Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated Planet Type

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated Planet Type

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated Planet Type

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated Pla... - 6/23/2020 10:35:30 PM

zgrssd

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

This thread has given me a idea on how to change armor.

Basic issues:
- The Environmental Suit is a good armor. So much everyone should carry it, unless they got something better like the padded versions or combat armor
- it is too easy to ignore the environmetal hazards, once you got the E-Suit or even Combat Armor. Just going for HP protection turns all Environmental Hazards into a non-issue instantly.
- Starting Soldiers on habitable planets peform worse because they do not wear any armor, not even a basic or padded E-Stuit. When it should be the other way around.

The solution may be to seperate HP&Armor strenght from Environmental protection - Into to two seperate settings, something you can (and have) to pick on each unit seperately over distinct steps.

Armor side:
- add a bunch of lower armor, going from "just unifors" (+0 HP) to just below combat armor
- potentially move combat armor and all later ones up +50 HP, to make room for lower level armor and offset them no longer having the protection function natively (see below).
- armor - including combat and battledress - no longer provide environmental protection.

Environmental Protection side:
- each piece of Environmental protection costs some resources. So the more you need, the more expensive your troops will get
- the highest tier would be "full environmental seal", equivanlent to current Environmental suit. It may exist in several levels, for different RAD Proteciton levels (as higher armors no longer would do that).
- In addition to the resource cost, the "full environmental seal" would also give -50 HP. This simulates that in a atmosphere where you need it, one rupture can be deadly. If you do not add at least minimal armor, that would give infantry 0 HP. (This should ideally only work when you need the environmental seal to protect you. But failing that, a general rule works too. After all, why equip it if you did not need it after all?)
- you could even seperate Environmetnal Protection into something different for each kind of hazard, if you wanted too. 1 setting each for: Respiratory, Radiation, Temperature. Each with a top tier with a HP downside so people do not pick it casually. Such detail may be usefull, but I do not feel it would be nessesary right now.

New Planet Type:
Iradiated
Some planets have such a weak margnetic field or thin atmosphere that the planet surface is bathed in a certain level of solar background radiation. The quintseential example would be mars, but most moons are not exactly save either - Luna included!
The planet may be devoid of natural life, but have imported earth plants if the other requirements are right. Not the best for farming however, as heavy water in high doses is not that good for earth-life.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 3/9/2021 8:46:11 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 6/24/2020 3:18:11 AM

MatthewVilter

Posts: 71
Joined: 4/4/2019
Status: offline

Agreed.

I think the minimum for "realism"/satisfying verisimilitude is, as laid out here, a penalty in cost and survivability for infantry that are dependent on life support suits.

It definitely makes sense, if at all practical, to split up infantry gear between life support and armor. The idea in my post from the other thread is to start by enforcing basic life support gear for planetary conditions and then let specialist protection and armor be added on top of that.

Ideally there would be some sort of "encumbrance" mechanics for infantry to emphasize the difficulty of carrying heavy life support gear and armor together and maybe make developing exosuits/power armor more interesting/rewarding. Encumbrance might give morale or readiness penalties like @LordAldrich worte in the OP.

List of Environmental Protection gear:
- Filters to protect against toxic atmosphere or spores in the air. Also useful against radioactive fallout and pollution.
- Oxygen concentrators for atmospheres with insufficient oxygen.
- Oxygen supply for atmospheres without oxygen.
- Radiation shielding (g.e. lead) to protect against ambient or (solar) stellar radiation.
- Insulation for cold weather/climates.
- Electrically heated garment for extreme cold.
- Liquid active cooling garment for extreme heat and/or vacuum.
- Pressure suits for very low atmospheric pressure or vacuum.

(in reply to zgrssd)

Post #: 2

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 6/24/2020 6:45:07 AM

Gozzon

Posts: 55
Joined: 6/20/2020
Status: offline

I do not think the environmental suit nerf is necessary due to realism but for game balance. As of now the you could on turn 1 model an infantry with carbine and envirosuit on Siwa class and that would be both damage and health upgrade for the infantry.

