Ship part or hull that counters mines?

[Oberlus]

With the mines I am not able to penetrate into enemy territory at all. There should be an anti-mines part I guess. If you have to mount a stealth part, a fuel part, an anti-mines part, and a detection part to get a scout going it will not be overpowered. There could be also a flagship which neutralized system mines.

Against mines I use bioadaptive with 1 armour part or sentient, if I'm focused on organic stealth, or big hulls in general if focused in any other hull line.
I never thought we need another counter for mines.

I wanted to send an invisible scout deep into enemy terrain. Got stopped at every system and 14 mine damage.

Another idea: If we include the "play dead" fleet focus, we could stop applying mine damage to the ship (at least if not moving). The ships could heal up a bit (also refueling) before jumping.

Nanorobotic hull can regenerate faster than mines damage, IIRC, and it could get a high stealth part for late game anti-mines hidden scout (an expensive scout indeed).

I'm scared of any hull that could be used to fully counter mines because these are already UP late game against big hulls, and making them also useless against small hulls (the ship part would not be used only for scouts) could be a death sentence for that tech branch.

The play dead fleet focus... I don't know. It could be mixed with that "go silent" focus we've talked about to boost stealth and help to get less mines damage, but always get some.

[Ophiuchus]

Nanorobotic hull can regenerate faster than mines damage, IIRC, and it could get a high stealth part for late game anti-mines hidden scout (an expensive scout indeed).

For the robotic hull line that is an option. For other hull lines a part would be nice. Internal slots are few, especially if you want to add a fuel part. I think the main question is if this would be bad in the other cases (e.g. for military vessels).

I'm scared of any hull that could be used to fully counter mines because these are already UP late game against big hulls, and making them also useless against small hulls (the ship part would not be used only for scouts) could be a death sentence for that tech branch.

Helping against some of the mine damage would also be fine.

I really do not like how omni scanners kill the complete stealth investments, so we probably do not want to introduce more such complete counters.

The play dead fleet focus... I don't know. It could be mixed with that "go silent" focus we've talked about to boost stealth and help to get less mines damage, but always get some.

It should probably also mean no positive interactions - no interaction with supply (no refuel from there, no weapon upgrades)

So feature list of the "go silent" focus:

• ship is moving slower (e.g. half-speed) - this may be a little tricky in details
• ship has stealth bonus (no emissions)
• ship behaves like a flying piece of junk/asteroid - will not shoot even if someone shoots at it
• ship is generally considered a flying piece of junk - surrounding friend or foe will usually not interact with it. I.e. no refuel/refill fighters/upgrade weapons from supply, no repairs at orbital drydock etc.
• ship is considered not moving at all/so much if not actually travelling (i.e. mines do no/less damage if you stay stationary, no/less ram-scoop refuel). Also maybe the owner of the mines should not get the "mines damaged hidden ship" message in this case(?) - at least if it is only one ship. This is highly dubious in reality as all movement is relative in space. Mine fields could be travelling with high speed. But would work well enough.

Not sure about restricting the ram-scoop part - it might be exactly what one would want for a hidden scout. On the other hand if we make lighthouses harder to maintain one could sneak past the lighthouse with the "go silent" option and "go passive" with normal stealth on the other side so the ram-scoop would be usable again.

[Oberlus]

I really do not like how omni scanners kill the complete stealth investments, so we probably do not want to introduce more such complete counters.

Stealth will get a revamp sooner or later.
We have that idea about stealth + combat ranges in which stealth decreases the closer you get to the enemy without firing (firing completely removes stealth), making maximum end-game stealth (achievable only with the best stealth hulls and stealth parts) equal to maximum end-game detection +1 level (or +2), so that stealth is at least marginally useful for first-strike.
And something similar for map (not combat) stealth, so that end-game no fleet can be fully hidden but can conceal some information (like ship designs in the fleet).
Lazy to link the threads right now.

(The play dead fleet focus) should probably also mean no positive interactions - no interaction with supply (no refuel from there, no weapon upgrades)

Maybe irrelevant if this kind of focus is seldom use while on your own supply.

ship is considered not moving at all/so much if not actually travelling (i.e. mines do no/less damage if you stay stationary, no/less ram-scoop refuel).

So the scout arrives an enemy system and gets reduced mine damage, then stays still for a time getting slow repairs and the such without mines damage (as long as it remains silent). I guess that is ok.

Also maybe the owner of the mines should not get the "mines damaged hidden ship" message in this case(?) - at least if it is only one ship

Differentiating between one or more ships seems odd to me, I wouldn't do it. But mines owners should be informed of mines damage, so that he gets a hint he needs better detection.

The ram-scoop not working on silent mode seems reasonable, but I don't care about that ship part: +0.1 per stationary turn is just ridiculous, I never mount it.

[Ophiuchus]

I really do not like how omni scanners kill the complete stealth investments, so we probably do not want to introduce more such complete counters.

Stealth will get a revamp sooner or later.

Yes, my point was that we should not add more complete counters.

Also maybe the owner of the mines should not get the "mines damaged hidden ship" message in this case(?) - at least if it is only one ship

Differentiating between one or more ships seems odd to me, I wouldn't do it. But mines owners should be informed of mines damage, so that he gets a hint he needs better detection.

I think there should be ways of not being surely noticed. How about something more gradual? Showing the message only if detection/stealth level difference is not too high. Else we should add false alarms (e.g. some kind of strongly-healing high-stealth monster, triggering mines but else not really dangerous).

