1) My first impression was that the new air units, especially hussars, were too strong. But I have since seen them annihilated by AA and gatling guns. So my new theory is that they are both too strong and too weak. Here are some suggestions for moderating these extremes by decreasing their offensive power and increasing their survivability:
I really think they should have to regularly return to their base ship to refuel/rearm. Ok, this is mainly aesthetic, but would also reduce their attack power by a third.
At short range AA guns seem to hit almost automatically, maybe reconsider the way the hit probability is calculated against these targets.
A lot of wargames use an abort mission mechanism for air combat. If you kept the same hit probability, you could practically say that a hit has a 50% chance of aborting the aircraft, and a 50% chance of actually doing normal damage.
I gather damaged aircraft return to their base for repairs. However, it seems to me that they are more often destroyed outright. Maybe increase (like double) the aircraft hit points, but reduce the threshold at which they must return to their base ship for repairs.
2) I really think game tactics could be made vastly more interesting by:
Adding a "Launch aircraft" button, so that the player can delay launching them (until say, their heavy guns have neutralised enemy AA guns).
Making the first press of "launch" launch 1/2 of the airplane/hussar complement, and the second press launch the other 1/2. Clever launch timing can be used to increase effectiveness of air attacks and reduce some of the odd visual effects as a stream of air units chases an airship.
Maybe the launch button could double as a targeting button, so pressing launch then allows you to select the target of the aircraft (so the base ship and its aircraft can engage different targets).
Add it to troops too. Oh wait, that's impossible, Planes are Troops, GASP CONVOLUTION! I had a thread on Steam that covered identical, but honestly I've given up on requesting it it. Two methods we've considered implementing was "Advance and Retreat", "Takeoff and Land", or the outright "Control of Troops". *We know it's possible.
Our current focus is taking comparisons of the most vital elements of the Code and noting the *Overall Changes. After it was pretty much confirmed these types of features wont happen, my three man team decided to take. As I've said... MINE! Promise it's worth 10k downloads on the open market, properly deployed of course.
It's clear: Zarkonnen believes the title doesn't need it. It reflects in the feedback, or lack thereof, on the issue. Our Multiplayer Bugs: I confirmed he believed we were, literally, crazy isolated issues. Like the PERMA STUTTER BUG was FAKE... like hundreds of players didn't suffer it. Then one day showed Zark how I interact with every player I meet.
I'm a recorded feedback monster. But you know that, Straker.
He types "These aren't getting reported", but when they do get reported he thinks we're crazy. So it begs; why report? I'm sorry, but that was cold, low, worth noting, directly related to this topic. Have a Tweet here somewhere...
Listen to your dedicated players. The online ones have much to report.
Psyringe - the Mad Prophet of Airships (every game needs a mad prophet...)
I guess with the stutter bug most people blamed their computer or internet connection, after all the game does warn about performance issues in huge games.
I think Zark's rigorous insistence on minimal control (lets call it high level control) of units is good for the game, however there is a big difference between high level control and no control.
Look, I love the thread in general; because it's identical to my comments in this one. It's... it's beautiful, Straker. We are on the exact same performance page too, we've been able to balance it to the best-possible standards.
FACT: Zark doesn't play his own game. Just obvious. He's not getting into his own lobby, he's not mass manufacturing and testing his own ships; he's engineering Java and assuming. He signs in a couple of times a week and acts polite. (and only until recently)
--that's cool too. All good, but if that's going to be the case, then listen to your dedicated players.
You and I; we're both Unsung Heros. Very neglected unsung heros, and now it's TOO LATE. Once those planes hit it's basically an effort in futility; and not only that, they increased overall latency.
Man, just now recorded for 20 minutes straight two players trying to get a 100k game working. Host hosted, client joined, 2 minutes passed, host returned, the other player took several moments to reappear - rehost. Twenty minutes of this until they gave up and quit.
My question to Zark is: What do you think their chances of coming back are?
My answer: Not at all. Chances are one guy bought it, gave his friend a copy, it didn't work. Next game!
Who loses? - you and I Straker. You and I lose because he's insistent on keeping a broken feature he's never bothered to fully test worldwide against SPECS LISTED.
