Forums » Suggestions

Several Suggestions

Apr 19, 2003 Spellcast link
ok i just want to start off with 3.2 ROCKS!!! keep it up devs.

also i tend to ramble so this post might get a little long.

Now for a few minor gameplay tweaks that I think would improve the game.. some of these may be in the works already and all of them are opinions and ideas open for criticizim after all thats what we're here for to give the dev's idea's and feedback.

1. perhaps a module that could be mounted to give a larger map display.. say sectors out to 2 jumps or 3 jumps from the one you are in.

2. Extended cargo pods.. mount them in a small module instead of a weapon and get +1 cargo space.. mount them in a Large module and get +2 cargo space. (different costs for the different sizes of course.)

3. extended radar module? don't know how feasable this is from a gameplay perspective.. perhaps something that would put a ring/pip/indicator next to a sector on the map when you are within jump range of it to let you know if there are any ships within XXXX m of the emergence point on the other side? (at least you would know if someone was camping the wormhole)

4. Thrust assist modules? mount them in a REAR weapons bay and fire them like a weapon for an additional burst of afterburner/top speed. (give them a LONG recharge time, or maybe require them to have ammo/fuel that you have to buy at a station [I think I like that even better] to cut down on the obvious exploit of using them in series with a regular afterburner)

and last
5. an inexpensive (under 300 credits) conversion module to change a LARGE weapons slot into a SMALL weapons slot. This would allow players just starting out to use a large weapon bay with an inexpensive small weapon untill they have the cash to buy a large weapons module. Obviously it would make less sense to have a converter that could change a small bay into a large bay.
but if you did decide to put in something like that it could be much more expensive than any weapon you would want to put into it.

ok I've started the ball rolling on these idea's.. have at them.. rip em to shreds.. say you like them.. I dont care.. they are just what I Personally think would be good in vendetta.

Spellcast
Apr 20, 2003 slappyknappy link
I like 4. Make it drain LOTS of energy, and boost you so darn fast that you have little chance of using it for close combat tactics.

But it could insert you (in a low-energy state) into the heart of enemy territory. It could also get you the heck out of there (once energy is recharged). (bad for CTF, but CTF isn't here to stay)

The cost should be high, and it should occupy several weapons slots.
Apr 20, 2003 Chameleon link
I like 2, 4 & 5.

Also, when/where did you hear that CTF isn't here to stay?
Apr 20, 2003 Pyro link
The devs have been saying it all along...
Apr 21, 2003 Spellcast link
CTF as it is now is not going to work in a universe that is 10,000 sectors.

(but a set of 10 sectors specifically for CTF.. in a bowling pin formation accessible only through the corners... would make a GREAT game within a game.)
Apr 21, 2003 Captain Rambone link
hmm A game within a game... that's a good idea for the finished product, methinks.

I like number 4 the best. I don't think extended radar that spans a wormhole would make any practical sense in the realm of science (which I have noticed the devs try to stick too). Extended sensors within systems is something that a few people (including myself) have being hoping for for a bit.

With #4 it won't matter who's on the other side of a wormhole... if these thrusters took some sort of fuel they could maybe negate the wormhole energy drain effect and blast you out of there while still under invulnerability effects.
Apr 21, 2003 Arolte link
I think the future of Vendetta should be more of a territorial war. The idea of conquering sectors via air superiority seems more appealing to me than capturing a flag. The "Nation Ranking" page could then include the number of sectors "secured" by each nation. Hopefully this should encourage exploration and teamwork. Of course, each nation should have its own home sector with surrounding sectors that cannot be captured, for obvious reasons.

This is strictly speaking in terms of conflicts between nation. All the other individual player objectives should remain (if not expand).
Apr 21, 2003 HumpyThePenguin link
He he he think of blue capping sec 14 and sec 10
Apr 21, 2003 Drooling Iguana link
The game should be changed from "capture the flag" to "plant the flag." Instead of trying to get the flag out of the enemy sector, you'd be bringing flags from your own sector into the various neutral areas, sticking them in a pre-determined spot, then trying to defend it while the other teams try to destroy it so that they can plant a flag of their own. Have it so that the teams get resources (leading to more/cheaper weapons/equipment in their home sector) while their own flag is planted, and have different sectors give different resources.
Apr 21, 2003 Arolte link
Excellent idea, Drooling Iguana! I was thinking about how someone could "secure" a sector besides simply occupying it, and that seems to do it very well.
Apr 21, 2003 Captain Rambone link
Here's a thought... while your flag is planted you can bring your nations' widgets--I mean proprietary cargo into the station and sell it for really high prices. Flesh out the "different resources" idea... I think it sounds cool.
Apr 21, 2003 Celebrim link
Well, my assumption is that flags are going away period, though the code might be used for carring high value cargo around in some way semi-equivalent to 'flags'.

