Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

31

Suggestions / Re: My feedback on the upcoming (tentative) ship systems

« on: July 06, 2012, 10:12:57 PM »

Regardless of immersion, I don't see the point of rapid firing ballistics and instantly reloading missiles being user-activated abilities. All you really do is spam F (system hotkey) if you're shooting at anything that isn't mindlessly easy to kill. Instant missile reload is useful for torps, the rest is boring and ends up being a passive damage boost that you have to spam F for.

Some of the subsystems are very good, some are terribly boring and borderline silly. I don't see why they would make it in when you can just use the good ones on more ships (or make new interesting subsystems). I'm not ranting or complaining, I'm just giving feedback based on the information currently available. That's why the thread title mentions that the 0.53 patchnotes are tentative.

32

Suggestions / Re: My feedback on the upcoming (tentative) ship systems

« on: July 06, 2012, 10:05:58 PM »

If, like what seems to be the majority of this forum, you think Alex is god's gift to earth and must have his butt kissed at all times, you'll be offended.

Oh come off it man, wait till you try it before forecasting the end of civilization and All That is Good.

And speaking of immersion-breaking, your suggested "improvement" reads like Microsoft Excel Simulator, instead of the intuitive and ultra-slick yet tactically rich and subtle dystopian presentation we currently have. Makes me want to slit my wrists and bleed all over your keyboard, as a means to help you realise the smugness and ridiculous irony in your post.

Predictable. I didn't even have to use my DeLorean. 

33

Suggestions / My feedback on the upcoming (tentative) ship systems

« on: July 06, 2012, 07:30:58 PM »

This is just my feedback on the upcoming ship systems. I'm going into enough details that I figured a thread was justified. Be warned that I'm not a fanboy and I greatly dislike non-immersive fantasy-like elements in what is otherwise a very immersive sci-fi game with a great atmosphere. If, like what seems to be the majority of this forum, you think Alex is god's gift to earth and must have his butt kissed at all times, you'll be offended. Below this is my feedback, with the tentative 0.53 patchnotes colored for easy distinction.

•Flare Launcher - launches flares that distract the guidance systems of incoming missiles and PD weapons. Any missile hitting a flare will be destroyed.
Hound, Dram, Valkyrie, Buffalo Mk.II, Atlas

This is by far one of the best subsystem in my opinion. Flares are a real thing and as such are completely plausible and immersive. I also think they would be 100% fun to use and extremely useful. I hope their limiting factor is a finite quantity of flares (say between 3 and 6 salvos with barely any cooldown), not just a cooldown timer with infinite flares.

•Active Flare Launcher - similar to the above, but flares lock on to and track incoming missiles
Shuttle, Tempest, Buffalo

Pretty much the same as regular flares. Not a problem, they seem very fitting for any higher tech ship. Smart flares, why not? Another possibility would be to replace the regular flares with chaff (see wikipedia), which causes missiles to simply stop tracking. This subsystem could then be replaced with regular flares which attract missiles. Regardless, a very good subsystem.

•Burn Drive - temporarily engages the drive used for system travel. Massive speed boost for a fixed time, can't turn or use shields (but can fire), risk of full engine flameout on significant collision.
Tarsus, Enforcer, Dominator, Onslaught

This one seems a bit boring. It's not terribly unimmersive or anything (other than it seems to give way too much speed) but the fact that it's being used on the slowest of ships makes it seem even more silly. The slowest ships are then the fastest ships in the game everytime this ability cools down. What?    I think this would be more fitting on midtech or hightech ship, although it would still seem a bit bland. Putting this on a toggle with a drawback when in use, rather than a cooldown, would make it much more immersive.

•Maneuvering Jets - activates extra thrusters to greatly improve ship maneuverability (acceleration/deceleration, turn rate, turn acceleration/deceleration)
Falcon, Eagle, Conquest

Even more boring than the burn drive, at least it's less noticeable and as such would seem less silly. The choice of ships is also more fitting for a speed/maneuverability subsystem. Still not particularly fond of it if it's on a cooldown. A toggle that can be used at any time for any length of time would be way more immersive, and easily balanced with a drawback (generates a lot of flux?).

•Fast Missile Racks - rapidly reloads any cooling-down missile weapons
Vigilance, Condor, Venture

Boring on anything that doesn't use torpedoes, yet given to 3 ships on which I would rarely if ever use torpedoes. This subsystem would be great on a torp-Conquest. On any ship without torps, it seems like you would just spam it every time it becomes available. Someone in the patchnote thread suggested that it should increase reload speed drastically for a few seconds instead, which I agree with. I'd say this subsystem is decent, if given to ships that can put it to good use.

