Forums » Suggestions

Trident death observations

«12
Sep 02, 2014 abortretryfail link
Yeah, destroyed ships-as-cargo should also always drop their contents, like how ships-not-as-cargo always drop their contents.
Sep 02, 2014 Pizzasgood link
"I don't understand the desire to destroy or prevent these drops, but that is a legitimate opposing position on the matter."

The idea is that if crates can be shot and destroyed, a pirate can threaten to deny you the cargo his victim dropped without having to get a vulnerable moth and risk scooping it up himself, which may not be practical in some situations.

Anyway, more on topic, I'm all for dropping the ships... but the devs would have to fix the bugs with dropping ships as items first. In the meanwhile, yes, extracting and dropping the stored ships' cargo would be an acceptable intermediate solution.

I'm on board with NPC tridents dropping trident parts. I am not okay with player tridents dropping trident parts unless, as CD says, the insurance system is adjusted somehow.

Here's an idea: Remove the stupid magic insurance system entirely, make tridents significantly easier to craft, then have them drop nearly all of their parts when they die. So they can just be put back together with the help of a few spare pieces.

Better yet over the long-term would be to not totally explode the trident when it dies, but instead turn it into a drifting wreckage that can be towed with a tractor beam. You'd have to tow it back to a capship station to repair it (and it would lose ownership during the interim, so other people could potentially steal it and fix it up for themselves).
Sep 02, 2014 Death Fluffy link
Pizza, my issue with cargo that can be destroyed is that it would have a negative affect on bot farming unless implented in some sort of magical way where only specific directed weapons fire destroys them rather than nearby explosions. Perhaps if the insane requirements are removed for building a trident this won't have as much importance. Otherwise, I agree it would be nice to be able to destroy drops.

I am open to the remainder of your comments. I particularly support making tridents easier to build and eliminating the insurance system.

As far as tridents dropping components, I've stated elsewhere that I would limit it to ffsa and fcp primarily and leave higher end compontents to the Connies and Hac's of Deneb- with a low drop rate.
Sep 02, 2014 CrazySpence link
Insurance isn't magical, go wrap your car around a tree (and live) and then tell me it's magical when they give you a cheque, it's something we all pay for!

Just in VO you pay at the time of tree wrapping vs the real world where you pay for years and years and years and probably when after wrecking your car only actually recoupe a fraction of your decades of insurance pennance
Sep 02, 2014 Pizzasgood link
Yeah, my point wasn't to get into a discussion of whether/how cargo should be destroyable, since that's veering off topic. Just clarifying why some people might want it, since confusion was expressed.

And yes, Spence, the insurance in VO is magic, or at the very least completely illogical. Tridents cannot be bought and require billions of credits worth of time and resources to produce, and then the insurance system gives you a brand new one for a flat payment of 500,000 credits per ship. 500,000 credits is the equivalent of maybe ten minutes of work. You can make that by pirating one or two convoys, or running a few escorts, or doing a couple trade runs.

So apparently there is some method of producing Tridents that is extremely cheap, but is only available to insurance agents who are only authorized to use it with people who have already built their own trident?

Bullshit. You know what I think? I think the manufacturing missions are lying to us. I don't think tridents actually require all the shit they claim. When people run the missions and turn over the goods, the conquerable stations are probably skimming 98% of the resources for themselves. The remaining 2% end up in the actual trident you build. So for every trident we build, we're building them another 49 for free, which they then resell to people via the insurance system.

Did you notice how the requirements for building tridents have decreased a couple times since the missions became available? That's probably because more people were building them, and the growing volume of skimmed resources was outpacing their ability to store it. And they were getting more worried about getting caught. So they cut back the size of their operation a bit, leading to the seeming efficiency increases from our POV.
Sep 02, 2014 abortretryfail link
Know what else doesn't make sense but we do it anyway because otherwise the game would be unfun? Respawning when you die.

Making Tridents harder to replace is just going to make them less likely to show up in a battle, and less likely for you to have a chance at killing them. That's unfun.

Looting cargo is fun. If you blow up a Trident, all the goodies inside should drop so you can loot them. That's the suggestion here. Why are we derailing the thread on a bunch of other tangents?