Any questions, comments, suggestions regarding the mod development.
User avatar
User

Sizer

Rank

Developer

Posts

954

Joined

08 Sep 2010, 23:56

Location

Oakland, California, USA

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Sizer » 21 May 2012, 23:54

I stand 100% behind what FF has said, and Blah has hit the nail fairly straight on the head. However, I can add a bit more on the heavy cap front. What I am about to say will be the last on this topic.

Heavy capitals represent a concentration of firepower unparalleled in the hands of a single player. They are immense force multipliers. Yes, you can have an equivilant number of smaller ships cheaper... however, your greatest limiter will not be funds or resources, it will be manpower above all else. Heavies are not meant to roam alone. They are meant to bring heavy firepower in a combined force with a single unit. Sure, it can be equalled by three or four smaller and ostensibly cheaper ships, but that can only be sustained if you have sufficient numbers available to you. Add that to the weapons range advantage, the tractor range andvantage, the fact that the subsystem hp on heavy caps is much higher, and the fact that they can carry nearly as many fighters as a carrier makes them a deadly and potent platform, provided it is employed properly and with care.
no avatar
User

Zhukar

Posts

82

Joined

14 Apr 2011, 23:32

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Zhukar » 21 May 2012, 23:56

Colt556 wrote:
Yet every time ANYBODY mentions anything even remotely negative, I see you rushing in and talking down on them. This isn't the first time, and it's something you might want to change. Every single person here loves this mod and wants to see it succeed, we want what's best for the mod. This isn't your own personal little sandbox and it doesn't concern just you, so stop acting like it does.


It would serve you well to remember that FF is not just talking for himself, he is talking for the dev team as a whole. And frankly, this is their own personal sandbox. If you don't like the way they've set it up or the toys they are playing with, you know where to go or wait for the final release and run your own server. No need to kick over the sandcastle.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 22 May 2012, 00:03

Zhukar wrote:
Colt556 wrote:
Yet every time ANYBODY mentions anything even remotely negative, I see you rushing in and talking down on them. This isn't the first time, and it's something you might want to change. Every single person here loves this mod and wants to see it succeed, we want what's best for the mod. This isn't your own personal little sandbox and it doesn't concern just you, so stop acting like it does.


It would serve you well to remember that FF is not just talking for himself, he is talking for the dev team as a whole. And frankly, this is their own personal sandbox. If you don't like the way they've set it up or the toys they are playing with, you know where to go or wait for the final release and run your own server. No need to kick over the sandcastle.


It's not what he says that's the issue, it's how he says it. His posts are generally hostile from start to finish, it's off-putting. Also, that mindset about "it's our game deal with it" is not something any game developer/modder should ever fall into. Otherwise we end up with trash like ME3. You may be making it, but if nobody plays it, it's pointless.

As for the heavy cap discussion, thank you Sizer for finally explaining why caps are worth it. I can understand the player limitations. While I still think caps shouldn't take hull damage the way they do (and this is one aspect I'll never relent on), I do see what kind of purpose they'd have. If the NR and Imps both fielded say, 5 players. Having 4 strikes and an ISD is infinitely better than 5 MC40s.

Either way, this got a little more heated than I would have liked, so I'll drop it here.
User avatar
User

DarkForce

Rank

Developer

Posts

830

Joined

16 Feb 2010, 17:46

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by DarkForce » 22 May 2012, 00:44

Colt556 wrote:Psychological warfare only matters when you have something on the line.


In final release, literally EVERYTHING will be on the line. Systems will be won or lost due to gaining/losing of faction influence. The larger the ship, the more influence is present. Which means an ISD in your system can seriously ruin your day without firing a single shot. So check one for psychological warfare.

Colt556 wrote:In terms of the mod, I'm currently flying an ISD, I've flown a strike, and the ranges are almost the exact same. For almost all of the weapons on my ISD their range is around 11km, a strike's range is around 9-10km.


Ranges are only the same if the ships occupy the exact same point in space, which, unless I've been misinformed, can't happen. Range advantage is, of course, gone completely if the captains of those vessels decide to engage at close range. Still, if you're a captain who is interested in preserving his ship, you'd likely be attacking from greater range and letting your fighters/bombers and small capitals engage the enemy at close range.

A perfect example of this would be Ackbar's reaction when Lando suggests they engage the Imperial fleet at point blank range. I believe the quote was "At that range, we won't last long against those Star Destroyers." If the Rebellion's fleet commander thinks it's a bad idea, it probably is. Preferably, he would rely on his picket lines to soak up damage, and allow his gunners to provide pinpoint fire support from afar -- unfortunately, we're limited by the Freelancer engine in terms of what we can do with accurate ranged fire.