•Fortress Shield - drastically improves shield efficiency at the expense of a constant flux buildup and inability to fire weapons
Paragon

Assuming this is on a toggle, I see no problem with this subsystem. Fits the sci-fi universe, sounds useful, requires thought to use properly.

•High Energy Focus - boosts energy weapon damage by 50%, increases damage taken by 50%, can't use shields
Sunder, Aurora, Odyssey

I'm surprised to see this subsystem have such drastic drawbacks compared to all the other ones. It seems like it would be very useful on the Sunder and Odyssey when using HILs or Tachyon Lances. Extremely pointless on an Aurora since it has no large slot, forcing it to get into the enemy's weapon range if it wants to be firing its own weapons. An Aurora that can't use shields is pretty much dead in the water. As for immersion, this seems to fit relatively well... justified by channeling your shield energy into your energy weapons.

•Phase Teleporter - teleports anywhere (to cursor location) within a significant range (~1500 pixels)
Hyperion

Immersive, useful, fun, pure awesome. I really like the ship choice but I would give this to the Aurora aswell instead of its current Press-this-to-die ability.

•Phase Skimmer - teleports a fixed, short distance along the ship's current velocity vector
Wolf, Medusa

Same as above, and I like the choice of ships to give it to. Great subsystem.

•Point Defense Drones (high tech) - small, fragile drones armed with LR PD Lasers
Astral

Immersive as long as the ship has a finite quantity of drones for a single battle. It sounds like a fun ability, although a lot more passive than the other ones (you just deploy them without much thought?). Whether or not this is useful depends entirely on how the drones perform so I can't comment. The ship choice seems very fitting, it's a highly specialized carrier afterall.

•Point Defense Drones (midline) - small, fragile drones armed with Light MGs
Gemini

Same as above, although I have the impression most players will only ever see this ability being used by opponents since it's only given to a freighter.

•Sensor Drones - drones armed with ion cannons that also increase the sight radius and weapon range while deployed
Apogee

Same as above. The ship choice seems very fitting as I seem to remember the Apogee's description mentionning that it's some sort of science/exploration vessel.

•Accelerated Ammo Feeder - doubles ballistic weapon rate of fire for a fixed duration
Brawler, Lasher, Hammerhead

Immersion-breaking, this sounds like some fantasy cooldown ability straight from WoW or Diablo. It would be much more immersive as a toggled ability with a drawback such as +50% fire rate but +100% flux generation, or -90% turret turn rate, or even have the weapons overheat and break down afterwards.

•EMP Emitter - targets missiles and nearby ship's weapon and engine subsystems, dealing a lot of EMP damage (and some energy). Mostly neutralized by shields.
Omen

Immersive, useful, fun. I really like this one including how it looks (based on the screenshot in the blog). Once more ships are added to the game, hopefully the Omen won't be the only one to use this. This is another candidate subsystem replacement for the Aurora although I think the teleport one fits it better.


Other possible subsystems :

Smartbomb : Causes an expanding wave of energy, centered on the user's ship, that damages everything it hits (except the ship using it). There could be different types of smartbombs for different ships (EMP smartbombs, etc.)

Ramming Maneuver : Increases the ship's speed slightly (20%-50%), prevents shield usage, generates flux, greatly increases collision damage on enemies. This would be a more interesting variant of the burn drive, for the Enforcer/Dominator/Onslaught.

Flux discharge : Transfers some of your flux to a targetted ship. More effective when your ship is at high flux, and possibly also when the enemy is at low flux.

Flux bomb : Same as above, except your flux (or some of it) is discarded in the form of a bomb that causes massive flux and possible overloads on any nearby ship when it explodes.

Repair bots : When toggled, repair bots roam the surface of the ship and slowly repair its armor. This would have to be balanced either by a finite amount of uses or by having the bots get destroyed gradually if you take damage while they're deployed.

Overload Reactor Core : When activated, your ship gains flux rapidly and enters the overload phase, then shortly afterwards explodes in a much larger and much more damaging explosion than usual. The ship is pulverized and leaves no wreck.

34

Suggestions / Re: 2 small UI related suggestions

« on: May 11, 2012, 11:49:24 AM »

1) If you click and hold the left mouse button on the campaign map but your initial click was anywhere on a background planet, your fleet will not follow the cursor. It seems it would be more practical if your fleet would only travel to the center of the planet (or other) if you tap the mouse button, but follow the cursor if you hold it down and move it away from the planet.

I understand what you're saying (I think).  Have the computer register the click on mouse press instead of mouse release?  Personally I sort of prefer the functionality how it is now.

2) If it's not too much trouble to implement, perhaps the storage facility should be able to use stored supplies to repair your ships rather than only the supplies in your cargohold.