(The play dead fleet focus) should probably also mean no positive interactions - no interaction with supply (no refuel from there, no weapon upgrades)

Maybe irrelevant if this kind of focus is seldom use while on your own supply.

I would have put it to good use last game for hidden troop movements in my own empire. Like the pausing of production but you also shift the fleet into the right position. This might be actually the most common usage (stealthily closing in, then openly attacking). Have to wrap my head a bit more around spending fuel in my own supply network though.

[Ophiuchus]

Nanorobotic hull can regenerate faster than mines damage, IIRC, and it could get a high stealth part for late game anti-mines hidden scout (an expensive scout indeed).

For the robotic hull line that is an option. For other hull lines a part would be nice. Internal slots are few, especially if you want to add a fuel part. I think the main question is if this would be bad in the other cases (e.g. for military vessels).

So I checked for number of internal slots. Most ships have two or one internal slots. The living organics usually have three. There are some bigger ships which have three. Robotic line never has more than two internal slots. Only flagships (asteroids and solar) have four slots. Also camouflage asteroid has four slots, but has no capacity for mounting weapons.

Mines come in three levels doing 2, 6, 14 damage per ship per turn.

I would suggest that having an anti-mine part negates roughly one level of mine damage.
So if you have one part you have a "mine-shield" value of 2, if you mount two parts, you have a "mine-shield" value of 6 and if you mount three parts you have a "mine-shield" value of 14.

PP cost should be similar to shield cost. Shields cost 30/50/90PP, so 10PP per shield point.

So, any objections to adding anti-mine parts, where mounting one part gives mine-shield-2 and costs 20PP, mounting two parts gives mine-shield-6 and costs 60PP (+40PP), and mounting three parts gives mine-shield-14 and costs 140PP (+80PP)? Access to the parts via a linear tech line depending on Mind of the Void or Psionics tech cost: 120/240/500 RP.

[Oberlus]

What if, instead of stackable, you make that part upgradeable?
First level negates 2 damage (-100% of mines 1), second level negates 4 damage (-66% of mines 2), third level negates 8 damage (-57% of mines 3).

[swaq]

I also find it annoying that there are no counters for mines. Though I think a part you need to put on every ship wouldn't feel worth the slot. Maybe if you combined the functionality with shields somehow?

I also like the idea of having a minesweeper part. So the more minesweeper ships you have in the system the less damage the fleet takes. Perhaps bigger/more planets in a system would require more minesweepers to neutralize.

[LienRag]

Mines are quite expensive to research (especially if one wants to have them mid-game, when they're the most efficient), are a technological dead-end, are useless for offense, are of very limited use against a well-planned assault, are nearly useless against heavily armored ships (which are common when the higher level of mines is researched)...

So the only thing they have for them is that they are unavoidable, and that there damage is not reduced by shields.

Which means that giving a way for ships to counter them would remove the interest of the whole research branch.

I can understand how it can bring some tactical diversity to infiltrate ships inside enemy territory even at late game (especially with the revision of how stealth work) and that having all systems settled at late game makes that impossible with the way mines work now, though.

So my (very strong) opinion on the topic is that only a situational method of countering mines could be acceptable.

That is, have an internal part that allow Camouflage Asteroid Hulls to not trigger mines in systems that have Asteroid Belts in them.

Eventually have another internal part (unlocked by a much higher technology, and quite expensive) that allow any unarmed ship to not trigger mines in a system with Resonant Moon.

I mean, it's imho more interesting to limit it to some Hull lines as it adds diversity of strategy, but what is absolutely paramount is to not give the generic ability to counter mines but only to give this ability in specific locations.

[Oberlus]

Mines are quite expensive to research (especially if one wants to have them mid-game, when they're the most efficient), are a technological dead-end, are useless for offense, are of very limited use against a well-planned assault, are nearly useless against heavily armored ships (which are common when the higher level of mines is researched)...

So the only thing they have for them is that they are unavoidable, and that there damage is not reduced by shields.

Which means that giving a way for ships to counter them would remove the interest of the whole research branch.

+1

I can understand how it can bring some tactical diversity to infiltrate ships inside enemy territory even at late game (especially with the revision of how stealth work) and that having all systems settled at late game makes that impossible with the way mines work now, though.

There are certain hulls that can infiltrate enemy space mid-late game without the need for a mines-counter. Bio-adaptive can repair its damage every turn regardless of combat status by +100% of current structure.
I think there is no need
The Fleet Repair tech allows every hull to repair 10% of nax. structure as long as the ship is not in a system where combat happened.
So, no much need for special parts.

[Ophiuchus]

So my (very strong) opinion on the topic is that only a situational method of countering mines could be acceptable.

That is a good conclusion.

.. So, no much need for special parts.

I think I will implement the silent fleet focus as part of the stealth revamp. This would give mine evasion possibility to other hulls at a cost but would also add the ability to go unnoticed in enemy systems (which is a feature we need i think). With fuel efficiency deep invasion is also strongly hindered by fuel.

I will also try it for suppressing mine damage and then get some game balance feedback. Maybe also mines could be considered active as well and move into some trajectory if need arises, so even if a fleet is silent and but the ship is visible mines could do damage.

Main question if the slow speed drawback works. It could be too cumbersome or hard to implement correctly. If the fleet focus does not give drawbacks it should not suppress mine damage.