If 11km is all you can get out of the ISD, I'd learn to become accurate at that range and coordinate with your commanders to develop an effective picket line.

Colt556 wrote:I know I can seem presumptuous, but I'm just going off the information provided.


You don't just seem presumptuous, you're being presumptuous. You are making assumptions based on incomplete information, so when we tell you that something doesn't work a certain way, or that things will behave differently later on, there's really no reason for you to argue further. When you finally have a complete set of information, it might be time to debate hyperspace mechanics or the worth of capital ships, but not before.

There are reasons we haven't released all the information regarding the mod's gameplay systems yet. Firstly, some are still in development. Some are still in need of tweaking and testing. We also don't want to use up all our tricks just yet because we want people to remain interested in the work we're doing, and if a feature isn't ready to be shown, there's no good reason for us to divulge all our plans, is there?

Colt556 wrote:Your post doesn't really counter my points.


I really don't understand why you're so intent on "countering" everyone's points. We're doing our best to explain our reasoning to you, and when we do that in a calm, open and friendly manner, you come back with more and more explanations as to why your point of view is the right one.

Don't misunderstand -- we aren't against differences in opinion, questions, suggestions, or even misunderstandings. What we are against is badgering, and that is precisely what you're doing. We like questions, we encourage them, but at a certain point it becomes frustrating and distracting. So if you're wondering why FF or anyone else on the dev team seems hostile, maybe you should think about the tone and frequency of your own points before you go off "countering" any more.

Colt556 wrote:This isn't your own personal little sandbox and it doesn't concern just you, so stop acting like it does. Yes, we appreciate the work you do. Yes, we understand the challenges of modding. That is why we want to help out in whatever way we can and pointing out things that don't work is about the only way we can do that.


We've been working on this mod for a long time. Some for as long as four years. Four. That's a lot of time and a lot of effort spent on a single project. You're right about one thing: this is a sandbox.

Now, I remember playing in a lot of sandboxes as a kid, but not once did an architect ask me to help him design one. And you know, I didn't like them all either. Some were too big, some too small. Others were too sandy. A few had too much jungle gym and not enough sand. I had a lot of ideas about how to make a better sandbox, but unfortunately I could never track down the architect to give him my opinions.

If I had, though, and he told me why things had to be a certain way, what the limitations were, what his time and budget was like, I don't think I'd have given him a hard time about it. The only option for me, really, would be to learn how to design my own, or accept that not every sandbox would be perfect for me. I chose the latter.

The point: No, of course it's not our personal sandbox. The fact is, we're the ones putting our time, effort and expertise into the mod, and you're the one making complaints based on incomplete information, conjecture, and assuming that your arguments are always the right ones. So, you should now understand that it comes off as pretty disingenuous when you say that you appreciate the work we do, understand the challenges of modding and 'want to point out things that don't work', when clearly you just want to be right.

Yes, we want people's opinions and suggestions, but when those suggestions become "irrefutable facts," we have to draw a line.

This isn't a build-your-own-burrito shop, it's a game mod.
Blame DarkForce, he wasn't clear about it.
no avatar
User

Colt556

Posts

46

Joined

14 Feb 2012, 10:00

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Colt556 » 22 May 2012, 00:54

I'll keep this brief since I don't want this to drag on, and I understand your points. But there's a key aspect you're missing. You mentioned several times "so when we tell you why something wont work, you shouldn't keep badgering" sort of thing. The thing is, you DIDN'T explain why it wouldn't work. What few explanations you did give, I pointed out those weren't accurate. Because the few reasons you gave I have all the information necessary, such as combat capabilities of ships or resource management. I hate secrecy, I disagree with your reasons for keeping such secrets, and keeping such secrets leads to arguments. There are people who will just go "oh, ok", but I'm a modder myself (not for FL obv), I understand what it's like from one modder to another, I've worked on my lengthy projects, I understand all of that.

So I also know people can think of things you didn't. So if you don't explain everything, I'm left wondering if you've thought of every angle. Nobody's perfect, we can miss things. Somebody may come up with an idea none of you have thought of. So when you just dismiss it going "that's not true" without explaining WHY, I press further for details. When explained why something is the way it is, I drop the subject. When Sizer came in and explained what cap ships do, and when you elaborated it further in your latest post, that was good enough for me. I know it can be a little annoying, but try to look at it from our point of view.

We like this mod, we want to play this mod, and when we suggest changes that we feel can better this mod, we would like a little more depth beyond "no". When that depth is provided, few people persist.
User avatar
User

Sushi

Rank

Developer

Posts

3219

Joined

14 Feb 2010, 05:05

Re: Questions about game mechanics

by Sushi » 22 May 2012, 01:13

Alright, this thread has run its course...
Image
Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 7 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign
[ Time : 0.071s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]
cron