Not Implemented Space Introduction of Decay to Space Components.

Narmy said:

actually good players do spend cash. good pvp is the smae as good pve on the ground

Click to expand...

and that might be the case but I can't think of anything on the ground outside of mutant rancor and BW rancor for requiring that good of gear but at the end of the day narmy my only issue with your idea is the rate of decay for crafted parts if you have it where it match's responsible armor and weapon care as well as a option to insure it the same way you can ground in case of death then it would be more reasonable.

EthavanCrowe said:

Like I said, those details can be worked out. But don't downvote this idea just because the number "200" was thrown out there. Upvoting this idea won't write that number in stone.

Click to expand...

Then make it to where space parts last as long as responsible armor and weapon gear

Narmy said:

THis proposal has NOTHING to do with changes to credit payouts etc Please actually read the proposal properly and ignore anyone using credits nerf etc to try hijack the proposal because they are unhappy that this is a middle of the road proposal rather than catering to an extremist view point.

Click to expand...

I did address the proposal. I actually did that first...directly after acknowledging that this thread has seemingly split into 2 separate conversations. I stated (in summary) that I belive attempting to increase the reliance on SW, will eventually lead to SW being a less desirable endeavor, as well as why.

The 2nd half/my proposal was to address the other half of the room that was talking about a precieved imbalance of space farm. An imbalance which, admittedly, I called you out for being a not insubstantial part of. While I can understand that can be frustrating, I did not intend it as a means of goading a response...I only use it as an example of where the frustration of others is coming from.

I included my suggestion because I'm not really a fan of "shooting down suggestions if you don't have a solution yourself."

Not entirely sure what you're talking about with 'extremists viewpoints.'
And I'm also confused about how you can attempt to call out someone for "actually reading the proposal" when there's an entire paragraph dedicated to a reply. Not to mention my bit about new player experience being a direct tie-in.

Bullet version.
1)Clearly some folks are irritated at the current state of space.
2)Proposed solutions are being discussed.
3)I believe that the originally proposed ideas will only make SW more expensive, and less profitable...as well as make it harder for new players to get started as SW.
4)Others suggested cred farm nerf as a another option to fix what they see as the problem. I believe the cred farm nerf at this point would only reward those who have already exploited the system while making it harder on everyone else (especially new players)
5)If you're going to call someone out for not reading...you should, at the very, least make sure you actually read what they posted.
6)I've seen radical economy changes (like the ones proposed) break other iterations of this game, and would rather not see it again.
7) If R3 can effectively enforce it's anti-afk policies in space, I believe it would go a fair way in elieviating some of the irritation of point 1.
8)The proposal was not 'hijacked' by 'extremists' (dramatic much?)...it's been a discussion of possible alternatives to the originally proposed idea.
9)I've no interest in turning this into a (fill-in-the-blank as creatively as you like) contest, so I will not be posting here any further.

Peace,
Zo

Zohath said:

I did address the proposal. I actually did that first...directly after acknowledging that this thread has seemingly split into 2 separate conversations. I stated (in summary) that I belive attempting to increase the reliance on SW, will eventually lead to SW being a less desirable endeavor, as well as why.

The 2nd half/my proposal was to address the other half of the room that was talking about a precieved imbalance of space farm. An imbalance which, admittedly, I called you out for being a not insubstantial part of. While I can understand that can be frustrating, I did not intend it as a means of goading a response...I only use it as an example of where the frustration of others is coming from.

I included my suggestion because I'm not really a fan of "shooting down suggestions if you don't have a solution yourself."

Not entirely sure what you're talking about with 'extremists viewpoints.'
And I'm also confused about how you can attempt to call out someone for "actually reading the proposal" when there's an entire paragraph dedicated to a reply. Not to mention my bit about new player experience being a direct tie-in.

Bullet version.
1)Clearly some folks are irritated at the current state of space.
2)Proposed solutions are being discussed.
3)I believe that the originally proposed ideas will only make SW more expensive, and less profitable...as well as make it harder for new players to get started as SW.
4)Others suggested cred farm nerf as a another option to fix what they see as the problem. I believe the cred farm nerf at this point would only reward those who have already exploited the system while making it harder on everyone else (especially new players)
5)If you're going to call someone out for not reading...you should, at the very, least make sure you actually read what they posted.
6)I've seen radical economy changes (like the ones proposed) break other iterations of this game, and would rather not see it again.
7) If R3 can effectively enforce it's anti-afk policies in space, I believe it would go a fair way in elieviating some of the irritation of point 1.
8)The proposal was not 'hijacked' by 'extremists' (dramatic much?)...it's been a discussion of possible alternatives to the originally proposed idea.
9)I've no interest in turning this into a (fill-in-the-blank as creatively as you like) contest, so I will not be posting here any further.

Peace,
Zo

Click to expand...