... So instead of just flying to the storage facility, putting some of the supplies from your facility into your cargo hold, and then exiting to the main facility screen and pressing "A", you want to be able to just fly up to the facility and press A to use supplies already in the facility?  Or is it that you want to be able to use the supplies that are located in the facility for your ships no matter where you are on the map?

If it is the first I kind of think it would be a nice quality of life change.  If it is the latter I think that it might be a bit ... broken I think would be the word.

You misunderstood #1. See my post just above.

As for #2, I'm reffering to the former, where if you click A and your fleet doesn't have enough supplies in cargo, it uses any supplies available in the storage. It wouldn't magically allow you to use them from anywhere but at the storage itself.

35

Suggestions / Re: 2 small UI related suggestions

« on: May 11, 2012, 11:47:09 AM »

Would you mind clarifying #1 a little more? I'm a bit fuzzy about what you are saying.

I also agree with what you are saying for #2, since you own them, but it's really not that much trouble to shift the supplies over, hit a button, and shift them back. It's probably an easy fix and I would expect Alex to apply this next update.

If you want to click and hold, so that your fleet continually follows your cursor on the campaign map, but you accidentally do your initial click on a planet or other object, even if you hold down the left mouse button and move your cursor away from the planet, your fleet will just go to the center of the planet and stay there. It can make you get caught or fail to catch a prey, it's already happened to me a few times.

36

Suggestions / 2 small UI related suggestions

« on: May 11, 2012, 11:17:14 AM »

1) If you click and hold the left mouse button on the campaign map but your initial click was anywhere on a background planet, your fleet will not follow the cursor. It seems it would be more practical if your fleet would only travel to the center of the planet (or other) if you tap the mouse button, but follow the cursor if you hold it down and move it away from the planet.

2) If it's not too much trouble to implement, perhaps the storage facility should be able to use stored supplies to repair your ships rather than only the supplies in your cargohold.

37

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 08, 2012, 03:37:22 PM »

Well it's not "tanky" by any means. Not to me. But it is fun and it does have promise.

If I wanted to do straight combat I'd still go aurora all the way.

It's barely less tanky than the 0.51 Aurora. Most of the Aurora's flux dissipation advantage is made up for by the Apogee's lower flux cost for the shields, and the effective hitpoints of the Apogee are now way higher than that of the Aurora with its barely higher flux capacity.

I'm still messing around trying to figure out what weapon loadout I want on the Apogee, but it certainly feels superior in combat. It also costs 1 less FP and it's going to be insanely useful in the full campaign because of all the non-combat stats it has, just look at its cargo capacity.

38

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 08, 2012, 03:31:41 PM »

My point exactly, the Apogee is now the tanky high tech cruiser, even though it doesn't have the sleek armored highest tech pure combat look of the Hyperion-Medusa-Aurora-Paragon line. It's very weird on a cruiser that has almost as good utility stats as an Odyssey (minus flight deck) but oh well, I can buy an Apogee for the price of a Hyperion so I'll just do that from now on.

By the way Alex, I used to get 0.3 shield efficiency using Hardened Shields and an Elite crew. I'd get -0.1 for the shield mod and -0.1 for each extra level of a crew (so -0.2). After the patch I get 0.4 on the Aurora, I expected to get 0.5. I imagine this is just rounding innacuracy? Is it possible we could get an extra decimal on the display? Also what is the actual effect of each crew level on the shield efficiency? I imagine it's not actually -0.1.

39

Suggestions / Re: Ships hit with the nerfbat could get a prototype version

« on: May 07, 2012, 05:58:39 PM »

If you're so upset about the (VERY slight) Aurora nerf, mod in the stats of the old one.

Or, just fly it as it is; you're unlikely to notice too much of a difference.

This isn't about the Aurora, it's only being used as an example. You could have a prototype Tempest with pre-nerf speed too, and a prototype Conquest with pre-nerf shield efficiency.

40

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 07, 2012, 03:40:49 PM »

It was as good a cruiser as the Paragon is a good capital ship. It also has crappy utility stats just like the Hyperion. I think it would be more appropriate to exchange the speeds between the Aurora and Apogee and let the Aurora have the 0.6 shields. That would match the Tempest-?-Apogee-Odyssey line of fastest ships with slightly inferior shields and good utlity stats. You could also nerf the Apogee, Hyperion, Paragon and Medusa's shields to 0.8 and that would also make sense, I'm not entirely against some sort of nerf there.

Note that the Medusa has 0.6 shields and is the fastest destroyer aswell. The Apogee has 0.6 shields and is the best utility cruiser aswell. I just don't see what the Aurora does anymore, that the Apogee doesn't. It's not much of a problem, I guess I'll just fly an Apogee and be just as tough with way better cargo/hangars/crew.

