PASSIVE SENSOR TYPES | How to find stuff & a reason to multi-crew

[pavvvel]

Will you keep blaming the players, or will you look at the game?

I did not quote your useless post completely, I will only answer this part only: I didn't blame anyone. Any adult man morally understands that this is just a game and being killed in the game should not cause negative emotions. Also, an adult man understands that this is an open world with complete destructibility. This means that players can and will destroy other players' ships and stations. And this is the best content.

 

[pavvvel]

The design of Starbase is really not centered on pirates-hunting-miners gameplay. It's there as an option, but it's hardly an emphasis (nor should it be). The idea that the game should alienate and exclude anyone who isn't interested in that one part of the game (so-called "inadequate players", as you put it) is out of touch with what Starbase has been building towards all this time.

How do you know that Starbase is not like that? Show me the evidence.
Why do you think there are so many weapons in the game? Why is there so much armor? There are many options because of which the ship can fail... This is all necessary for pvp.
The developer gives a unique opportunity to destroy what is made with his own hands. There is no difference between pvp against a miner or against a warship: both are pvp.
I once again draw attention to the fact that this is a completely destructible universe, which means the destruction of any player's ship is exactly the gameplay that is promoted by the developer.

 

[Recatek]

There is no difference between pvp against a miner or against a warship: both are pvp.

Well, no. PvP between combat ships is PvP between two players prepared to fight and in ships optimized to do so. PvP between a combat ship and a mining ship is definitionally lopsided in favor of the combat ship. The general gist of your posting here seems to be that the game should favor hunters over the hunted, but those players already enjoy pretty much every advantage over miners in combat -- they're in dedicated and optimized combat ships, they have surprise and complete control over the timing of when to attack, they can avoid attacking or disengage at any point if the odds aren't in their favor, and so on. Honestly, if miners detecting attackers with scanning poses such a threat to pirates, then maybe the pirates are inadequate ones here.

 

[pavvvel]

Well, no. PvP between combat ships is PvP between two players prepared to fight and in ships optimized to do so. PvP between a combat ship and a mining ship is definitionally lopsided in favor of the combat ship. The general gist of your posting here seems to be that the game should favor hunters over the hunted, but those players already enjoy pretty much every advantage over miners in combat -- they're in dedicated and optimized combat ships, they have surprise and complete control over the timing of when to attack, they can avoid attacking or disengage at any point if the odds aren't in their favor, and so on. Honestly, if miners detecting attackers with scanning poses such a threat to pirates, then maybe the pirates are inadequate ones here.

It doesn't matter what kind of ship it is, in any case, PVP.
The attacking player should not care about the condition of the victim's ship.
If a player decides to fly on a weak ship, this is his personal decision, his responsibility and his fault.
Who prevents him from preparing a combat miner? Yes, he will be inferior in speed, but he will have protection, will have a chance to survive. I don't care that then he will be able to carry less ore - these are his problems. Do you want to mine on glass ships and humiliate pvp players by the fact that it's not pvp..?

 

[kiiyo]

Who prevents him from preparing a combat miner?

If you're okay with miners adapting to being ambushed, why not passive sensors? What if I, as the pilot of a mining ship, want to make the decision of creating a miner with powerful sensor capability, so that I can see the person trying to hunt me before they can get to me? I could use this to ditch my cargo, or dip into a cloud of fog, or some other way of doing my best to stand up in my little mining-oriented ship against a terrifying predator who is full of guns and armor.

Surely, if you're an - as you say - "adequate" pilot of a fighting ship, you can deal with being detected a few dozen kilometers out from your target. Nothing big, right?

 

[pavvvel]

If you're okay with miners adapting to being ambushed, why not passive sensors? What if I, as the pilot of a mining ship, want to make the decision of creating a miner with powerful sensor capability, so that I can see the person trying to hunt me before they can get to me? I could use this to ditch my cargo, or dip into a cloud of fog, or some other way of doing my best to stand up in my little mining-oriented ship against a terrifying predator who is full of guns and armor.

Surely, if you're an - as you say - "adequate" pilot of a fighting ship, you can deal with being detected a few dozen kilometers out from your target. Nothing big, right?

I've written about this many times before, should I do it again?
I have explained it in detail several times.

 

[kiiyo]

Yes please.

