When you go bankrupt

[CW]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lynx:
I disagree with the abandon ship idea

---

It is plainly illogical to NOT have the option to abandon ship or cut off supply. If I can order my ships to do suicidal attacks why can't I simple NOT pay for things that I don't want any more? Your reasoning might be that the rule adds challenge to the game, but I strongly believe that most people hate rules that don't make any sense.

[henk brouwer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CW:
[b] It is plainly illogical to NOT have the option to abandon ship or cut off supply.B]

---

what about the mothball option?

[CW]

quote:

---

Originally posted by henk brouwer:
what about the mothball option?

---

You can't mothball a ship without a shipyard, and sometimes you just don't have one nearby.

[Cheeze]

Yes, the self-destruct device is there to deter boarding parties, but it does serve this other purpose. I don't entirely agree with the abandon ship option, since it makes it too easy for players to send ships as far from their own systems as possible, and then simply abandon them when they are out of supplies or usefulness. That would unbalance game play since it would not check the player who just continues to build and send ships out to attack constantly and doesn't mind their maintenance expenses. I would also say it's mostly unrealistic. From the perspective of a crew, why abandon a ship when there's no hope of being recovered? Sci-fi stories that do an "abandon ship" are either leaving a ship that's being destroyed or they engage some self-destruct device/sequence. In this sense, the AI is annoyingly on target...it's ships immediately return for resupply when they are low on supplies.

You don't want a ship any more or can't afford it? Then you can: destroy it (SDD or fire on it), mothball it, scrap it (both requiring a shipyard), or send it on a suicide mission. In any result, it requires at least some thought and planning on the player's part. Or you hope the computer decides to trash that one when you run out of resources to support your ships. This does put it out of your control, but it could be said that different ships have, or do not have, resources that keep them going where others, even inconveniently, must be scrapped.

[Rhinestone Cowboy]

How about a Life Pod/Emergency Escape Component, Which is much Cheaper and smaller than a self-destruct?

If it is possible this component does not work in combat mode(?) and/or only works when the ship is 50%(?) damaged.

If this is feasible, it gives you a component that enables you to abandon crippled ships and doesn't have the cost or tonnage of a Self destruct device. It also cannot be used to deter boarding parties if it can be made not to work in combat.

I have yet to dabble in mods, but am continually amazed by what people have done.

Is this feasable?

RhineStone Cowboy

[CW]

quote:

---

You don't want a ship any more or can't afford it? Then you can: destroy it (SDD or fire on it), mothball it, scrap it (both requiring a shipyard), or send it on a suicide mission.

---

My reasoning: can I tell a crew to commit suicide? yes. Therefore can I tell them to crash their ship into a sun or do some other stupid things to commit suicide? I should! There you go. If I can't afford a ship, (never happened to me before but still...) I don't see why I can't choose which ship I want to keep.

The other thing is, if the game doesn't behave like what people expect, then challenging it will be, but no FUN! (A lot of frustration though)

[Suicide Junkie]

In tactical combat, you can give orders to ram a star, planet or wormhole. You still require movement, but your ship does explode and require no further maintenance...
In any case, you'd need engines to suicide your solo ship, otherwise you'd stay in orbit.

If you've got engines, you can fly into the nearest black hole or ship-damaging storm, but you could also just return home and get repaired/resupplied/scrapped.