Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Player Ship Interiors: Blueprint systems, combat aspects, customize, HUBS  (Read 2952 times)

Offline Kinneas

  • Illustrator/Designer
  • Lieutenant Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 865
  • Reputation: 371
  • Howdy, folks!
If folks eventually get PSI's (Player ship interiors) Will they just be window dressing or will ship systems be simulated?

Usually only the Enginneer's want this as they are the kinds of people who actually do want to live and work on a star ship.

Here are some from the Enterprise D blueprints from Dr. Rick Sternbach and company:

-
Subspace driver coils, electroplasma system (EPS) step-up and step-down nodes, EPS dual distribution nodes,  Surge protectors, structural integrity field generators, inertial damping field generators,  Organic matter/non-organic matter processors,  air scrubbers, waste/water reclamation/recirculation units... etc.

These were just a 'few' from the blueprints (very few).

When and if the developers get a chance to think about PSI's...should they push for simulation?
---

PSI's and 3D combat:  Very exciting to ponder as feature by 2012 and beyond. 

Knowing as much as possible about the 'basic' interior layouts of ships could make you a very mean opponent in 3d.

Knowing placements lets you ponder what angles to strike to  pierce just the systems you want.

It is not a foolproof advantage if folks can shift module placements inside the superstructure and reinforce modules, armor modules, create shields...etc.
-

Remember HUBS?

They say the above ideas are really far down the road still, yet the idea of creating (at first) some HUBS (legendary ships, bases, special locations, etc) in a stage one launch could be do-able.

Should HUBS be built for simulation and include as many simulated systems as possible?

Many feel that the number of folks who would want this style of play is extremely low and that they will not even get HUBS to fill up.

What do you think?
   



 





Offline Admiral of Starfleet

  • STO Trivia Competition #2 Winner
  • Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 233
  • Reputation: 54
I think simulation is a great idea. Hubs should definitely find there way into STO and maybe each fleet could own their own HUB and maintain it. Starships and hubs that werent well maintained should not handle as well in battle as a well maintained ship. For example a BoP versus a run down Akira. The BoP could win due to the fact the Akira was not kept in order.
« Last Edit: 26 June 2008 08:21 PM by Admiral of Starfleet »


Offline Raven

  • Hailing Frequency Donator
  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 97
  • Reputation: 21
I always felt that starship and starbase interiors should be more like simulations but loaded with content such as accessable panels and workstations.  I strongly believe that failure to include interiors at launch or near launch will be a major blunder.  STO should be about being engulfed in the Star Trek Universe, not flying your ship around like we have done in almost every other ST game.

Offline Zach

  • President
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2919
  • Reputation: 1475
  I strongly believe that failure to include interiors at launch or near launch will be a major blunder.  STO should be about being engulfed in the Star Trek Universe, not flying your ship around like we have done in almost every other ST game.

I completely agree with you and i truly believe that we will get PSIs at launch. I was always worried about this when the game was in Perpetuals hands, but now its in the hands of Cryptic, I dont think we have to worry at all. They are a much bigger company with alot of experience doing interiors and such.

If anything - I'd be worried that they might not include exteriors ala EVE Online, and go for something that always leaves you in your ship........