I do not support morale/readiness penalty for these either: they exist to counter morale and readiness penalty already and infantry already has readiness penalty for being infantry. Being in irradiated areas and too hot/cold areas gives these penalties and if player would need to start calculating should they or should they not put on these suits to get less penalty is not something I want to do. A health malus would be more than enough offset to think twice if those equipment is strictly necessary or not.

Do not think we should have to think of encumbrance either as it would be rather binary thing: you either need those equipment and have the penalty or you do not need those at all and do not have the penalty. Right now the issue is that envirosuit is easy upgrade and gives you health and rad bonus on top of taking care of possibly other issues for life like temperature, atmosphere and alien life.
We have to remember that a lot of these variables are set in stone on start and do not change at all during the game so adding illusionary choice of having the penalty would in reality be in most cases just permanent penalty that units just get. After all more or less only Siwa class (and couple Siwa like randoms) support anything other than envirosuit.

(in reply to MatthewVilter)

Post #: 3

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 4/14/2021 9:45:11 PM

zgrssd

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

Revive oh old thread.

Asuming that I have a scenario editor and it can modify the equipment values, here is what I would do.

Armor:
Keep Uniform as no Armor option
Move thermosuit, masks and the like to environmental step
Rename the Armors to:
- Flak
- Advanced Flak
- Combat Armor
- Adv. Combat Armor
- Battledress
- Adv. Battledress
That way I only need to rename E-suits to Flak here and in the tech tree
I would drop the thermal and breathing protection
A part of the rad protection could stay with the better Armors. Having a lot of materail should offer some protection

Environmental:
- All the thermosuit and mask options
- "Full Environmental seal", which has all the environmental protection I took from the Armors
My original idea to have the FES reduce HP might cause too many issues. Let us asume thd thing is designed to not be weaker then the armor In turn it will cost a decent amount of IP and Metal

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 4/14/2021 9:46:59 PM >

(in reply to Gozzon)

Post #: 4

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 4/21/2021 5:24:00 PM

Pymous

Posts: 133
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

I agree with most of propositions / ideas, and here is some pics from the old "envirosuit" thread :p
Separating Armor from Environment protection, and making use of others variables maybe like energy, material cost, to add some variety for infantry would be great (each planet = a different infantry design / use / cost . It's also great for "immersion")

(in reply to zgrssd)

Post #: 5

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 4/21/2021 5:26:45 PM

Clux

Posts: 411
Joined: 9/16/2018
From: Mexico
Status: offline

Your sketches looks awesome, indeed we would benefit from a more "advanced armor/equipment" system for Infantry, but we would need to write down an overhaul with the proposals

_____________________________

Amateurs talk about strategy. Professionals talk about logistics!

(in reply to Pymous)

Post #: 6

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 5/9/2021 8:59:17 PM

Morion

Posts: 12
Joined: 3/7/2016
Status: offline

Good idea, but I want to make an addition. Instead of adding "-" on HP, I suggest adding some lethality coefficient to convert some non-killing hits to kill one. This can affect only infantry, vehicles with a reduced effect, and even population as a result of bombardment, making fighting in more dangerous environment more deadly. I think it will benefit the game by making different environments more different.

(in reply to Clux)

Post #: 7

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 5/16/2021 10:24:25 AM

BlueTemplar

Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline

Environmental protection is already separated if you don't have any armor : you can pick any combination of yes/no air filters and/or thermosuit, which has a direct impact on subunit cost (which isn't negligible early on when the basic infantry starts at 1 metal and 1 IP, and a mere thermosuit *doubles* the IP cost from 1 to 2 - and remember how hard IPs are to come by in the early game !).