Fair point, I have said my piece(s), there's only so much that can be said until one feels like their opinion and voice is getting ignored or misconstrued. I will be hoping off this as well

Not to step on anyone's toes here, this situation effects people server wide. That being said this will likely kill the JTL population if it passes. I don't know what personal issues you have in this PlayerVoice, I can see there are aggravations toward you that seem to exist past this post. The simple truth is this system will not be for the players, this system will benefit just a few and a specific profession. As a senator I feel like you should have more consideration for the full player base, and I am slightly sad as a newer player to see some of the remarks made.

Been keeping an eye on this PV and going to post up my own views. I think the general idea of decay on parts is not a bad shout. The challenge is that space was deliberately designed to work differently to the ground system - we have condition on the ground and hitpoints in space. Adding condition for space components would make sense, however it should follow similar rules for ground decay - so 5% on death and damage reduces the condition a little bit at a time. This ensures we don't end up with a confusing "space decay" and "ground decay" - there's plenty enough to confuse players without introducing new items.

I strongly dislike linking decay to launches - I feel decay should be linked to how hard you push your ship. Keeping your weapon firing without pause should reduce the condition of that weapon more than firing short bursts. Using abilities should also have a small decay implication (e.g. overcharging). Popular AFK spots could have a "microfragment" debuff that increases the amount of decay in that area. It won't be noticeable if you hop up there for a couple of hours, but leave your ship there overnight and you'll come back to a wreck.

I would also suggest that that the initial Condition value is a multiplier of hitpoints, rather than a brand new experimentation line.

Repairs needs careful thinking about. If decay is added the repair mechanic needs to be simple enough that it works regardless of if you're a casual or hardcore player - not everybody spends double digit hours playing JtL each day. I think having Shipwrights involved is a good idea, ideally it should be something non-established Shipwrights want to do rather than the more established ones. My own feeling is that this should be done from a spaceport rather than unplugging items from the ship and lugging them somewhere - a Shipwright goes to a Starport to repair a ship in a similar way that Entertainers go to a Cantina to perform. In my head there could be a window highlighting all of the components installed in a ship and the SW selects the ones they're repairing. This would require a tool (perhaps requiring some easy to obtain Artisan / DE / Architect parts) and then some type of consumable element - perhaps "Spare Parts". Spare Parts could be made by a SW by dropping a couple of pieces of space junk alongside some steel & chemical into another tool - or a bin in a Crafting station. Each repair would require a specific number of spare parts based on the condition and part level. Yes you could complicate it by having different levels, but I don't feel it's needed. Let's have a system that doesn't care if you're a new shipwright with next to no resources or if you're a founding R3 shipwright with millions of the server best. What would be very cool would be to have a designated area in the centre area of a starport to activate repairs in - think the place Mando get's his work done...

If we're desperate for a credit sink we could have a Jawa who sells us a "special" component that's needed to repair anything above a level 5 certificated component.

So i was Thinking about this the other day, regarding the idea to bring space more inline with ground thing, so excuse my bit of rambling here

I don't know much about ground combat at all, i've almost been exclusively playing in space, but do ground people have to repair all of their gear and weapons every time they die? or have to fix their parts if they just barely get away before they head out again?

those are the two questions i keep finding myself asking, and i don't quite understand why the push to bring space inline with ground is such a big matter, does this mean that if we get a condition stat on our parts, do we no longer have to repair after death? or in the attempt to bring space more inline with ground, be even more punishing than ground than it already kind of is

and considering that condition on ground armor and weapons goes down on death, not the second they step outside a city, why would there be a push for part condition to go down on launch instead of on death(to be more inline with ground)

the more i think about it the more this push just kind of seems to disincentivize people from going into space

and if i recall someone brought up using ships for travel instead of paying for tickets, well we can't travel to shuttleports with our ships, so we still have to use the shuttle tickets

also sounds like there is a bit of contention regarding some afk grind, i personally don't know much about this topic, but seeing how this server despises any form of afk combat, this should be heavily nerfed, why is the ability to do this even a thing right now

but if we have no choice but to change how space works, then i'd rather have a condition that goes down on death just like ground armor and weapons that can be repaired by a shipwright like Grogar was mentioning in post #47

I see some new players here, so I thought I'd pop in to provide some context.

1. The AFK discussion is useless because my second Player Voice has already been approved. The main AFK spot (Scyks) is being nerfed.

2. This Player Voice was made (at least partially) in response to the amount of credits being generated from space. Specifically, credits generated from the system, rather than other players. My first Player Voice, which is one of the most downvoted posts in R3 history, was to nerf credit generation by 80%. Narmy's proposal here is a more creative and less aggressive way of achieving the same outcome.

