Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Tarsis
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed, 14. Aug 19, 00:22
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by Tarsis » Thu, 29. Apr 21, 22:24

jlehtone wrote:
Thu, 29. Apr 21, 17:04
Tarsis wrote:
Thu, 29. Apr 21, 12:36
for example, how is it that a missile with 17km effective range can only be deployed/fired at around 5km of the target :?
Which missile are you talking about?

I know that turrets of Osaka do launch missiles from near 20 km distance. (I was in the receiving end, in Phoenix. They must have been EMP; very fast, no shield damage, both Boost and Travel were disabled. For a while I thought that they did disable turrets too, but that had been me setting them to missile defense. :oops: )
Check the Encyclopaedia, it says cluster missiles have a 17km and Dumbfire 24km effective range but when I used them on my Syn, I had to be at around 6km before it started firing. I'm not alone on this one, you can check Captain Collins on YouTube when he tested missiles https://youtu.be/pmTcjzVvfaA?t=6900.

Now if you're saying the NPCs are capable of hitting you from 20km away and it is "working as intended", that is the epitome of unbalanced and perhaps we should start a new thread about missiles.

GCU Grey Area
Posts: 7776
Joined: Sat, 14. Feb 04, 23:07
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by GCU Grey Area » Thu, 29. Apr 21, 23:21

Imperial Good wrote:
Thu, 29. Apr 21, 21:33
GCU Grey Area wrote:
Thu, 29. Apr 21, 18:30
The moment you want to fight you need to slow down a bit, manoeuvre to get the enemy in the crosshairs, etc & that's when one of those damn Cerberuses sneaks up behind & nukes the engines.
The Rattlesnake is a L destroyer. You do not slow for S or M ships because they are beneath you. You are not meant to shoot them with batteries either, even though the AI flies so badly you can at times.

If they have missiles you keep flying at full speed. They will eventually run out of missiles, in which case they become harmless.
It's not a matter of slowing down specifically to engage fighters. Generally it's more that there are fighters present in the sector when I slow down to engage my primary target (e.g. enemy capital or station). As for passively waiting for fighters to run out of missiles, simply don't have that much patience - frigates can carry 100 of them. Anyway it's not the fighters I'm aware of that are usually the issue - those I can account for, even pause the game & have a close look at them for missile launchers if I'm feeling paranoid. It's generally the ones arriving in travel mode from elsewhere in the sector that can catch me out & sometimes I only become aware of those new arrivals when engines start exploding...
The Phoenix L turrets cannot even shoot directly forwards due to the dome...
Phoenix L turrets can shoot forwards if you need them to. Unlike the other Teladi capitals the Phoenix's 'dome' isn't a single piece, it's comprised of 6 distinct segments. There are gaps between them through which the L turrets can fire if you know how to aim them: https://www.dropbox.com/s/v2x5st70g8g81 ... 1.jpg?dl=0

nOy
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue, 26. Apr 05, 15:07
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by nOy » Tue, 11. May 21, 19:02

No matter how we look at things, the simple fact is once a capital ship's engines are taken out, it is essentially a sitting duck. If enemy forces at that time isn't enough to take it down, additional reinforcements will. I can understand the decision behind thrusters being connected to engines but taking out engines is way too easy. I am deviating a bit from the thruster discussions but here are some suggestions.

Have 2 modes of engine operation, normal/travel mode and combat mode.

In combat mode, I imagine engines "recessing" into the superstructure or armored cowlings coming out to cover and protect the engines giving them additional protection at the expense of reduced forward thrust performance. In addition, in combat mode, make the "afterburner" boost more effective like 150% to 200% of combat thrust at the expense of lost shield strength. At the moment, there is no benefit at all in engaging boost for the majority of capital ships. You just lose shield strength over nothing. Combat boost thrust should be tactically useful (with a corresponding tradeoff like losing shields). This change will make it more interesting to make tactical decisions/tradeoffs when piloting capital ships like destroyers. Having combat mode for engines means thrusters will also work longer.

In normal/travel mode, the engine is out of the superstructure (comes out if transitioning from combat mode) as it currently looks in vanilla, or the armored cowlings recess back to the superstructure. Then it essentially performs like vanilla. You can even tie in the travel delay to the time it takes for the engine to transition from combat to travel mode. That would look cool and would give another meaning to the wait/spool up time for travel mode to engage. You can even make it so that engines in non-combat normal mode would be 50% out of the superstructure, 100% out for full travel mode. Visual indicators would be nice. It adds tactical options like, ooh that destroyer is not in combat mode, we have xx seconds to ambush and get that engine before it goes into lockdown.

