I've been thinking about an idea to enhance PvP RP. Allow for a shoot to disable option.

When someone has selected Shoot to Disable (rather than shoot to kill) they score hits and damage as normal but when their target drops to 0% health they are disabled rather than destroyed.

Once a ship is disabled control of that ship is taken over by the other ship and follows the other ship as though it were an NPC ship in a convoy, following them at best speed where ever they choose to go.

The two players can then negotiate terms of freedom. This might create more RP opportunities for piracy and bounty hunting because instead of negotiating while the defender is still free can be limited especially if they're trying to get to a jump point.

Once negotiations are over the controlling ship can release the controlled ship using a new /abandon "name" command. Once abandoned the controlling ship will no long follow the other ship but also cannot move under its own power for 3(?) minutes (maybe 5 minutes?) so requesting a safe drop off sector could be a factor in negotiations. Abandonment would happen automatically if they controlling ship docks with a station or cap ship, or if flies more than 5km away from the controlled ship.

The pilot of a disabled ship would be able to call for help, it would be up to the controlling pilot to devise a strategy to minimise the risk of help arriving.

=====================

The way I see this working internally is that Shoot to Disable damage would be recorded separately, internally, but only shown as part of the overall damage to the game client. In every other respect this damage would be treated as normal damage and if a kill shot (rather than a disable shot) takes a ship to 0% then they explode. However, once a ship is disabled then all disable damage it took is automatically repaired (or maybe repaired only after abandoned and any time limit has expired).

If a ship has received disable damage but didn't actually get disabled manages to dock then disable damage is repaired normally (or perhaps at a reduced cost).

No.

so many reasons, but most importantly, exploit. Imagine if I took over your ship, then one of my guildmates, then another, and another. Don't want to play a game where I never have control of my ship.

Plus, let's just say it wasn't repeated by different players, does the "controller" ship have a time limit for the duration of the control? If it is 3? 5? minutes (i know you said 3? 5? minutes for abandonment) and multiple times a day i lose control of my ship for 6 - 10 mins? no thanks.

Plus, recoding. And lots of it. VO needs much better things.

A better implementation of control would be a tractor beam (already been suggested).

Don't feed the trolls Helena Lycia.

-1

I like the idea of disabling ships but the reason we don't have it already is probably because the implementation is so tricky. I'm not a fan of this particular implementation myself Helena but don't let that discourage you from trying to think of different ways it can be done.

The issue of perpetual control can easily be solved by allowing the pilot of the controlled ship to use /explode. That way shoot to disable becomes shoot to kill, at the victim's request, so no exploit.

Please think about what you said...

I like the way Freespace did it, where you can disable ship subsystems with purpose-built disruptor weapons.

I do not like the idea of disabling the sip entirely, however subsystems such as weapons, and shields, and turbo yes!

Outside of having a rare weapon equipped, I'm not sure why anybody would put any effort in to negotiating their release with current game mechanics. A new ship and repairing the same ship from say, 1% have about the same cost. Very little cargo is worth more than a million credits, and a million credits is at the lower end of p2p interactions.

Something else about the game mechanics would have to be different before this made sense. At this time, -1.

lol... I'd prolly wind up binding /explode to something, but I like the concept.

+1 from me.

Faille.

I'm a hauler...and I rarely have a cargo that I care to lose..its all so easy to obtain besides manufaterd stuff and sss..if u disable me I'm just gonna /explode if I can't then I'm just gonna log..FAMY does enough already in the keeping you on lock down till u pay...or die..BUT I like were this could go...

zak totally missed the elephant in the room: capital ships.

Being able to shut down the jump drive on a Trident would be huge.

Also, zak is living in la-la land when it comes to piracy. Very few pirates charge millions unless they know you have cargo worth even more (e.g. capship parts). I usually charge only 100k, and I think FAMY usually charge in the area of 600k. I have had quite a few times when I was playing a trader when I ended up paying the pirates rather than lose my cargo.

And, as usual for never-pay-ninnies, he totally ignores the lost time factor. If you have just made it all the way from Nyrius to Odia in your XC of robots and finally get stopped at the wormhole, one hop away from the Tunguska station that is having a terrible shortage of roombas, you don't want to have to try it again, especially knowing that they'll probably be keeping an eye out for you to just kill you again. There is a reason that when I hire people to haul robots for me, I pay them 2M per XC - it's a long haul, and time is valuable.

Component damage is a somewhat different idea that would be really cool. Having the ability to target subsystems of a capship and destroy them to cripple the ship, Freespace-style would be awesome.

True, pirates are typically cheaper than a million credits. I was thinking of hauling and sales. In any case, I think this idea needs work.

"zak totally missed the elephant in the room: capital ships."

Maybe he didn't miss it, it just disconnected and despawned

Yeah we all know you exploit every bug you find. There's no need to brag about it.

Has it been fixed yet? No? Then he should keep bringing it up until it is.