On balancing out demideities: CBMs

[EkarusRyndren]

[quote=“PoeSalesman, post:38, topic:8665”][quote=“Stretop, post:37, topic:8665”]Something else that your organism is not adapted for.

But conversely, the bionics are designed to integrate with the human body. They wouldn’t cause damage to it in that sense.[/quote]
They do not cause damage, they reduce durability through reducing functional redundancy and structural integrity. Do you understand the difference?[/quote]
As you just pointed you, they do not cause damage. “Hit Points” are a representation of damage to your body. By permanently lowering HP you’re implying that the object has been permanently damaged.

[Stretop]

As you just pointed you, they do not cause damage. “Hit Points” are a representation of damage to your body. By permanently lowering HP you’re implying that the object has been permanently damaged.

As I just pointed, they do not cause damage, they reduce durability. “Maximum Hit Points” are a representation of your body durability. By permanently lowering Max HP I am implying that the object’s durability has been permanently reduced.

[iceball3]

[quote=“EkarusRyndren, post:41, topic:8665”]As you just pointed you, they do not cause damage. “Hit Points” are a representation of damage to your body. By permanently lowering HP you’re implying that the object has been permanently damaged.

As I just pointed, they do not cause damage, they reduce durability. “Maximum Hit Points” are a representation of your body durability. By permanently lowering Max HP I am implying that the object’s durability has been permanently reduced.[/quote]Well, semi-permanently.
The reason why max health reduction is not significant as people here tend to think itis is because they’re nottaking into account how much fluctuates on base strength alone, and they keep assuming that every bionic won’t displace some useful amount of body tissue, regardless of size. Internal Storage is a biiiig culprit here.
Once you uninstall a bionic succesfully however, getting that extra max hp up shouldn’t be extremely hard.

[vache]

As an alternative to slotting, you could have a volume + body part system. Player can install 140 worth of volume into their torso. Power storage = 1 volume, power storage 2 = 2 volume, Internal furnace = 20 volume, etc. They can install 40 volume into their arms, and hydraulic muscles might be 30 of them. You get to limit number of CBMs installed, but it’s not too limiting. Some CBMs may be able to be made 0 volume if it makes sense (armor plating comes to mind). Mutating yourself larger would give you more volume to accommodate more bionics. Some bionics might be able to do the same, but they’d have to be rarer and more difficult and possibly unique per body part.

[PoeSalesman]

[quote=“Stretop, post:40, topic:8665”]They do not cause damage, they reduce durability through reducing functional redundancy and structural integrity. Do you understand the difference?

Then, again, you should learn the role of redundancy in engineering and in physiology on living beings.[/quote]
And why should they reduce durability? Again, these bionics are designed to integrate with the human body. The idea of someone’s ‘structural integrity’, which is largely a matter of bone structure, being reduced because their finger has a laser in it doesn’t really follow logic. Redundancy largely applies to organs and joints, which in this case are either entirely replaced, in which case it makes no sense for my new robotic stomach to somehow reduce my health as it’s now where a stomach was, or not involved at all to implants that are placed under the skin or muscle tissue. It just doesn’t make sense.

[MormonPartyboat]

The reason why max health reduction is not significant as people here tend to think itis is because they’re nottaking into account how much fluctuates on base strength alone, and they keep assuming that every bionic won’t displace some useful amount of body tissue, regardless of size.

There’s the practical issue of a bit of max health reduction really not mattering once you’re to the point where you’re loaded up with bionics. It would only really incentivize stocking up on bionics until you’re at a point where you feel comfortable taking the ‘hit’, which isn’t even THAT big a change of behavior since it takes quite a bit of time to get your skills to a point where you feel comfortable rolling the install dice. The only real change I could see from this would be people discarding rather than installing some of the less useful bionics, which really isn’t the issue anyway (rip .

I’d rather it swing the other way, and make bionics a separate progression path from mutations with its own sub-categories. Have certain Control Chips that enable certain categories of powerful bionics, but make it so you can only have one control chip and make CCs mutually exclusive with mutation thresholds. That would let bionics actually be buffed on a per-module basis, and allow a degree of tiering (say, ‘integrated toolset’ only providing small tools and no welding but available to anyone, while ‘industrial toolset’ would provide big tools and a welder but only available with an industrial control chip slotted). It also opens the gate for some ~lore~ type interactions, where there are NPC factions against CBM posthumanism that would view having a control chip as enough to make you KOS.

All the fiddling with weight, size, hp loss, whatever, all work to accomplish the same goal - giving the player meaningful choices. And the important thing is choosing between a few incredibly powerful bionics, which most of the fiddling wouldn’t touch - people would have no problem dropping the olfactory mask or terranian sonar to make room for uncanny dodge or an integrated toolset. Whatever the solution is, it needs to make people decide between those Need To Have bionics while not making every other bionic garbage. And I don’t see the penalty-per-install solutions as accomplishing that.