Speaking of lists... to elaborate on my other thread comment: I think it was my Airships List Bug that fixed it. The Stutter bug didn't vanish until he fixed my "Obscene Airships List". It wasn't until testing his Custom Fix that I noticed reliability. So maybe in this specific case, a prophet, suggesting the unrelated fix that was causing the issue.
I'm not taking credit for phropheteering, though. (lol)
It's why I put a Reaction video there.
Anyway. It's really an effort in futility, it wont be until the end when it forks that he'll see it. That's what I was afraid of. It's unfortunate, because Procyon works. All I hope to do is wake our leader up to the facts.
You and I, Straker, are FACT. We are vessels of the games HEART.
But... Planes DO land to refuel/rearm....
You too, Respawn. I love you too. You're a HEART of the community, and you've made several ignored suggestions that were perfectly viable as these windows close. You also make fantastic contributions and keep the forum chugging.
Windows close as modders build on this silliness. I don't want to release my Star Wars mod. It will be THE BEST PLANE MOD.
...BUT I *DISLIKE PLANES.
Er... Thanks! You're not too bad yourself! :)
You're very welcome. Everyone have a wonderful day.
"But... Planes DO land to refuel/rearm...."
- I guess I didn't notice, because either my ship rapidly blew up and the game ended, or the planes quickly got shot down first...
- Yep, I think your assessments are more right than wrong.
Technically, you can already command your planes as they will target whatever the mothership is aiming for. Target another enemy to make the planes switch targets.
And I think Zark should wind up Airships development. Just tidy up what's there. Forget ground troops, sea ships, land moles and all that other junk (I would have advised forget aircraft too). Save that stuff for Airships II "The Republics strike back"...
Yes I know Respawn. As usual my response to your post about my post is contained in my original post (see last line in this instance).
Ground troops have been ditched already. And sea ships are planned for a future expansion. I mean, most of the stuff you mentioned has already either been delayed to post-release or has ended in the rubbish bin of game-concepts...
Light weapons being a strong counter against planes is intentional. That being said, balance does need tweaking. I think Hussars are currently too strong.
One of the updates planned for 9.3 will also finally introduce AoE explosions / splash damage, which should make flak be more effective against flyers at range - at which point it can be made a bit less effective close up.
You can indeed target planes by using targeting on their mothership. Adding the ability to control plane launching and targeting separately is of course possible, but it would mean adding more buttons to an already overloaded UI. One of the ongoing tensions with a game that's in early access for a long time is balancing the needs of veteran players and new players, and in this case, I think the additional tactical options of a "launch and target planes" button aren't worth the extra pain for new players.
I'll be looking into the performance and stability issues for multiplayer this week. I've been out of touch a bit because my old laptop spontaneously died on Friday. The aim is to get 10k battles working reliably, but I may just remove the option for 100k battles again. There's a warning message when you choose that option, but I am not convinced it's enough.
In terms of future development, ground troops and sea ships are indeed not happening for v1.0. The remaining development until v1.0 can be roughly divided into three things:
Air Lord, Engineering Corps
Zarkonnen, with balancing veteran vs new players needs; the game From the Depths had two really good ways of dealing with this you could adapt.
They did the obvious difficulty settings that modify certain stats and AI behaviors in campaign.
The interesting thing I want to get to though is that they had a massive
option overloading problem, complete with hour long tutorials that were vague at best.
Their solution to the too many options/ui overload was to just hide UI elements and give the player a complexity slider to change what was hidden.
It ranged from 'first day builds' (only show basic things) to 'veteran' (everything shown). I think you could do the same for tactics/editors and then add all the options/tactics you want if you decide it's necessary without compromising readability.
For clearing clutter in the UI without sacrificing buttons, I know a different game that uses hexagonal instead of square buttons to maximize space: That way half of each button is halfway in the horizontal space of it's neighbor button but without overlapping it, way more space efficient. I also find that it looks much nicer than square buttons.
Complexity sliders could be a thing, yes. Or at least an "advanced mode" toggle in the settings. Could also put some of the lesser used options like "abandon ship" and maybe the crew priority buttons in there.
I was also thinking about using settings to try and solve the performance problem treadmill. So this is my - kind of selfish - complaint that whenever I improve the performance of a part of the game, players very quickly find and take issue with the new limit. So eg if I make crew job assignment more efficient, people build even larger ships which again have performance problems. And of course the point at which those problems hit very much depend on the specs of your machine!
