GrimJahk
-
Posts
183 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by GrimJahk
-
-
The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost...
Wrong they do have an upkeep a massive amount of permanent energy drawl but energy means nothing atm lol.
just plop more gens down.
"Wrong"
That is a foundation cost. Maintenance cost is upkeep... Putting down those generators is part of what I meant by "Once you install them".
After that allotment of generators and the shields are in place... there is no cost.
-
I think he meant if you have ships in different sectors...
Like a storage ship in the starting sector and one at the barrier.
-
Whats funny about this discussion, is that it's based on fixing the wrong problem.
The problem with shields is that once you install them there is no upkeep... no maintenance cost... so, crippling other aspects of the game just to fix that broken thing does not make a whole lot of sense...
The same holds true for other mechanics that can currently be abused.
-
What would you do with a 15 slot ship? I've never used more than 10 different types of module. Sure I could throw in a thruster upgrade or something I don't normally. But, this means every large ship would be slotted the exact same way. Kind of defeats the purpose of having the slots in the first place.
Not to mention that this completely restricts the number of turrets you can mount.
-
To be clear, I'm am not a PVPer. and frankly not all that interested in multiplayer.
My "balance" suggestion here is intended to improve long term playability of the game.
Longevity is based on challenge to reward ratio... not 'pvp balance'. And frankly, longevity is really only important to MMO's where people pay for microtransactions or a subscription fee. discouraging new and casual players with Ambush mechanics is NOT a way to encourage longevity or new players. And your comment about 'finding the optimal' while supporting the creation of a path to the optimal is...ironic.
Risk/reward is not there if there is no risk.
Currently, for me, there is no challenge to combat. That aspect of the game has become boring because I have monster shields, and OP weapons, and the ability to gleefully engage any opponent(s) with no fear of loss due to the propulsion and warp mechanics as they now sit.
People keep comparing this game as a "Sandbox" like Minecraft... in Minecraft you can die easily and rapidly if you make a mistake or get in over your head. That is not the case here. To die here you either need to play battering ram, or start a fight way over your head and then go AFK.
Ugh, no. This would be a horrible change. Are you trying to do 'pvp balance' or some nonsense? F*** 'pvp'.
Not a fan of PVP... correction... HATE PVP.
Now, if you like to explain WHY this would be horrible, I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Without some sort of challenge (as I said above) this game will get dull and boring fast... Think "No Man's Sky"... beautiful to look at, interesting to play, but after a little while, repetitious ... and ultimately more of a slog than quality entertainment that keeps you challenged.
-
You can go one step further with this, allow the creation of Panels (Tabs). Loadout 1 = Panel one, etc. This means that a module cannot be in two places at once. And you have the ability to place and protect your favorite/best modules.
-
One of the things that I have observed here in the suggestions forum ties around customizing turrets. Size, aesthetics, etc.
What if...
I'm stretching this a bit here...
What if the fixed position turret block had a performance benefit... an inherent bonus for mounting a turret to it... since the turret no longer needs the guidance/aiming, or the resources to manage it (like aiming), they should be adjusted appropriately
If mounted FixedPosition (size +2, DPS +20%, Range +20%, operators -1) <--- or similar
This would be beneficial to unarmed turrets as well.
Thoughts?
-
With Jump, Shield, and Afterburners all tied to one pool, you have to plan strategically.
Are you sure about that? The obvious (at least to me) way to handle a shared energy pool would be to build relatively-massive generators and absurdly-massive energy-containers. And with shield blocks no longer being required to handle my shield strength (assumably at least, more on that below) I can focus more on having a crazy amount of power storage and power generation (I like laser weapons so I usually have overly-robust power generation anyway).
How, exactly, would shield blocks even work in your suggested change? Would they function more like integrity field generator blocks, in that you just need to have one to cover your ship (or a few spread around if we take the integrity field generator block model further and make it so shield coverage requires spaced shield blocks)?
<snip>
Batteries have mass. If you make a 5,000^3 battery, it will take massive thrusters to move and turn it... And frankly, with other discussions going on about turrets (Hopefully using energy instead of Modules) Battery/Power management starts to be the glue that ties it all together...
Offense, Defense, and Movement - how you allocate your power will affect your ship. 33% all around... great balance... but if you bump up a slider in one area, SOMETHING will have to be sacrificed.
You want massive defense and damage output? Movement will suffer...
Nimble and dangerous? Not so much power remains for shields...
Shields change in no way from current system. What changes, is that your battery is tied to them... Right now, many are saying shields are broken... Once you pay the price to install them, they are a self repairing miracle of magic. By tying everything to a single finite source. You force the player to make decisions... have a plan...