"Encumbrance" is already simulated on vehicles with soft HP % penalties and extra AP movement cost % penalties (on top of engine power / mass), see here the discussion about it :
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4974985

So infantry should get a similar treatment, no need to mess with flat -HP, morale/readiness penalties or hidden OVERRULE KILL% (like on Nuclear weapons) ?
(Consider also how "encumbrance" (doesn't) work for towed artillery & AT guns.)

Or maybe infantry should also get an "engine" value ? (IRL in the order of 100W sustained average for your typical human, which is ~0.14 horsepower.)
(We might also need a "(xeno)beast of burden" option for towed artillery & AT guns ?)

Or maybe instead to keep it simpler, non-powered armors (i.e. non-battledress) should also get attack value penalties (made worse by heavier environmental protections) ?

< Message edited by BlueTemplar -- 5/16/2021 10:26:30 AM >

(in reply to Morion)

Post #: 8

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 5/16/2021 2:37:17 PM

zgrssd

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Environmental protection is already separated if you don't have any armor : you can pick any combination of yes/no air filters and/or thermosuit, which has a direct impact on subunit cost (which isn't negligible early on when the basic infantry starts at 1 metal and 1 IP, and a mere thermosuit *doubles* the IP cost from 1 to 2 - and remember how hard IPs are to come by in the early game !).

"Encumbrance" is already simulated on vehicles with soft HP % penalties and extra AP movement cost % penalties (on top of engine power / mass), see here the discussion about it :
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4974985

So infantry should get a similar treatment, no need to mess with flat -HP, morale/readiness penalties or hidden OVERRULE KILL% (like on Nuclear weapons) ?
(Consider also how "encumbrance" (doesn't) work for towed artillery & AT guns.)

Or maybe infantry should also get an "engine" value ? (IRL in the order of 100W sustained average for your typical human, which is ~0.14 horsepower.)
(We might also need a "(xeno)beast of burden" option for towed artillery & AT guns ?)

Or maybe instead to keep it simpler, non-powered armors (i.e. non-battledress) should also get attack value penalties (made worse by heavier environmental protections) ?

Currently environmental protection is integral part of Environmental Suits, Combat Armor and Battledress (all 6 versions).
This has two downsides:
- Environmental protection becomes a non issue with the first actuall armor
- It is impossible to get armor without environmental protection
As a point in fact, even with the same starting armor options avalible it is the Environment that decides if you soldier model carries any armor protection

(in reply to BlueTemplar)

Post #: 9

RE: Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated... - 7/12/2021 9:51:36 AM

zgrssd

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

Environmental Protection side:
- each piece of Environmental protection costs some resources. So the more you need, the more expensive your troops will get
- the highest tier would be "full environmental seal", equivanlent to current Environmental suit. It may exist in several levels, for different RAD Proteciton levels (as higher armors no longer would do that).
- In addition to the resource cost, the "full environmental seal" would also give -50 HP. This simulates that in a atmosphere where you need it, one rupture can be deadly. If you do not add at least minimal armor, that would give infantry 0 HP. (This should ideally only work when you need the environmental seal to protect you. But failing that, a general rule works too. After all, why equip it if you did not need it after all?)
- you could even seperate Environmetnal Protection into something different for each kind of hazard, if you wanted too. 1 setting each for: Respiratory, Radiation, Temperature. Each with a top tier with a HP downside so people do not pick it casually. Such detail may be usefull, but I do not feel it would be nessesary right now.

Thinking about this more, this could propably do with a slight simplification.

Instead of selecting the especific protection for each and every infantry unit, what about having one Policy setting for it? The game could set the default policy on game creation.
You say that "all future Models should have Filter masks", so the cost is added automatically to all future units. We already have such a system - Upgrade techs that are worked into the next version use a "have tech" if. You would need a "has policy setting" if for this, as well as some cost.

(in reply to zgrssd)

Post #: 10

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Armor and Environmental Protection rework/Iradiated Planet Type

Page: [1]