So the idea would be to have a whole set of preferences determining maximum limits for stuff. These would be initially set to pretty conservative values, and when they're hit, the player is told that they've been hit, and that they can raise them in the preferences, but that they have to figure out by themselves how much their computer can handle.
So this would be in terms of maximum ship size, maximum combat size, maximum number of troops, and some other stuff, probably.
In other news, I'm still having horrible trouble with my computer(s), but I hope to resolve them soon. I have... complicated ergonomics needs.
I did start having a look at the multiplayer problems. I might issue a band-aid fix that disables some things that are causing performance and stability issues: the multiplayer chat overlay, and the desync detection.
Yea, @Straker, I still haven't told Zark about my ability to crash the Match+All Players in the Lobby back to the Main Menu. I've gotten THAT lazy on my error reporting - THAT discouraged. lol
@Zark Yea, boss, that's on video. You made a few promises about troops you never kept, it's a little disappointing. What exactly does "A steady drip of new content to keep you entertained." mean? Like the mods? I understand you make mods and their content an option, or will this be persistently forced on new players? I understand bugfixes, but that's a confusing "naw, this game will be updated forever" point on the list.
I had assumed something along those lines would get posted, though, after using the word "Procyon". Time will tell, Emperor, time will tell. We've waited 7 years, I'm sure a couple of more can't hurt. I believe the expansion will struggle and merge backwards anyway, but time will tell. Maybe just a PROPER DLC UPDATE, you know? And make it an option.
I agree with Straker though. At this point it *appears as if you're dragging this out, or a term I like to use is "Milking It". The features aren't necessarily reflecting the supposed time invested. It's a "trying to stay popular thing", but we all become the Doctor one day.
Your development, your time, your fanbase. What do I know? The sooner the better, Airships isn't getting vastly more popular.
It seems as if this is a near-future occurrence. Very exciting.
Maybe the fanbase isn't getting vastly larger, but it's certainly increasing over time...
Holy christ, psy give the dev a break lol. I don't think you understand all the work he does to constantly improve this game.
And by steady drip of new content, I'm sure he means stuff like new monsters, planes, ect.
Go upload your star wars mod and deal with people complaining about bugs, op weapons, and wanting more stuff. That would keep you busy for awhile. It sure keeps me busy .
@Respawn We're not on the same page, or not seeing the same data. But that's not to say you're "wrong", just not in the same way I'm "right". It's two different interpretations of the data we have provided.
@Sombrero I'm glad you're busy with your mod and encourage you to continue it's growth, not that Conquer The Galaxy was at the heart of the thread nor the core basis of the new ideas. I *was representing the players who have been at this for more than a year, not new arrivals, with focus on players who keep the online community rolling and have made repeated requests/reports.
Had a chance to discuss this situation with Zark personally. I believe we both had an appropriate opportunity to represent views on both sides on this subject/thread. With time, planned publishes, and cooling, this will resolve itself appropriately.
Everyone have a wonderful day.
Wow, you are really dedicated to this game. Most players including myself couldn't care less how a games fanbase is growing. Thats for the dev team to worry about. Simple people like me just annoy the dev with more content requests but thank goodness for the modding community. They appease our endless appetite for new stuff.
So next time you start losing hope in the direction this game is heading, just make mods to try and grow the fanbase yourself instead just asking the dev to do it. Im sure your CTGalaxy mod will be great for the community(when are you releasing it?). With enough great mods, a game can be kept alive by the community forever.
Have a good day as well and see you next time.
And the answer to your question is: Does it matter?
My replies weren't intended for you, nor does it have anything to do with modding. Your contributions are noted. Now please, leave it be.
Sorry. I was just wondering when it would come out. It doesn't matter i guess.
I just mentioned modding because it has a really strong impact on the community, which is what you seem worried about. But i understand your main beef is with mp.
Best of luck to you my friend.
Sombrero; you're a known antagonist. This happened between you and stuChris as well. I was attempting to serve a greater purpose here, and was given the opportunity to voice my opinion in the correct format.
Now albeit; there was a degree of undermining to Zarkonnen, the Aerial Emperor, and that makes me wrong no matter the conditions. I'm wrong on many occasions. Sometimes I can go "too far". But I fail to see how your mods or how you're going about this in general represents a larger portion of the community. You have admitted you're not an online player, and I think it's great you're a modder.
