My interpretation from the manual is that if you disconnect from a machine (specifically, terminal) before trace is complete, then in 50 turns it returns to original state and can be hacked anew.
It would be nice if machines that are no longer hackable (because of completed trace) and those that are temporary in "better not connect" state are somehow indicated on a map. Cogmind is a robot, shouldn't have a problem tracking terminals he connected, how long ago and what was the outcome. I, on the other hand, would appreciate some help with this.
The situation when I wish for it, is when I am retracing my steps because dead end or just running for my life and back to terminal. I vaguely remember, I've been here. Maybe even remember the trace did not complete. But was it 50 turns ago? Have no idea, but I would really like another roll at Access(Main) or Alert(Purge).
On a similar note, some visual indication that fabricator is fabricating would be nice too. And maybe a query to tell ETA exactly if more precision is needed.
Mmm, I think I could get behind some of this. Maybe any machine that has been 'used up' can turn grey? AFAIK there's nothing you can do once a trace has completed - at least, not yet...
Re: fabricator fabbing and repair unit repairing, perhaps the machine can simply gently glow, kind of like the effect used on broken stairs?
Quotegently glow, kind of like the effect used on broken stairs
Wait, what's a broken stairs? I just fought a defender off something that looked like a stairs and as I enetered it said something along the lines "Some branches are not implemented in alpha". Is that a broken stairs? If yes, I do not recall seeing it glowing (ascii mode).
Quotefabricator fabbing and repair unit repairing
If fabricator is fabbing, repair unit must be repping.
Quote from: nsg21 on May 24, 2015, 05:42:25 PM
Quotegently glow, kind of like the effect used on broken stairs
Wait, what's a broken stairs? I just fought a defender off something that looked like a stairs and as I enetered it said something along the lines "Some branches are not implemented in alpha". Is that a broken stairs? If yes, I do not recall seeing it glowing (ascii mode).
It's not a glow so much as a subtle shimmer; that's going to be made more obvious in the next release.
Thank you for all the machine suggestions. Those are good and will help.
I was going to make a suggestion along the same lines: When a machine is working, the relevant info should display on right-clicking/examining the machine:
- What is it?
- What is its level?
- Familiarity?
- Has it been traced?
- Has it been disabled?
- Is it working on a task?
- Task ETA remaining (out of total, maybe with a completion bar)?
- Lore, once known?
- Did I miss anything???
In the future, it seems almost a given that machines will make a different sound when they are running (and may or may not be silent when idle, depending on type). Maybe even a constant weak alarm sound once traced.
Ah, a machine info window analogous to the item/robot windows... that could/should happen eventually, though I hadn't thought of it yet since for me machines were more about maybe hacking once and moving on, but it seems like some players are using them far more than that. I'll start with the changing color states feature first.
Making different sounds depending on status is another good idea, too. I've been planning on doing all machine sounds together much later in alpha, and I'll add that to the notes.
Yes, the machines are just so inviting and reliable, if you treat them right. ;) If that wasn't your intention, then it seems to me you'd have to make them more like treasure chests, so that they are burned after you use them once or a certain number of times, or the failure rates go up steadily per use, or give them a chance of local shutdown without causing major alerts (maybe an operator will come along to diagnose the problem and send out an alert once he gets there giving you some time depending on where the nearest one is).
Another way would be to change the mechanic for tracing: if the tracing was never reduced but took (many?) more failures to activate. That would put a cap on usage and seems reasonable in theory, yet I can understand that some players seem to really like the hacking mechanics, so cutting them in the wrong way might be too harsh.
Just thoughts.
I have my thoughts on how hacking could be changed to be a lot more fun to use, but I'm saving that till the command schemes are more finalized.
The schematic/analysis issue needs to be addressed first.
Quote from: Sylverone on June 06, 2015, 11:32:01 PM
Yes, the machines are just so inviting and reliable, if you treat them right. ;) If that wasn't your intention, then it seems to me you'd have to make them more like treasure chests,
Not that it wasn't my intention, but it's just not the way I would play it. I would want players to feel free to do as much hacking as they like that gives them good results, so long as its not overpowered. Soon I can begin to make some adjustments as other players relate their experiences.
But first, the main issue with hacking has been the ability to abuse schematics/analysis, so that will be fixed first.