Logically, my idea has all kinds of flaws... I won't pretend otherwise. But, from a balance, integration, and ease of use perspective... I think it's solid... not to mention that you can use modules to "improve" your situation. Modules that reduce battery consumption of AB, Module that lowers the percentage of battery consumed by a Jump. ETC.
-
Moving Items (IE to research) is instant for individual items via Right-click --- once I found that ... much happy.
I would like to see Hotkeys for controlling the turrets.
Hit the number to make the group hot
'F'ocus My target
'G'uns free (fire at will)
Hit the number again to release the group with their orders.
Guns on 1, salvagers on 2
I currently have "2" set to "G" and "1" set to "F"
Fight starts... One of the ships is a nasty one and I am more interested in seeing him dead faster. I hit "2" and "F" now my salvagers are hitting the target that I just broke shields on, It dies, some little pests are still buzzing around I Hit "1" (since "2" is still active) and hit "G" and both guns and salvagers go autonomous, I hit "1+2" to release them with their orders while I look around at the field of battle for loot.
Shortly the last enemy dies, I hit "1" and "F" to use the guns to assist the salvagers in destroying wreckage.
-
I can see the thought process but it don't address the real issues this change would just poke at them.
The big problems you are trying to fix are as follows.
1 If a player ever finds them self in trouble they can just boost away.
2 If a player ever finds them self in trouble they can just Jump away.
The first problem derives from the engines being able to pull for the almost infinite battery pool.
The second come from there being no way for NPC's or players from stopping you from jumping.
Both are engine related, sorta.
I would like to see this change to engines
Afterburners: every engine according to its mass will have a certain amount of afterburners that the player can use and that recharge over time no longer will it directly suck energy from the batteries. This limitation will stop the first problem at its source.
Cruise mode: activating Cruise mode will shift all available energy from weapons and other nonessential components into the engines allowing for much faster travel. However activating and deactivating Cruise mode takes several seconds and can be disrupted by taking damage. The larger the mass of the combined engines the longer it takes to switch over.
On top of this hyperdrive should only be able to be activated while in cruise mode. IE: straighten out for your jump for too Hyperspace and don't get hit or your cruise mode will cut out and you wont be able to jump. This new implantation also fixes the second problem at its source.
Actually, I think my math directly addresses both of those points...
Once you have taken sufficient hits to your shield that you are worried, your battery is already below 80% so jumping away is no longer an option... additionally, if you have taken enough hits that your battery is @50% you only have 10 seconds of boost before you are drained.
With Jump, Shield, and Afterburners all tied to one pool, you have to plan strategically.
But Yes, this was an attempt to solve the "I can pick any fight and alway walk away" problem that is the meta now. I tried to minimize changing game mechanics, and just tie existing functions together in a different way...
I like your ideas as well, but some of that (changing Jump mechanics) might be a bit more challenging. On a different thread about a week back I also suggested the "your ship must be damage free for xx seconds for the jump to be properly calibrated."
-
Affix Warp, Shields, and AB to the battery.
Warp consumes 80% of your battery. If your battery is below 80% you cannot warp.
Shields strength is based on battery... You take a pounding... your battery depletes... you lose half your shields? You cannot warp away, you had best run... and hope they can't keep up...
Afterburners consume 5% of battery per second. This running action also deplete the Shield effectiveness...
Thoughts?
-
Ok I fully understand that but can we at least have some thing like this
1 Make all turrets need power and make engines have there own limited after burner pool(not reliant on battery).
2 Make all turrets scale able increasing or decreasing there DPS and power draw.
3 Make all turrets independent targeting once they are past a certain scale
4 Make turning and aiming speed relative to turret size; the larger they are the slower they are. Thus making them effective against larger slower targets and quite ineffective against fast agile ones.
There should also be no arbitrary limit placed on them other than the need of gunners and energy. If this was done it would also be nice to see the plus more turrets module completely removed from the game along with the plus energy generated modules or they will be all the player will ever use.Maybe replace them with Accuracy/ range modifiers and energy efficiency.
This will make balancing easier in the long run as well as making all ship sizes more viable and the game funner as a whole because while we would still enjoy new loot as you say; we would also still have some say in the matter. If you dint know the hate for the RNG god is real and this would help elevate some of it giving the best of both worlds.
1) I like this
2) I would add that bigger scale also needs more operators... (more operators, larger footprint and logarithmic power requirement = more DPS/Range)
3) OMG YES... If we have to Hire (and pay) crew members to operate the turrets, once the turret has X crew to operate it... it makes SENSE that they can pick their own targets ---- I would add that it would be WONDERFUL if, -as commander- I can set "Autonomous with priority targeting". If I target something the turret will prioritize it, otherwise it does it's own targeting.