 

[pavvvel]

Stop littering the thread and trolling

 

[Recatek]

Who prevents him from preparing a combat miner? ... I don't care that then he will be able to carry less ore

Well, no. That's precisely what prevents a miner from going mining in a combat ship. A ship optimized for combat (or partially so) won't be an efficient miner, and vice versa. It's absurd to think that someone would ever go mining in a ship that is equivalently combat-capable to a combat-optimized ship, since combat-optimized ships would be an utter waste of time to mine in.

Actual fights between pirates and most miners is barely PvP anyway. The miner is usually as good as dead the moment the fight starts, so it's really closer to "player vs. clay pigeon" than "player vs. player". The difference in ship optimization means it's often just not worth fighting back. It's the same issue as with escorts -- most times you go mining, you won't be attacked, and so it makes more economic sense to get the most out of those uninterrupted mining runs and just write off the loss uncontested if you're pirated.

these are his problems.

Well, no. PvP is a two way street, and miners' problems are your problems if you want the game to have miners for you to shoot at. "Toughen up, buttercup" is a silly attitude to try to push on players who can just leave and play something more fun. Sandbox games always need to prioritize advantages for creation-oriented players (who tend to hate having their stuff blown up), otherwise they all find a better game, and destruction-oriented players have nothing left to destroy, so they quit too and the game dies.*

Passive sensors would be a good way to level the playing field and give miners at least some sort of chance here. As I mentioned earlier, pirates already enjoy every advantage in these can-hardly-call-it-combat situations, and are getting additional ones with radiation detection. The fact that it's seen as a huge sacrifice to throw miners a bone here is telling. Don't PvP players want an actual challenge?

* - One could argue that this is inherently irreconcilable and makes all sandbox PvP MMOs doomed failures from the start, and you'd be mostly right if you look at the statistics of how many actually survive more than a few months, but somehow a few of them get the formula right.

 

[pavvvel]

Oooh... again I had to read a lot of useless text...
Another "beautiful text" hides the idea of casualization...
Lies again... The lie that the miner has no chance. This is nonsense.
I'll let you in on a secret: other games have universal ships. For example, the Star Citizen or the Elite. In Starbase it is also possible and players in my company build armored and armed Miners.
For a miner, the weight of the weapon is a tiny fraction of its weight.
Miners have powerful generators, which is what the weapon needs.
The main modules (parts) can be hidden in an armor shell, and cargo containers can be placed on the outside.
Given the size of the miner and the fact that weapons can be mounted directly on cargo containers (without fear of damaging the hull of the ship due to explosion of ammo), you can mount more weapons on the miner than on the battleship.
I've even seen automatic turrets. I've seen a friend of the miner fire a machine gun on a tripod.
You could make a ram bumper to that would protect against asteroids as well and to ram the pirat to kill him.
Then the question arises: what is the problem! ?
Yes, the miner will hold a little less ore. But it will be protected.
If you don't know how to make ships, you should learn how to do it.

Instead of learning you want casualization. Bravo!

Please don't tell me what PvP is. PVP never changes and it's always fair, even against unarmed. Because it's the unarmed man's own fault for not arming himself.

 

[Recatek]

Instead of learning you want casualization.

Well, no. But if you're going to try to frame this as a "hardcore vs. casual" thing (it isn't, btw), you might want to reexamine your position of feeling threatened by miners gaining access to, of all things, scanners. Surely a hardcore PvPer can handle that if their goal is to fight typically unarmed miners.

 

[Askannon]

Lies again... The lie that the miner has no chance. This is nonsense.

Who has their settings set up for fighting?
Who can put their all into spotting?
Who is more likely to move around, showing the thruster trail?
Who is more likely to spot the other?
Who might not be on the ship?
Who is already moving/aiming?
Who get's the first shot?
Who is more likely to be slowed by damage?


So what was that about weapons? Because I don't see it in these questions.
All that is asked in this thread is to give a way to make spotting (semi-)automatic, so that even an armed miner can have a chance to land the first shot instead of being reliant on a stroke of luck and seeing the attacker first.

 

[pavvvel]

Well, no. But if you're going to try to frame this as a "hardcore vs. casual" thing (it isn't, btw), you might want to reexamine your position of feeling threatened by miners gaining access to, of all things, scanners. Surely a hardcore PvPer can handle that if their goal is to fight typically unarmed miners.

