage via a chart so there was no aspect of component placement. Now with the AI handling the helm during multiplayer combat, maybe SE:IV 360 degree arcs are superior, but they should be easily modded in SE:V if desired. Would the AI maneuver to protect downed or lesser shields?

Overall opinion: I did not ask for it but based on playing SF and knowledge of SE:IV, I think I might like it. Subject to change after playing SE:V.

[Baron Munchausen]

Slots are ok if 'inconvenient' when dealing with many components. The real problem is the difference between ship sets. In the 'form fitting' slot scheme, races that have been given 'slender' ship artwork will have far fewer actual slots to work with in designing their ships. With Starfury you can go buy another ship if you want something different. With SE V you will be stuck with the racial set you have chosen, and screwed if that set has 1/2 the slots of some other player's shipset. Ships needing many small components, like transports, could be impossible to finish properly in some shipsets. We need a standard grid for a game like SE V where fitting weapons to firing points is not necessary.

[Kamog]

The real problem is the difference between ship sets. In the 'form fitting' slot scheme, races that have been given 'slender' ship artwork will have far fewer actual slots to work with in designing their ships.

That's a good point, I'm concerned about that too.

OK, for SEV I'm only going to play races with square blocky ships like the Borg! Yup, the Borg are my favorite race now. Hopefully the Borg dreadnought will be just a huge cube full of slots that takes up the entire ship design window. With the maximized number of components, it will easily beat other races with thin spindly-shaped ships.

[Captain Kwok]

Ships still have a tonnage as dictated by the game and not by the number of slots they have... what BM was saying below was that if slots were based on each ship so some might have an advantage in how you could arrange components...

[narf poit chez BOOM]

The number of slots will most likely be standardized.

[Baron Munchausen]

Captain Kwok said:
Ships still have a tonnage as dictated by the game and not by the number of slots they have... what BM was saying below was that if slots were based on each ship so some might have an advantage in how you could arrange components...

Actually, I was saying that you might not be able to use the full tonnage allowed because of not enough slots. It won't happen early, of course, but ships that use many small components, like transports, could in fact run out of slots.

There are also very real differences between the shipsets in the proportions of armor, outer hull, and inner hull slots. This also will make for arbitrary and unfair ship design restrictions.