4) Wow... intuitive and balancing... I LIKE
5) OMG Yes... switching to Accuracy/range/Efficiency/DPS modules!!!!! If I want to make a ship that has 500 turrets on it (for entertainment purposes) I can't. Switching to Power/Crew as limitation factors allows me to do that and then either use them or not.
Imagine a ship with 50 turrets... That all guzzle energy to fire... Massive Alpha strike, but depletes the battery, now vulnerable and can't warp away ...
-
#2 Here.
I dislike needing to enter build mode to change out turrets. I want hardpoints (blocks) that allow me to change out turrets from a management screen.
When you save your current ship design it loses the turret info, so having hardpoints would be a great fix IMO
NOTE: you left out of the option list the currently mentioned integration of blueprints... Which I love... I hope that kills the need to play cargo hauler for hours on end ;-)
-
Since there is such a divide, then perhaps the answer is making it possible to mod this into the game, if it isn't already.
If there's a foundation that allows it, and people who want it, then the modding community will make it
Actually, that's a great thought... however... lets go back to ROI assessment... Is it a smart use of resources to invest time and funds into creating and integrating code, on the off chance that someone else will build a MOD to utilize it?
(if the code was already in place for this to happen easily, we would have seen it by now... if only for testing reasons...)
That all depends on how much time and what value is returned... If the code is an interface adaptation to allow overwriting of core coded systems... Like the booster mentioned, It may only be a day or three of coding that the Modding Community would go crazy over... so maybe... If that same code requires two to four weeks of time and has to be retrofitted into the core of the game... probably not happening ... soon.
There is great benefit to working with and helping the modding community thrive, and I'm reasonably sure the DEVs see that...
Again... I don't hate on this idea... but as others have said... it's too complex... whether or not I'd actually use it, it has no value NOW but later? Who knows?
With a shiny future in the hands of the modding community, I fully expect to see all kinds of things down the road... including themed mod-packs and the like...
-
(1)Any chance that people could stop saying that it would be too hard to develop, or that nobody wants it, or that it will affect performance, or that dev resources need to go to other things first?
From what I'm seeing here, people who play this game like everything between random drops to designing their ships in all aspects the very smallest details. Satisfying both would be a challenge, but surely it would be a worthwhile one if it can be managed. (2)
All we can do is make suggestions, and hope that one of them "clicks", or at least makes something click in the mind of the developer. Sometimes they come up with a solution that's a bit of everything, or something straight out of nowhere that works surprisingly well.
I've been thinking on this issue constantly every time I slip into a daydream, it's a tough problem, but I know there's gotta be an elegant way to manage it.
1) Those are called reality checks... Each one of those four items is a critical decision making factor for any business.
- "too hard to develop"
- if a project is 80% done, and if a new "feature" will require more than XX% of that time (Additionally) to develop and implement... Is it worth it?
- "Nobody wants it"
- Very valid question. Will the added feature be used by more than XX% of the player base?
- "It will affect Performance"
- If a game is so resource hungry that a dedicated SOLO gaming rig suffers, how would a server handle it? If a feature cripples the game for some of your player base, what is an acceptable percentage?
- "Dev resources are needed elsewhere"
- When do you draw the line? There is a difference between polish/tweaking and adding/altering core functions. Every project must ship at some point. We are back to the; How much additional time will be needed to "add new" AND finish the project.
2) This is where you answer your own question. A small start up that has limited resources spends a crazy amount of time managing them...
ROI (Return On Investment) is a powerful decision making tool. Time, cost, impact, value to consumer.
- How long it takes is a huge issue, time is the only thing you cannot recover from. Once spent it's gone.
- Cost is a factor of resource management, finances, labor, schedule... "What is the COST man!?!?!?"
- Impact describes the positive or negative effect. Bugs have huge impact, server performance (good or bad) have impact. Percentage of player base affected has Impact.
- Playability, storyline, ease or complexity, is it fun, is it a grind, is this a game that you restart every other day with a 35 minute forced tutorial that drives you crazy? Basically all QoL (Quality of Life) factors that make a player likely to recommend the game to a friend...
If it takes one day of coding to polish a feature that everyone uses... The ROI is huge, so It happens. If there is a Bug that affects 90% of the player base, (thus potentially affecting sales) it will get fixed even if it takes a month. Again, ROI driven.
Those are easy examples. Then it starts getting murky... A new feature, that has appeal (additive) to 50% of the (current) player base, and will take 3 days to code and implement... Maybe. Three weeks? ... Probably not.
After all of the above... the one thing to remember... any project is the product of a person's/team's vision.