I can see why new players don't see this as an issue. Here's some data I gathered after about 6+ months of farming space for 2-8 hours a day:

Scyks (AFK): ~750k+/hour
Kashyyk Transports: ~1mil+/hour
Officers: ~1.25mil+/hour

Keep in mind, these are conservative numbers. The better your ship, the more money you get. As you can see, this is R3's equivalent to money-printing, which no one would support in real life. Now you might be wondering, "How good of a ship do I need to do this?" Well, lucky for you, all you need is to be an ace pilot and have about 2-3 mil to spend on crafted parts. That's the only barrier of entry.

That's going to be it from me, unless someone insists on calling me a liar again (I posted a video of me grinding in the #space-senate channel).

I don't care how you look at it you need to deflate the credits. I have given solutions. Yes people ultimately want RE parts. By taking spare trash parts and using them to create Durability panels similar to the Smuggler and Armor. Each level would cost more in spare trash parts to apply to your components. My suggestion is on first page. You can use 3 professions in my opinion. Engineer, SW, and Smuggler. Engineer recycles the looted parts required. SW creates the durability panels using recycled metals and Smuggler applies the panels.

RE and SW parts Decay
Credit sink
SW, Engineer, Smuggler
People spending credits to do what they love.
Thousands of parts taken out of circulation that are normally sold to Chassis dealer.

In my original post it would take about 300, RE VI plus parts to fully enhance durability for a Heavy X. It's still going to decay but at a much lower rate

Nerf ORD randomize spawn locations.

You already have recyclers just modify.
Smuggler can apply stat mods
SW can craft parts. I don't code but I think you can make it work. Just seeing all the other pieces added to the game already.

While I get that something needs to change, I disagree with "every X launches"

Space is very fast. faster than the ground game. Perhaps as a percentage of the hp decreases with each of the repairs done. Add on a HP decrease for each droid command used on each part. EO4 should do some damage to the engine.

And I don't agree with simply exempting RE'd parts. Why not exempt CRAFTED parts from decay? I mean looted ground gear decays... Oh, because that perfect set of ship parts is hard to come by? Yeah... and? Like someone's ground gear isn't just as hard to come by.

And while we're at it... the chassis dealer should drop his payouts to 100 x cert level. That is more in line with the ground loot and junk dealer...

The Point of this Post with some history.

****MAYBE RE PROJECTS***** Should result in a craftable schematic? Then a SW can remake that item. thus have decay same rate as toher items?



Well first off Im new to server Not even Fetching my wings as of yet. But I am sitting looking at the very CD i had to Sign a NDA for Alpha SWG SPACE EXPANSION. So i can only offer a historic perception of this idea.

In the beginning before the darktimes. We had Decay. Chassis everything would decay. Alpha it was every time ya launched and every time ya blew up. it was insane. So there was decay the SW did get repeat business. Also Repair kits were in huge demand Plasma conduit repair kits aswell.

Then we got Wookiee world. ROW. Suddenly there were ships ya could only get once the Decay meant that was it. Poof Gone. So it was removed.

Im a Old Iconic driven player. I Like the idea that Other players needed other players. SWG was based on this. Crafters often LOVE to craft they like the whole system. Personally They can have it I hate it! Yes i had a SW only to RE parts.

Re Parts...... RE Projects are like finding that last item to complete that collection you have been trying to complete for years lol. Takes alot of time and frankly that time should be rewarded.



It seems theres a Space makes to much Creds. Argument going. Well If Ground is not making the Same that Space it Grinding a spawn maybe ya need to look at ground payouts.

Of course Space is perfect just the way it it and nothing should change. But it's going to change.

This proposal is a pretty good compromise. I support it.

I would like to see some minor refinements, particularly with the way that Condition loss is triggered.

The Condition loss should be triggered by damage to any part of the ship from any source, including overload programs. Such a trigger will allow quick trips to space to outfit or test a set of components without permanently damaging them. It will allow experienced pilots to launch into space with new pilots to talk them through the basics, as I often do, without incurring the Condition loss. It will also cause the Condition loss, as intended, for any serious space activity where the overload programs are used, or any damage is suffered.

Also the starter ship and the prototype components should be exempt from the Condition loss. This will make the proposed changes have less of a negative impact for new pilots. It would just be another thing to learn about as you progress, in the same spirit as the 100 credit repair at the space station, remember that? Ah the good 'ol days.

Cyclopeus said:

The Condition loss should be triggered by damage to any part of the ship from any source, including overload programs. Such a trigger will allow quick trips to space to outfit or test a set of components without permanently damaging them. It will allow experienced pilots to launch into space with new pilots to talk them through the basics, as I often do, without incurring the Condition loss. It will also cause the Condition loss, as intended, for any serious space activity where the overload programs are used, or any damage is suffered.

Also the starter ship and the prototype components should be exempt from the Condition loss. This will make the proposed changes have less of a negative impact for new pilots. It would just be another thing to learn about as you progress, in the same spirit as the 100 credit repair at the space station, remember that? Ah the good 'ol days.