Now understand: your passive-aggressive approach is very clear to the readers. All it's done is made another point. That:
I can't allow myself to go as far as I have here.
You take shots no matter the opportunity.
You wouldn't even mutually put a fire out with stuChris. My advice; stop trying to be right. If your fans represent this opinion, then bring out the mods and methods of solution; or begin the discussion with them. Yes, this game does mean a great deal to me, on levels that frankly I wont bother elaborating further in this format. There are those of use who invest a great deal of involvement. While my views do not represent all of them, it's a large enough portion that this has become an issue to address overall.
Also, as a practiced Eastern Russian Orthodox member, keep Jesus Christ out of it.
My apologies go out to David Stark.
Let all that rage out hahaha. I got a good laugh out of that =)
Thanks for furthering the point.
Sorry but everything you wrote in that reply was wrong and i couldn't help but laugh at how wrong it was.
chris, I don't want to wind you up again, I'm only using you as an example because psy brought you up first.
I'm a known antagonist? Really? Next time someone calls you a thief, threatens legal action, and calls you a harasser, I'd like to see you stand idly by.
I never said my mods represent a large portion of the community. Most of my mods only have about 100 subs.
My fans? Again, i only have about 100 subs per mod
I only replied to you at first because ,as you said, were undermining zarks work and giving him a hard time. So i suggested that maybe you should cut him some slack and try and improve the community yourself because i feel zark does an amazing job working with the community. He has always helped me and i always see him helping others. So please do go around acting like he's "milking this game" just for money.
Look at you go, Sombrero. Situation long since resolved appropriately, yet you feel the need to be "Right".
Don't get called a thief because I invest the appropriate effort to make my content unique. Not to mention, lets say in reference to Conquer The Galaxy, I'm personally connected to the developers of Pandemic and Rebellion; it's not my kind of problem. Make an honest effort in being creative, make an honest effort in getting permission, and it never will be my kind of problem.
I only use the term in features maybe not in demand preventing the games completion, the start of the expansion which can be purchased by interested parties, and the enabling of Java modding for the title.
Now please; be done. The discussion no longer serves a purpose. If you believe it's an issue, personal message Zarkonnen.
Oh don't let it get to ya psy =D I still love you. I just had to show you where you were wrong. It's not that i "just have to be right.
But yea i agree. This should be done.See you around psy and i can't wait for that mod of yours to be published.
I already have mods published, Sombrero. You probably used my guide to learn how to mod to begin with.
Problem is I'm not wrong. I just represent an audience and voice the opinion in a "mad prophet" way.
But your nature in antagonizing, telling you now that if it continues it's bound to get you banned.
I'm glad it's revolved.
I learned from the devs tutorial and asking questions on steam(shoutout to cataclysm for helping me out 85% of the time and the dev for the other 15%)
It ok to be wrong every now and then psy, it's part of life and friendships don't have to end because of it. It's always best for you to admit when your wrong.
You do have mods? Cool, what account are they under because I don't see them on your current account. I'd like to try them out of you don't mind. =)
In hindsight, Respawn's strategy of shrugging off needling criticism seems very wise.
Ohh psy, it's a shame you get angered so easily. And your the one who got worked up and started spouting lies and nonsense. I i called you out on each lie and you have nothing to say for it.
Here's my advice for you. Don't dish out what you can't take. I simply told you to take it down a notch and you were so damn sensitive about it. Yet you have no problem being so rude to others.
For the 99+ time, good day
Also what a damn hypocrite. When i was having a back and forth with someone else, There you were preaching peace and commending the other person for deleting his comments. Yet here you are being salty and doing the opposite.
Also you claimed i take shots at people at any opportunity and im a known antagonizer. Show me where im going around taking shots at people and antagonizing them. I bet you can't give me 3 examples(and don't use the chris example because you have no idea what happened there and the part you actually saw you failed horribly to see how i was the one being "antagonized")
Give me 3 examples psy and prove to everyone what a big, bad bully i am on the internet and how your not just an oversensitive salty snowflake.
Otherwise, be gone with you and your false claims psy.
This thread is now locked, as it has gone completely and utterly off topic. I am extremely tired of people picking fights.
Straker - thank you for your feedback on the new units. I have received it and will look into improving the balance.