They read the forums, they read the discussions, then they implement what they think will truly improve the game... When people (like myself) express concern over suggestions, it is a form of feedback as well. I didn't count noses on this topic, the fact that it's 3+ pages of debate makes that unnecessary. There is a significant divide in the player base on this. Having that piece of information helps the Devs. It's up to them to decide the value of this concept and how it fits into their puzzle.
-
Any ship that doesn't need a lieutenant shouldn't need a Captain.
A team has their functions. A Pilot to fly, gunners for the weapons, Miners for the salvagers etc.
All of them report to the commander of the fleet.
-
Am I the only one that sits at the loading screen and thinks of Red Dwarf?
-
I see...
Either way works for me, Just would like to see it (or similar) in game
-
Not bad...
BUT
"Tactics" will require behavioral rework (hopefully already underway)
Resource Scarcity would only effect sectors before generation...
Unless your idea is ONLY for generation of the current game?
And I would add in one more
Diplomacy - How hard or easy it is to adjust your faction standings
-
Functional block (volume dependent) that "assists" with Docking and collecting loot, and helps reduce collision damage with other ship/asteroids.
Anyone like it?
Yeah. I'll also put forward the idea of a system card that works with this block to boost item pick up range and/or collision damage reduction.
I was thinking it could be a function of Material/Volume... Unless you think this system is OP enough to warrant a choice of restricting other systems? (not many free module slots on my ships)
-
Functional block (volume dependent) that "assists" with Docking and collecting loot, and helps reduce collision damage with other ship/asteroids.
Anyone like it?
-
for our non-german speaking community users i summarized the Questions and answers for your reading pleasure:
____________________________________
20) Bigger Turrets?
- Definetly, current turrets are remaining placeholders from an old system, expect something
more like Turrets scaled by damage done
This!!^^^^
Huge solution that addresses a number of problems...
Tiny ships can no longer equip 1k DPS turrets (or more than one), and an actual reason to have a bigger ship. I would assume that it also translates to Passive turrets as well... this is an AWESOME solution!
-
Beautiful translation!!! Thanks!
(Mein Deutsch is sehr schlecht...)
-
Hi Guys and Gals, this is going to be my first post on the forums here because this is by far the biggest issue in my opinion.
Right now you can build mega cargo haulers, Mega carriers (even if they suck) and general specialized non-Combat ships.
However you simply Cannot Design a ship that is a Mega cannon or Mega Weapon of any sort. You cant build a "primary weapon' and that's just kinda lame. The only way currently to increase your firepower is to spam tiny turrets that look Dinky on most designs.
Now allot of people seem to be saying that the game relies on an rng loot system because they game is an RPG. but if you check the store page it doesn't mention anything about an RPG. by the creators definition its a sci-fi space sandbox. focused around combat, exploration, fleet building, and trade.
If this game is focused on these things then an rng loot system should not be the only way to arm your ships. it makes the idea of a combat fleet almost impossible simply because you cant build an armed ship. every time you build a new ship in your fleet you have to personally arm it with random turrets.
Now with that fact understood. if an new player wanted to build a fleet it takes hours just to get enough turrets to arm a fleet, and days to get the turrets they actually want. and yes there is the turret factories, but honestly they are a logistical nightmare to use.
If we used a way to design weapons, either in build mode or a separate weapon designer you could have your ships pre armed before you build them in game or at least make it much faster to install weapons that you actually want to use. meaning the learning curve will be a bit higher yes, but the game will feel less grindy and more strategic.
I believe this game isn't designed around an rpg, its designed around space exploration, and in some cases, space conquering. therefor ship design should tie directly into the weapons of a ship, which should allow for ships that specialize in a combat role. which will allow for actual space fleets once AI improves a bit, And that is what this game really needs.
This is all just the opinion of one random gamer that loves the game as is, but wants the game to be better.
It was recently posted officially that "Blueprints" (commented around weapons) were being designed/implemented/added... I think this may address your concern around fleets and also the dreaded Haulfest that is the current turret Factory implementation.
Around fleets and new players... the bigger issue (not weapons) would be gathering the required materials to build said ships... Or collecting the credits to pay for the crews and construction of ships... Most new players just jumping in, unless they are in creative, have bigger obstacles than quantity of available weapons as a hurdle to leading a fleet.
Limit one module per a type.
in Suggestions & Idea Voting
Posted
no.. it's still "Do and Done"
Permanent protection with no drawback. This is why there needs to be some sort of balance/depletion of resource tie to the shields.
Currently, Shields are like a magic fender on your car. You side-scrape a post and in a few minutes it's back to brand new. No effort needed or cost.
Shields should consume energy to refresh, or materials...