Here we go again... I'm describing a specific solution to the problem, but it's not casual, so you don't like it....
What kind of hardcore is that? Making a good ship is hardcore?))))
are you used to flying a miner without armor?
Are you too lazy to duplicate the power supply circuits using duct, is it easier for you to lay 1 wire and 1 pipe to your 100 drives?
Ahahaha are you sure this is adequate gameplay?
This is ridiculous.
The way you ignore my arguments clearly shows that I am right.
You can no longer clog up the thread, it's tiring.

 

[pavvvel]

Who has their settings set up for fighting?
Who can put their all into spotting?
Who is more likely to move around, showing the thruster trail?
Who is more likely to spot the other?
Who might not be on the ship?
Who is already moving/aiming?
Who get's the first shot?
Who is more likely to be slowed by damage?


So what was that about weapons? Because I don't see it in these questions.
All that is asked in this thread is to give a way to make spotting (semi-)automatic, so that even an armed miner can have a chance to land the first shot instead of being reliant on a stroke of luck and seeing the attacker first.

Stop making excuses

 

[pavvvel]

I'm trying to explain the same thing for the tenth time......
If you give the players passive sensors, then the players will always know about the likely attack.
They won't watch their back...
They won't make good ships..
They will not interact with other players.
All they will do is chain and cheap stations and mine around. When the siren is triggered, they will simply fly to these bases.
When their ship is flying, they will jump from the ship to stretch the safety rope(lifeline) for one kilometer (by the way, this mechanic needs to be cut) to look around. This is the end of the gameplay. Not just miners. It will be impossible to sneak up on any ship.
You want casual mechanics. Then you will come up with other casual mechanics. I've seen it here many times.
You don't care about the game. You want to hold a bottle of beer in one hand, chips in the other and have the game obey you.

I suggest that there be no 360° passive sensors.
We need active sensors that scan, for example, an area of 60-60 ° in 10 seconds and that the number of sensors is limited.
So that the sensors are expensive and demanding to install correctly. You can also automate them using yolol.
We need to make sure that there is an opportunity to board and find blind spots. It will be more interesting!....
But you want to have casual mechanics, which, combined with huge safe zones, cheap stations and 1km lifeline, will simply kill the gameplay. Passive sensors will allow players to mine along the safe zone and near stations and fleet carriers. It's going to be terrible.

I remind you once again that it is possible to slightly reduce the number of cargo containers.
Place generators in an armored shell, and place cargo boxes outside the armor.
More weapons can be mounted on crates than 99% of warships. The miner has the energy to power the weapon.
What is the problem of making a strong and reliable ship???.......
If you join the battle, you can destroy the ore in 1 click from the inventory to become faster.
If the miner is armored, then he will be able to defend himself and if there is a guard, then such a miner becomes especially dangerous - he has a lot of weapons (if ammunition is blowing, only cargo boxes will be damaged).

Stop making excuses. You write long useless messages in which there are no arguments, only excuses.
Pvp never changes: there are players who are ready to beg for casual mechanics from the developer...... And there are other players who study, think, monitor the situation and prepare for possible situations. And Who are u?

 

[Recatek]

Arming, armoring, guarding, and escorting miners doesn't make economic sense when it negatively impacts all of the mining runs during which you aren't attacked (the vast majority of runs). That space, the cost, those other people, and that speed can be used to complete more, cheaper, and more efficient runs in less time. This especially when you consider that even with an armored and armed miner, you're still probably going to lose to a combat-optimized ship, because despite your additional effort, that combat-optimized ship is still more equipped for combat than your miner ever could be. It's cheaper and more efficient to just accept losses compared to flying a hybrid ship that doesn't mine as well as it could, and is still probably going to lose to a pirate anyway. It's cheaper and more efficient to have two people running two mining ships than it is to have that other person sitting on your gun not making you any additional money.

You seem to want miners to (a) not mine very well and (b) still lose to you. That's just not going to work, because nobody is forced to play Starbase with you. If you make it an unpleasant and unrewarding experience for them, you're not going to have anybody to play with anymore. They'll take their ball and go play another game with other people. Then you'll have no miners to casually shoot.

If you're worried about miners running to bases, then siege their bases. Or are you just afraid of enemies that know you're coming and are prepared to fight back? Because that's actual PvP. Adding sensors would give miners one advantage compared to every other advantage that pirates have. It's not especially "hardcore" if pirates can't even handle that.

 

[pavvvel]

I didn't expect any other answer. Casual gamers are the reason why games are getting worse. Dialogue with them is impossible. They do not perceive information. Waste of time. You're just clogging up the thread. Your ignoring of information looks like trolling. And trolling doesn't belong here. You need to learn to respect other people more than your casual ideas

 

[Askannon]

Stop making excuses

Answer those questions then, if these are only excuses.

