Component order

sapperland · #1 November 20th, 2000, 12:21 AM

Does the order of components placed on ships matter for what takes damage? Like in the game starfire where damage from most weapons goes from left to right. Do some components take more damage than others, like heavy mount guns?

Phoenix-D · #2 November 20th, 2000, 12:24 AM

Dunno about damage, but to see what components can take what damage, right click. Note the "tonnage structure" below the actual size.. for things like armor, this will be much higher. THAT is the amount of damage the comp takes before being destroyed.

Phoenix-D

Instar · #3 November 20th, 2000, 01:14 AM

It doesnt matter what order you have the comps in. Damage is random, after Shields/Armor. (Unless the weapon skips through taht)

sapperland · #4 November 21st, 2000, 05:49 AM

I wish the damage was done in order from left to right. That would open up a lot of design options for players. Like using engines to suck damage while weapons are hit Last or saving engines for the get away...oh wait, thats right, you can't run away when you hit the wall. And where would you put life support and crew quarters? Does anyone know what effect losing life support or crew quarters has on ships in battle or on ship operation after a battle?

great.throwdini · #5 November 21st, 2000, 11:18 AM

Re: "I wish the damage was done in order from left to right."

Well, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense given the simplicity of damage modelling in combat -- since there is no "orientation" to damaging blows, it is difficult to justify a left to right ordering to components.

Specifying the order in which components is damaged is a bit too much for the relatively simple set-up of SEIV combat ... although I could stretch to justify why crew quarters might be the first to get it (your empire designs vessels with meatspace on the exterior of the hull), it is difficult to carry the justification across all possible components in the game (how to justify that a self-destruct mechanism would be the first to go?).

I fear the AI would not be able to cope with players capable of such design finesse.

I'd also prefer to see some (limited) modelling of fore / aft / starboard / port in combat first

WendellM · #6 November 21st, 2000, 12:52 PM

Hi Throwdini (News Radio was a great show, wasn't it?

),

In Starfire (the boardgame "inspiration" for SE4), component order matters since hits are generally from left to right. Shields have to be placed leftmost; armor immediately follows; then come the other systems. Some weapons skip certain component types, while others roll a die to determine which one of the next few components is hit, and some component types have to be placed in contiguous blocks (possibly broken up by bulkheads) with a random number of losses per weapon hit. This is an "outer hull" to "inner core" progression rather than a fore/starboard/dorsal affair.

All of this allows the ship's designer to roughly anticipate how his ship will be shot up. For example, lose engines first, but keep the best weapons, or lose weapons but be able to run away by preserving engines. Or a mix. Or, let the crew quarters & life support holds take hits to preserve engines and weapons during the battle, but at a cost afterward in loss of efficiency/lives. Spend space and money for internal bulkheads (for carriers and freighters), or use it for outer defenses, or use it for more fighters/cargo and trust in your escorts. Starfire is pretty sophisticated in these matters.

SE4 has some of this with its "Shield then Armor then everything else" hit order, and it sort of makes sense that after Shields and Armor you can't expect to design what will be hit next. Plus, there's the issue that you mentioned of the AI trying to match players' sophisticated designs if hit order mattered. But, some folks seem to miss the detail that Starfire offers.

Dweeb · #7 November 21st, 2000, 03:24 PM

quote:
Originally posted by WendellM:

In Starfire (the boardgame "inspiration" for SE4), component order matters since hits are generally from left to right. Shields have to be placed leftmost; armor immediately follows; then come the other systems. Some weapons skip certain component types, while others roll a die to determine which one of the next few components is hit, and some component types have to be placed in contiguous blocks (possibly broken up by bulkheads) with a random number of losses per weapon hit. This is an "outer hull" to "inner core" progression rather than a fore/starboard/dorsal affair.

This is how it worked in SE2. Yes, I played SE2!!

sapperland · #8 November 21st, 2000, 07:08 PM

Choosing the order of components is what made starfire so great. You could spend a great deal of time designing ships. Your opponent could not see your designs so he would have to just learn what sort of damage your ship could take and dish out by combat. This would lead to ships made to hit and run, ie engines on far right. Armored brutes that had few weapons but might get your opponent to waste shots on and were cheap to build. Ships that would fight to the end with weapons on the far right but couldnt move after taking damage. Also the location of PD's played a very important role, if a ship design put the PD's more left then the enemy could stand off and use missles to finish it off. If you put the PD's more right then the ship could stop incoming fire but gave up offensive fire or speed after getting damaged.
Speed in Starfire is life. This is key since the play area had no "walls" If you could out run your enemy then you can disengage and live to fight another day. You could set hard hitting close range ships to cover warp points and long range ships too guard inside systems.
I wonder how hard it would be for the game to allow for this finesse of design and combat modeling.