[Stretop]

We are going in circles. PoeSalesman, can you try to read what I have typed in starting post and in my answers already?

And why should they reduce durability?

Because they reduce redundancy of functional tissue. Learn the role of redundancy in physiology on living beings.

Again, these bionics are designed to integrate with the human body.

It does not mean that they are harmless for said body, only that level of harm is tolerable and acceptable.

The idea of someone’s ‘structural integrity’, which is largely a matter of bone structure,

You did not understand it at all. What I am speaking about is structural integrity of body as working system not simply as physical object. And structural integrity of working system depends on its fault tolerance, which, in turn, depends on its functional redundancy.

it makes no sense for my new robotic stomach to somehow reduce my health

And why do you think that your new robotic stomach, being the same in size and more functional, would have the same fault tolerance as your “native” stomach? Or that it would be just as well intergated into all systems of your body as your native one?

It just doesn’t make sense.

To you. Because you do not know engineering and physiology.

a bit of max health reduction really not mattering once you’re to the point where you’re loaded up with bionics

And who said that it would be “a bit”? This, again, depends on exact numbers that would be assigned to CBMs.

[EkarusRyndren]

[quote=“PoeSalesman, post:45, topic:8665”]it makes no sense for my new robotic stomach to somehow reduce my health

And why do you think that your new robotic stomach, being the same in size and more functional, would have the same fault tolerance as your “native” stomach? Or that it would be just as well intergated into all systems of your body as your native one?[/quote]

Considering the ‘bionic stomach’ is literally a straight upgrade over the ‘native’ one, going so far as to correct a handful of traits… I’d say it’s a safe bet it’s functioning perfectly. Semi-Faulty installs really aren’t worth the effort that’d be required.

“You successfully installed your bionic stomach but whoops you forgot to connect the ass end of your stomach to your ass and instead routed it back to your throat; you’re in for a fun life.”

On a side note your superiority tone you have to reinforce in every one of your responses is getting exceedingly old.

Because you do not know engineering and physiology.

I may not know engineering and physiology, and I may have the social skills of a rock but I know when someone is sitting there screaming in their head “You fucking moron”

[Shoes]

You guys are debating whether or not bionics would affect the body in X or Y way, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is how it affects the game. This thread has gone very off topic in that regard. I’ve mentioned two alternate approaches to making CBMs less of a “one time fee” and both have been ignored in favor of discussing whether or not bionics could in theory reduce maximum HP, and what maximum HP means. On page 1, Kevin even expressed discontent towards the idea as it doesn’t affect CBM using ranged characters and cripples CBM using melee characters.

So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

[vache]

I like damageable CBMs. Conveying them in the UI might be difficult. Bionic menu would have to get way more in depth, and setting up different effects for damaged bionics might get complicated. Also, if you can repair a damaged CBM that you successfully installed, can you repair a malfunctioning CBM when you fail the installation?

[MormonPartyboat]

And who said that it would be “a bit”?

It really doesn’t matter at all how big the numbers are, because the concept doesn’t actually address the problem it’s supposed to solve.

So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

I’d love to see damageable CBMs added baseline, though it’d probably have to wait until after the permanent injury system is tackled.

The weighted CBMs makes a lot of sense (especially for things like the superalloy plating), but it would probably just be an annoyance and devalue less-used CBMs even more. I’ve always been of the opinion that the way to counter min/maxing is through mutually exclusive options that aren’t directly comparable rather than adding more dials to fine tune.

[EkarusRyndren]

So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

I expressed my opinion on damageable CBMs back on page one, it has yet to change.

As for weighted CBMs it could prove interesting, but I can see that one getting old fast.

“Oh you’ve installed a Battery Drainer, a finger laser, and four MKI battery CBMs? Congratulations on putting on almost 30 pounds in a matter of minutes. Keep going and you can have the density of a dying star in a day.”

[Shoes]

In response to weight and damageable CBMs, not all CBMs need to be create equally. Some can be fragile, some robust. Some light, some heavy. I can’t imagine a finger laser would weight that much, but I feel like battery storage and power generators would weigh a hefty bit.

One thing I don’t like about weighted CBMs is the finality of installing it. However, if we mess with that, we mess with the whole mutations vs CBMs duality; one is fluid and the other is fixed. We mess with that, and they start to lose identity.

This “one time fee” is a tough nut to crack. If I could chose, I would chose “better injury tracking” -> “CBM injuries”.

[Stretop]

Considering the ‘bionic stomach’ is literally a straight upgrade over the ‘native’ one, going so far as to correct a handful of traits… I’d say it’s a safe bet it’s functioning perfectly.

“Functioning perfectly” - yes. Being as fault tolerant as natural one - no. And Max HP represent fault tolerance.

On a side note your superiority tone you have to reinforce in every one of your responses is getting exceedingly old.