As for securing a sector, there are several possibilities.

1) You secure a sector by capturing a neutral station. You do this by pummelling the station for one million damage or so. Then the NPC's in the station yell, 'Our shields are failing, we surrender'. Then you park a ship in the station. Boom, the station is now 'Blue'. Faction heads can either lock a station so that only thier own people can trade thier, or they can leave it open and collect 'docking fees' and 'sales tax' from anyone that uses the station.

2) You gain influence over a sector by being the faction that has the most 'presence' in the sector were precense is variously defined such as 'The team with the most time spent in the sector during the past 24 hours' or 'The team with the highest player time * hull points in the past 24 hours or so'. This idea could be combined with #1 above in that if you fail to maintain influence over a sector with a station you control the station reverts to nuetral.

3) You gain influence over a sector by doing the most business there. The faction with influence over a sectors economy gains a favorable trading advantage (ei stuff in that sector is cheaper for them).

In general, you have to make some realism concessions in a game like this. A few sectors stations have to be invunerable, and stations in general should not be allowed to be destroyed just captured. No faction can 'win'. There has to be subtle bonuses that come into play (the 'back to the wall bonus') when a faction is losing badly that help them stay in it. Fights for critical resources have to be moderated and are advertised in advance to insure all teams get a fair chance to participate. Basically, nothing can be allowed to happen that 'ends' the game.
Apr 21, 2003 Pyro link
Options 1 and 3 I like. Option 2, on the other hand, just doesn't seem right... I love option 1, but it would only work if the stations had defense ships or something (like EVN)... Maybe it could be tied in so that all station charge a sales tax period, and the more money they have the stronger the defense fleet. Also, maybe nations could contribute money to the station (whether or not they control it) to augment the defense fleet.
Jan 22, 2005 dfryling link
It took me a while to figure out where to post this, so here it goes.
First, the time and effort the developers have put into the game is fantastic. The space flight part is excellent. This game reminds me of the game Elite that was first released on the Commodore 64..
Anyway, I loved that game, however, I had major wishes with that one, just like this one:
1. The only interface now is in a space ship. I wouldn't care if it was a simple "pacman" looking layout for a space station, it would be excellent to have something to engage in on the space station. Yo
When you dock, there needs to be a simple, quick graphical interface of sliding into the space station (like flying through a tunnel). Maybe when you press enter, you see your ship automatically align with the doors in the station and you fly in.

I feel like once I dock, I loose the feeling of being Immersed in the game. I'm now just looking at a manefesto without any real feeling of being in a particular space station. I'd much rather replace the picture of the outside of a space station in the background with a picture of my ship docked inside the station floating there - maybe looking through a window at my ship docked inside the station.

2. In Elite, I wished that I could land on the planets and explore. I realize this means you'd be building an entirely different user interface, unless landing was just like docking. The ultimate game to me includes 1st person adventuring, 3rd person adventuring and space ships/trading all in one. Someday, someone has to do it. I've seen it done in a few OLD timer much simpler, relics of the past, games like "Questron" and they were able to do it by not have nearly as demanding graphics quality as we do today.

Sometimes, I'd trade off the graphics quality for a more expanded absorbing universe.

3. It would be wonderful if there were a much larger variety of ships and weapons. I believe there should be a Buy/Sell screen that is for equipment and one for goods. I don't think trading comodoties should be combined with equipement and equipement shouldn't be combined with selling and buying ships. However, I really like the fact that you can own several ships and have equipment stored on several space stations.

4. I think your ship shouldn't be automatically repaired. I think you should have to pay for it like reality and if you can only afford to fix your ship from 50% to 65% that should be an option.

5. I think you should have to buy fuel and can only travel a certain distance that is marked by a circle on the navigational map. It may not need to be marked with a circle, but the further you go, the more of your fuel tank you use up.

6. I think that there shouldn't be any friction in space. If you use the booster, you can't intially go faster then 150 (in the first ship), but, this is based on the maximum that the ISP is pushed out the back. Once you let up on the thrust, you should continue to float (at that speed) till you apply breaking thrusters.

7. Can you reduce the distance you have to be from any object to jump from 3000m to 2000m? This would really speed up the game.

8. It would be nice to encounter more ships while warping around too.

Anyway, what you've done so far is fantastic. Great job on interfacing a mouse to the game!
Jan 23, 2005 Solra Bizna link
3km is too close anyway.
Plus, if (as you suggest) "friction" is removed, the result is not fun. Ask an alpha.
From the sound of your post, you're A) still in the EC-88 and B) a greyspace virgin. Go grab a Wraith and hang around at Corvus Prime for a while if you want to see some other people...
-:sigma.SB