Here's a suggestion. Some might like it, others will probably hate it. How about an additional factor to their stabilisation ability? Allow the stabiliser to raise the minimum integrity possible on a ship. For example, Mk1 stabilisers allowing a ship a minimum integrity level of 50%, Mk2 60%, Mk3 70% and Mk4 at 80% - the optimum before a ship has an increased chance of breaking up when performing a manouvre.
Not being either a programming whiz or having a PhD in astrophysics <g>, I can't say for sure how this would affect the chance of a ship breaking up when performing a maneouvre (There's probably some type of bell curve with a cumulative chance involved, the more jumps etc the more chance of breaking up? Or is it based all on actual integrity?), but I think this would give a nice added angle to the devices - especially as other affiliations are using them too now, and even selling blueprints.
Phoenix uses production and stellars as the driving mechanisms and this was why morale floors and maintenance free shipping had to go, they are game wreckers.
Even a low minimum will mean that certain ships will simply fall to this level and never be bothered again. Yup, most assuredly a game wrecker.
I am not sure what the value for the stabilisers are but on heavy hull ships, I am fairly certain that this makes a significant saving in production.
The point about Heavy Hulls & Integ stabilisers is taken. However, everyone's blueprints were constructed around patches and maintenance at the old patch requirement rates. I know for sure that the FGZ don't employ Integ Stabilisers in Heavy hulls because the previous effect (20% reduction in integ) was considered too negligble when compared to the rate at which heavy hulls degrade - when compared to say light/xlight hulls.
In any case, guess I have some refits to do.
Not sure this is a bug though.
Andy
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Dec 9 2004, 09:21 AM) |
| With respect to refits and designs, I have noticed a trend to leave at least some internal space in the design unused on the blueprint. I have presumed that this is to accomodate stargate keys, cloaking devices and other unusual technology. |
Yeah, personally whenever I design a ship I try to leave 5 mus empty for keys. Usually it works out 10 though (damn waste - need more 5 mus items
). I could build it into the design but I won't always need keys on ships and prefer to leave the space there "just in case".Mica/David, would you consider reducing the mass of Integrity stabilisers to 10, 5, or (preferrably!) 1 MU?
Reasons as outlined in this thread - improved usefulness on Heavy hull ships (with the whole ship building/patch changes), lack of designs incorporating 40 MU spare install space (most FGZ designs having 5 or 10 mu free for keys, for EG).
Admittedly, not having a list of every affiliation's designs I can't say for sure that other affilliations don't run their ships with 100 MU empty on the off-chance of picking up a cloaking device or integ stabiliser, but I would certainly believe it'd be the exception rather than the norm. EEM designs certainly don't.
Production costs/limits/effects could of course be kept the same for integ stabilisers, but reducing their mass would improve their value and use a great deal as I'm sure everyone would agree.
| QUOTE (Ro'a-lith @ Dec 31 2004, 07:34 PM) |
| Admittedly, not having a list of every affiliation's designs I can't say for sure that other affilliations don't run their ships with 100 MU empty on the off-chance of picking up a cloaking device or integ stabiliser, but I would certainly believe it'd be the exception rather than the norm. EEM designs certainly don't. |
Not decided either way for the install size of integrity stabilisers - there are several other nice hitech items that are 40 MU's though, so perhaps affs that are likely to get decent access to one of these items should consider leaving 50 MU's spare?
I would say it's more of an issue for affs that gain the technology to build them than those who manage to pick up the odd one or two - for those affs it's easier to choose something to uninstall - does anybody know if Mica's willing to make minor (eg. remove 40MU's worth of items to add in an integrity stabiliser) changes to existing blueprints/designs?
Dan
Geoff
| QUOTE (Dan Reed @ Dec 31 2004, 09:00 PM) |
| something to uninstall - does anybody know if Mica's willing to make minor (eg. remove 40MU's worth of items to add in an integrity stabiliser) changes to existing blueprints/designs? |
Mica once allowed me to makes changes in a design, but that was before I actually built the first ship from said design. It might be harder after you have started to build the ships.
Although personally i don't think i have a single ship that conforms to the bp it was built with any more.. but maybe thats just me.