Click to expand...

This is how it was. As for starter ship and gear I like it if it can be done to those ships can be done to the one time only ships chassis aswell. yeah I do remember the 100cr repairs and people complained then lol.

I've only been here about 20 days so I can't speak from experience regarding the longer term issues. Since arriving I've mastered SW as it was one of my main profs back in live. I love JTL so that was obviously going to be my first focus. I do agree with a lot of the proposal. Not keen on the tick-on-launch idea for decay though. But I do like the idea of introducing some kind of decay elements that involve the SWs in a more meaningful way. Perhaps something that can encourage interaction between players. I dunno, maybe make it so SWs are needed for the best possible chance to repair stuff to 100% condition, without completely gating off the option for non-SWs to repair.

With regards to the conversation people are having about the top tier farming. Aren't there always going to be players who min/max and focus on creds-per-hour spreadsheet gameplay? Regardless of what measures are ever implemented to counter that behaviour people will always find a way to squeeze the most they possible can.
My concern is that measures might hurt the newer players, or casual players. Personally I have no interest in AFK farming for maximum profits because I'm a crusty old veteran who just wants to relive the glory days. I'm sure there are many others here who have families, careers, responsibilities or whatever.

But back to the proposal. I am in full support of something being introduced, but please not a tick-on-launch decay. Any decay should come directly from things being used, as people have already pointed out. Make it make sense, but also make it so it doesn't punish the masses so hard that it kills the fun.

Narmy said:

There is no equivelent with the space RE game on the ground and that has to be taken into account. And as for ground gear when it decays its fairly easy to replace it like for like. in space this is not the case at all as each Reverse Engineered part is totally unique. That has to be protected because for many pilots it is their end game content. If you read the proposal and stop listening to players who have no understanding of how space works you would see that RE parts where not except from decay. That there was a mechanic that would allow decay on these parts but that they would be fully repairable instead of decaying away to uselessness.

Click to expand...

For one, I DO understand. I also think it's ridiculous that the best parts are looted rather than crafted. The best parts are from loot and RE, making a SW pretty much just a missile manufacturer. There used to be a market for crafted parts. The only reason people go to or have a SW alt is so they can RE parts. Wooooo.... So exciting.... Much skill. If you're an RE SW, you aren't a real SW. You're a parts collector. And frankly with people farming the scyks in Ord, that RE part argument is kinda pointless. "It took me hours of holding the trigger down while pointing at one spot. I almost woke up like twice."

I don't think it is fair to make SW crafted parts completely pointless to buy. Why buy a crafted part that WILL be destroyed versus looting and RE'ing parts which can be repaired to full condition.

IF crafted parts are to be destroyed, then CRAFTED parts need to be better than ANY RE part out there. Otherwise, you remove the incentive entirely for crafted parts. As it is currently there's very little incentive to purchase crafted parts except to level. And even then, you get better parts for leveling in loot. Hell, you can't even wear the junk armor you find while out leveling in the ground game. But space, you get the parts you need to level and space mine for parts through the loot drops. I think it would make more sense to create a schematic that uses space mined resources rather than "Oooo I clicked a button, and got a great part with better than crafted stats for everything"

If there's no equivalent, then space doesn't need decay, because space is different to the ground game. There's realistically NO loss with decay not destroying RE parts. Maybe POB parts. But aside from that, the only crafted part on people's ships at end game are countermeasure and missile launchers. While the ground game people are using crafted weapons and armor, crafted foods, crafted pups, crafted pets, crafted buffs, and almost nothing looted... So decay can destroy what people use on the ground, but space, it destroys things people DON'T use.

Narmy said:

Even in a mostly RE Loaded out ship there will be crafted parts. In most cases these will be the booster, the capacitor the Droid interface Chaff Launcher and Missles. Other the the Chaff and missle launcher in most cases the other crafted items are better than anythng you can RE'd parts. There is also a Playervoice requesting that the Engine Overhaul Subcomponent be added to a SW's expertise so that Engines can be a viable alternative to RE'd engines. The Experimental Borstal is a very useful weapon thats also crafted and can be used for whats classed as a starter end game loadout as well.

Click to expand...

Yeah... Again STARTER end game.
Ground end game gear moves more toward crafted gear that would be destroyed. Space end game moves AWAY from the parts that would be destroyed. There's very little if any incentive to get gear from a crafter at end game. Again, if crafted gear would ALWAYS be superior to RE'd gear, then I can see exempting it. BUT you want to reward those who move AWAY from crafted gear which is the exact OPPOSITE of the ground game.

The way I see it, RE'd parts should drop a limited use schematic rather than a superior part. Crafted base stats should be what the RE'd part would be. And use only space mined resources. It should NOT be exempt from decay any more than ground gear is.