You misinterpret my tone.

[quote=“Stretop, post:47, topic:8665”]Because you do not know engineering and physiology.

I may not know engineering and physiology, and I may have the social skills of a rock but I know when someone is sitting there screaming in their head “You fucking moron”[/quote]
It is more speaking calmly “acquire more knowledge - and your understanding will improve” rather than screaming anything.

So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

Neither. Weighted CBMs are silly: CBM infuse your body with additional functions by changing your flesh (hence no need for open stomach surgery), not adding something to it. And damageable CBMs present many questions about what constitutes a CBM. If it is a separate artefact inside your body - yes, it would break as such. But if it “grows” from modified tissues of your organism and lives as part of it - why it should be treated as something separate? After all, your natural stomach do not have a separate amount of HP.

And after all that is said and done - there is issue of implementing all that.

[Shoes]

[quote=“Shoes, post:49, topic:8665”]So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

Neither. Weighted CBMs are silly: CBM infuse your body with additional functions by changing your flesh (hence no need for open stomach surgery), not adding something to it. And damageable CBMs present many questions about what constitutes a CBM. If it is a separate artefact inside your body - yes, it would break as such. But if it “grows” from modified tissues of your organism and lives as part of it - why it should be treated as something separate? After all, your natural stomach do not have a separate amount of HP.

And after all that is said and done - there is issue of implementing all that.[/quote]

Consider it from a gameplay point of view first, and then we can make up reasons as to why it could or could not work. If the only way to get over the “one time fee” demideity-ness of CBMs is to change the very definition of a CBM, then much of this discussion will be for naught.

[Muaddib]

[quote=“Muaddib, post:29, topic:8665”]Well then, the CBM’s should be restructured by realism. Not by balance. Balance is a horrible master, because reality isn’t balanced.

Anything but this.
CBMs aren’t realistic. Balancing them by realism is basing dragon’s wing size on physics.

CBMs should get a huge nerf, but it should be a simple (from mechanics point of view) one at first. Even limiting it to hardcoded 1-slot-per-CBM (no power storage in legs, for example) would be good.
Later on we could add CBM sizes (internal furnace has to be bigger than a cranial flashlight), multi-slot CBMs and other fancy stuff.[/quote]

When you start going that route, you might as well scrap everything in CataDDA and turn it in UnReal World With Guns.

Because that’s when you abandon all science fiction and enter just pure realism.

[vache]

I am definitely in favor of a CBM volume + body part and damageable CBM system. Reducing max HP seems silly to me. Bionics were designed to improve and augment human capability, not harm it, and I would be willing to guess a lot of the early bionic work came about from creating bionic systems for medical purposes (see bionic patient). I’m assuming they’ve solved most problems related to rejection at this point, otherwise they wouldn’t really be anywhere near as widespread as they are. The volume + body part system limits options and forces the player to make difficult choices (monomolecular blade or integrated toolset in my hands?), and the potential for bionics to become damaged forces upkeep.

[John_Candlebury]

So, weighted CBMs and damageable CBMs. Thoughts on that?

Well I think that weighted CBMs is not a bad idea at all. But it may mess the utility of certain bionics quite a lot, for example the toolset cbm would become far less desirable to carrying a toolbox around if this system were implemented. (well you would still get the easier to power welder at least).

Not a fan of the breakable CBMs though, because I think that repairing CBMs should be an activity too complex for a survivor to perform. And it sounds more like a massive chore than a valid penalty; basing myself on the fact that having to repair your clothes everytime you get hit by a zombie is already horrible. (seriously sombody duplicate the durability stat of cloth and wool plz)

[Stretop]

Consider it from a gameplay point of view first, and then we can make up reasons as to why it could or could not work. If the only way to get over the “one time fee” demideity-ness of CBMs is to change the very definition of a CBM, then much of this discussion will be for naught.

In-game consistency should not be ignored under any circumstances. As for gameplay: repairing damaged cybernetics is far above something survivor can do with simple soldering iron. Repairing working cybernetics that are installed inside him is so ridiculously above something survivor can do with simple soldering iron that even turret-construction seems tame by comparison. And also it would be a chore with repairing them, not a cost.

As for weighted CBM - that is totally unrealistic. Do you realise, how much your body would be deformed by adding such irregular weights in different places?

Reducing max HP seems silly to me. Bionics were designed to improve and augment human capability,

And chemotheraphy were designed to treat cancer. It does not stop it from having adverse effects.

I’m assuming they’ve solved most problems related to rejection at this point,

And reducing max HP has nothing to do with rejection, as was discussed at length already.

[vache]

And chemotheraphy were designed to treat cancer. It does not stop it from having adverse effects.

But chemotherapy is a serious measure to attempt to counter a serious affliction. At this point, citizens in cataclysm land can install flashlights in their skull if they want. Someone making that decision is in a very different position than someone making the decision to take chemo.