Lastly, in combat mode, the recessing into the superstructure of the engine or deployment of armored cowlings make it so that the only way to easily take out an engine is if we shoot it from directly behind. You can then introduce a mechanic wherein the thrust wake damages shields/hull if we stay on it for too long. Make it difficult, but not impossible. IT IS A CAPITAL SHIP for crying out loud.

At the moment, it is laughably easy. I can take down a Xenon I with just 2 ships, a fighter to take out engines (no thrusters too so dead in the water), and a big boy with guns outranging the I's L turrets. Again, once the engines are taken out, its just a matter of using guns with a longer reach and staying out of range while you pound it to entropic oblivion. It gets boring after some time. These proposed changes introduces a bit of uncertainty and choice: shall I take out the engines or brute force my way through it? At the moment it's always, take out the engines dude, duh?!

If something like this is implemented, then flying solo in a fighter trying to take down a capital ship's engines won't become a chore. Of course there is always the option to brute alpha strike your way to victory but winning in other ways should be challenging and rewarding. :mrgreen:
Last edited by nOy on Tue, 11. May 21, 19:19, edited 1 time in total.
nOy>>

jlehtone
Posts: 21801
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by jlehtone » Tue, 11. May 21, 19:09

You don't need two ships now. Just one.
nOy wrote:
Tue, 11. May 21, 19:02
You can then introduce a mechanic wherein the thrust wake damages shields/hull if we stay on it for too long.:
The 4.0 did add that already.
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.

nOy
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue, 26. Apr 05, 15:07
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by nOy » Tue, 11. May 21, 19:20

I get the warnings, but it doesn't seem to do any damage so I am not sure what it was for.
nOy>>

dtpsprt
Posts: 2794
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by dtpsprt » Tue, 11. May 21, 21:17

nOy wrote:
Tue, 11. May 21, 19:02
...................

Have 2 modes of engine operation, normal/travel mode and combat mode.

..............................

If something like this is implemented, then flying solo in a fighter trying to take down a capital ship's engines won't become a chore. Of course there is always the option to brute alpha strike your way to victory but winning in other ways should be challenging and rewarding. :mrgreen:
Very nice and thought off suggestion providing that there is time (always precious) for the devs to work on something like this and the, inevitable, bugs that it will introduce to the game...

RodentofDoom
Posts: 406
Joined: Sat, 27. Feb 16, 09:37
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by RodentofDoom » Wed, 12. May 21, 23:54

Tempest wrote:
Mon, 22. Mar 21, 14:14
imo, the shieldgenerators protecting the engine(s) could be stronger perhaps, a few seconds of burst-fire from an S-classed ship (even if using powerful weapon mods) shouldn't be able to take out an engine.

personally, i like the idea of always being somewhat on guard whilst solo'ing in a capital ship (always that threat of strike-craft crippling my engines if i overextend into something's turret range) the current mechanic of dispatching repair-drones seems to work okay (could be open to some tuning) allowing thruster-usage should allow you to bring some turrets to bear. (does roll work? not at the gaming PC atm)

i guess, in the end, no capital ship should be flying without escort realistically. (i'm just glad Ai isn't smart enough to use heavy missiles or torpedos frequently)
That's the catch with sub-components that are independently targetable.
They are easy to neutralise even if the main shields are powered up.
If the main shields have to go first, sub-components then largely become redundant.

Alkeena
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue, 15. May 07, 20:43
x4

Re: Capital ships should still be able to use thrusters when engines are dead.

Post by Alkeena » Thu, 13. May 21, 01:26

RodentofDoom wrote:
Wed, 12. May 21, 23:54
Tempest wrote:
Mon, 22. Mar 21, 14:14
imo, the shieldgenerators protecting the engine(s) could be stronger perhaps, a few seconds of burst-fire from an S-classed ship (even if using powerful weapon mods) shouldn't be able to take out an engine.

personally, i like the idea of always being somewhat on guard whilst solo'ing in a capital ship (always that threat of strike-craft crippling my engines if i overextend into something's turret range) the current mechanic of dispatching repair-drones seems to work okay (could be open to some tuning) allowing thruster-usage should allow you to bring some turrets to bear. (does roll work? not at the gaming PC atm)

i guess, in the end, no capital ship should be flying without escort realistically. (i'm just glad Ai isn't smart enough to use heavy missiles or torpedos frequently)
That's the catch with sub-components that are independently targetable.
They are easy to neutralise even if the main shields are powered up.
If the main shields have to go first, sub-components then largely become redundant.

I agree, and certainly don't want subsystem targeting to become less useful.

However, if someone wanted to explore this space a bit more I could see an effective balance point where shields were made significantly less effective while capital ships were likewise given substantially more hull. I don't think that approach would be any more satisfying, personally, but it would be a path forward along these lines.

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”