41

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:55:29 PM »

human controlled auoras were literally the best ship in the game

This, human controlled tempests were literally the best ship in the game
This, human controlled hyperions were literally the best ship in the game
This, human controlled medusas were literally the best ship in the game
This, human controlled paragons were literally the best ship in the game
This, human controlled onslaughts were literally the best ship in the game

Seems like you can say that about a lot of ships! Try a human controlled Onslaught against any ship, or even a Dominator. Then look at an AI controlled Aurora (I kill those in a frigate even in 0.51). Of course most human controlled ships are overpowered, that's not the ship.

42

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:46:42 PM »

if you brought an escort of tempests and xyphos along then nothing could stand in your way.

Well then that's not a problem with the Aurora, that's a problem with the enemy not bringing his own escort of tempests and xyphos.

As for "how bad it was", I played it extensively pre-patch and it was nowhere near as good as you make it out to be. The only way it could match your claim is if you were playing with the 50% damage handicap, in which case you could also say that a player piloted Onslaught obliterates 5 AI Auroras so that point is moot. Even in 0.51 a Paragon was tougher than an Aurora in every way except size and speed, which would not be a factor if you were just "pushing 3 Onslaughts around with your shields", but as any experienced player knows, an Onslaught vs Paragon duel in 0.51 can go both ways if you play on normal mode (100% damage to player ship). The Onslaught has been boosted since then.

43

Suggestions / Re: Ships hit with the nerfbat could get a prototype version

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:40:50 PM »

You can fix the "whole fleet of Prototype ships" problem by making them unique. Make it so you acquire a hull, not a blueprint. Even without that limitation, if someone has the resources to build either 10 Prototype Auroras or 50 Paragons for the same price, the game balance was no longer a factor either way. The 50 Paragons are much stronger.

44

General Discussion / Re: Why the Aurora nerf?

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:33:15 PM »

Probably has to do with the fact that in the older version you could play tag with Onslaughts in an aurora, and kill them in that way. It was an absolutely overpowered beast of a ship.

Right now its still a damn fine ship, fast, maneuverable, good weapon arc spread, still good shields mid-tech shields outlcassed by an exploration cruiser.

Fixed.

PS : the Tempest and Hyperion (and many other smaller ships) can still beat an Onslaught. The Onslaught is supposed to be supported by smaller ships so that it doesn't fall for such tactics. The Aurora seems like it's supposed to be the cruiser equivalent of the Hyperion frigate, Medusa destroyer and Paragon capital ship, which are also top of the line, highest-tech pure combat ships. They all had the same shield efficiency (0.6) and they are all overpowered beasts of a ship except the 0.52 version of the Aurora.

Hyperion, frigate class, high tech, combat specialized, expensive but very powerful, 0.6 shield efficiency
Medusa, destroyer class, high tech, combat specialized, expensive but very powerful, 0.6 shield efficiency
Aurora, cruiser class, high tech, combat specialized, expensive but very powerful, 0.6 shield efficiency (nerfed to 0.8?!)
Paragon, capital class, high tech, combat specialized, expensive but very powerful, 0.6 shield efficiency

Now I might be wrong but I thought there was a pattern and that it was pretty balanced. The Aurora could be nerfed into a freighter for all I care, but that does leave a void. Will there be a new ship to fill the role of high tech, combat specialized cruiser? The role is now filled by the Apogee which has 0.6 shield efficiency, but is also specialized in cargo, fuel efficiency, crew capacity and hangar capacity. Seems overpowered.

45

Suggestions / Re: Ships hit with the nerfbat could get a prototype version

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:22:41 PM »

If a ship got nerfed, it got nerfed for a reason. Why would they put that ship back in to the game with its original stats?

As far as adding in ships that have better than normal stats, I'm on the fence about it. It's a cool idea, but I like being able to see an Eagle in game and know what to expect, rather than having to guess if it is a super powered version of one.

I imagine you didn't read the part where I said "be extremely hard to acquire". In other words, you wouldn't run into them when fighting NPC fleets, they would probably be unique. By the way, this isn't an MMO. Ships get nerfed when they're too powerful for how easy they are to acquire, because otherwise they make the game too easy and make other options unappealing. They aren't nerfed so that your victim's feelings don't get hurt, since you're only fighting NPCs 100% of the time. If adding a prototype version is fun, I don't see why not. If the prototype Aurora (just an example) is about as hard to acquire as 5 Paragons, then it won't affect the game's progression.

The 0.51 Aurora was too cost efficient, an extremely hard to acquire Prototype Aurora would not have that problem.