And who in their right mind mines while constantly looking around? We have at best 5km of render distance and probably more like 1.5, which correlates to about 33 seconds if the attacker is already moving or probably a minute if he is lying in wait (for the 5km range). Mining an asteroid takes far longer and is requiring enough attention to not smash into the asteroid, resulting in plenty opportunities for an attacker to get into range without the miner ever getting the chance to look back.

And if the miner is in transit getting on his tail isn't that hard.

If you read the original post you will probably notice that the 360° variant only gives the heading and relative strength of the contact.
Miners have more of a radiation footprint resulting in them being seen from farther away while fighters should generally only have a small footprint. This means the vast majority of >>noticable<< sensor spikes will be miners.
Further, other stuff will also cause the sensor to react, causing low profile ships to disappear in the background noise.

Sure, some will run away from everything (in this case even asteroids), but the vast majority will get more cautious but continue their mining.
But with increased caution comes also the opportunity to build ships that can make use of that caution: armed miners.

Practice what you preach and learn how to build ships that are able to stay below the radar, so to speak. With heat storage mechanics on the way that shouldn't be too hard.

 

[pavvvel]

Answer those questions then, if these are only excuses.

And who in their right mind mines while constantly looking around? We have at best 5km of render distance and probably more like 1.5, which correlates to about 33 seconds if the attacker is already moving or probably a minute if he is lying in wait (for the 5km range). Mining an asteroid takes far longer and is requiring enough attention to not smash into the asteroid, resulting in plenty opportunities for an attacker to get into range without the miner ever getting the chance to look back.

And if the miner is in transit getting on his tail isn't that hard.

If you read the original post you will probably notice that the 360° variant only gives the heading and relative strength of the contact.
Miners have more of a radiation footprint resulting in them being seen from farther away while fighters should generally only have a small footprint. This means the vast majority of >>noticable<< sensor spikes will be miners.
Further, other stuff will also cause the sensor to react, causing low profile ships to disappear in the background noise.

Sure, some will run away from everything (in this case even asteroids), but the vast majority will get more cautious but continue their mining.
But with increased caution comes also the opportunity to build ships that can make use of that caution: armed miners.

Practice what you preach and learn how to build ships that are able to stay below the radar, so to speak. With heat storage mechanics on the way that shouldn't be too hard.

a battleship's heat signature will be just as visible as a miner's.
passive 360 sensors will kill the ability to board, cloaking in fog, and visual cloaking (coloring).
thanks to passive sensors, we will see 10 friends set up 100 stations in a limited area and 10 flit carriers. they will mine on the edge of the safe zone. it will be good gameplay..???
...Even if the hunter starts the chase - he won't have time to attack the miner before the LOD loads. Passive sensors won't give time for hunter to wait for the LOD to load - that's what you want!

I see that arguments are powerless. after passive sensors, you'll probably be begging the developer for the possibility of a combat log, blacklist, private group and everything else that will send this game to its grave.

 

[[TAC] NASA]

a battleship's heat signature will be just as visible as a miner's.

No?
You will be able to pick up a contact from further away the stronger their radiation footprint is. These are radiation detectors remember? A miner with 40 gens will be much more visible than a fighter with only a couple, since the square inverse law. The weaker signature emitted by the fighter will dissipate more quickly than the miners, meaning that you can pick up the miner from much further away than the fighters.

passive 360 sensors will kill the ability to board, cloaking in fog, and visual cloaking (coloring).

Do you want to just sit and AFK near a gate sealclubbing noobs, or do you want to have sensors to guide you to the miners full of ore that are not expecting you, with your stealth ship, using many tactics in order to get as close as possible to the target?
Which sounds more exiting and fun?

thanks to passive sensors, we will see 10 friends set up 100 stations in a limited area and 10 flit carriers. they will mine on the edge of the safe zone. it will be good gameplay..???

We will see that anyway regardless of sensors due to an asteroids ability to break your ship, and you will be able to siege those stations wont you? IMO sieging sounds more fun and profitable.


I see that argume

ts are powerless. after passive sensors, you'll probably be begging the developer for the possibility of a combat log, blacklist, private group and everything else that will send this game to its grave.

What makes you think of that? We are talking about sensors that can act as a double edged sword, not about how we could be carebears in this game.