Forums » Suggestions
But then you'd be fulling the name of the game. You'd have a vendetta for another player.
Seriously, though, LordofBlades is right.
While capturing/hijacking enemy vehicles is really great fun in single player modes and MP RTS games, in this game, where your ship is your avatar, it would come off as too harsh a loss.
While capturing/hijacking enemy vehicles is really great fun in single player modes and MP RTS games, in this game, where your ship is your avatar, it would come off as too harsh a loss.
Games aren't meant to cause stress.
having your Cappy stolen is going to cause stress... then people won't want to play the game because it won't be fun.
Remember... this is a GAME!!!... it's supposed to be FUN!!!
That's why griefing is looked down upon.
having your Cappy stolen is going to cause stress... then people won't want to play the game because it won't be fun.
Remember... this is a GAME!!!... it's supposed to be FUN!!!
That's why griefing is looked down upon.
Well, if the Cap ship is worth around 30 mil, having one stolen would be a blow, but for a guild, not a serious one. Seeing as money is undervalued anyway...
I like the idea, though the means for capture should not be as simple as landing on your opponent's ship.
A process of turning the sucker into a derelict, dropping it to JUST above death. (This should alleviate the anger regarding losing the ship, since the attackers could just as easily destroy the damn thing)
At which point, you would have to get everyone to board the ship, and play some minigame for capture.
Problems would arise in that as soon as you capture, the thing is still incredibly weak, and could be annihilated by the guild that just lost it.
Seems like a good idea, still in the pipe dream stage though.
I like the idea, though the means for capture should not be as simple as landing on your opponent's ship.
A process of turning the sucker into a derelict, dropping it to JUST above death. (This should alleviate the anger regarding losing the ship, since the attackers could just as easily destroy the damn thing)
At which point, you would have to get everyone to board the ship, and play some minigame for capture.
Problems would arise in that as soon as you capture, the thing is still incredibly weak, and could be annihilated by the guild that just lost it.
Seems like a good idea, still in the pipe dream stage though.
Taking off from Shape's idea...
Ships at a certain hull % become crippled: won't move, won't fire any remaining turrets, ALL THOSE INSIDE ARE SPEWED OUT! if for some reason someone was inside without a ship (as in, he docked from a station) he gets a bus or a centurion, or maybe he gets sent back to his home station.
Anyway, the capship remains closed to all docking attempts for say, one to five minutes, and during this time the attackers and defenders fight it out; the capship itself can be still be damaged and destroyed all this time. After the capship "undockable" time is up (and supposing it hasn't been destroyed), THE FIRST PERSON TO DOCK WITH IT TAKES OVER IT, REGARDLESS OF GUILD OR ANYTHING. The capship now also becomes responsive, though it is still quite damaged, and it's in the new owner's best interest to move it off to safe haven. Further shooting up of an overtaken capship will just deal damage to it, not start the whole "overtaking" process again, so the best the losing guild/person can hope for now is to destroy it to deny the enemy their prize.
This way, a badly defended capship can fall to the enemy, while a properly defended one won't. In fact, the capships could be indestructible, not being destroyed but just crippled. This way, there would be no need to destroy a cappy; just cripple it, and then either take it over or deny your enemy its reactivation; in an engagement where both sides haver their own cappy, the first one to have theirs crippled would suddenly be in a very BAD position.
This way the capships could also be like fortresses in other PvP MMORPGs, where they can be taken from you but never really destroyed, and could serve as good testing grounds for the eventual ownership and capture of stations.
Ships at a certain hull % become crippled: won't move, won't fire any remaining turrets, ALL THOSE INSIDE ARE SPEWED OUT! if for some reason someone was inside without a ship (as in, he docked from a station) he gets a bus or a centurion, or maybe he gets sent back to his home station.
Anyway, the capship remains closed to all docking attempts for say, one to five minutes, and during this time the attackers and defenders fight it out; the capship itself can be still be damaged and destroyed all this time. After the capship "undockable" time is up (and supposing it hasn't been destroyed), THE FIRST PERSON TO DOCK WITH IT TAKES OVER IT, REGARDLESS OF GUILD OR ANYTHING. The capship now also becomes responsive, though it is still quite damaged, and it's in the new owner's best interest to move it off to safe haven. Further shooting up of an overtaken capship will just deal damage to it, not start the whole "overtaking" process again, so the best the losing guild/person can hope for now is to destroy it to deny the enemy their prize.
This way, a badly defended capship can fall to the enemy, while a properly defended one won't. In fact, the capships could be indestructible, not being destroyed but just crippled. This way, there would be no need to destroy a cappy; just cripple it, and then either take it over or deny your enemy its reactivation; in an engagement where both sides haver their own cappy, the first one to have theirs crippled would suddenly be in a very BAD position.
This way the capships could also be like fortresses in other PvP MMORPGs, where they can be taken from you but never really destroyed, and could serve as good testing grounds for the eventual ownership and capture of stations.
Another thought just hit me. If capital ship turrets are stupid, IE fire like computers do, then it is feasable that someone with a lot of guts and a guass cannon could take down the capital ship with nothing but a tiny fighter. Therefor, I think it may be a good idea to allow the pilot of the capital ship to switch between turrets with some hotkey or another. Maybe being able to select the turret from a list. So that they can defend their ship, assuming they are running it alone, which would likely be the case, seeing as players won't always want to sit around in your turret while your doing a trade mission.
Why would you use a capital ship intended for combat for a trade mission?
Personally, I would give the capships zero or very little cargo space to prevent exactly that from happening.
Reason?
If you create super-freighters that are at the same time super-fortresses, it will be even harder to pirate than it is now, and piracy is a good thing in this game, at least in my opinion (I don't recall ever having pirated myself, though. Evidence leading to a contrary conclusion would be appreciated).
Instead, create super-freighters that can defend themselves only with a fighter cover. This, combined with targetable missiles, will ensure that the cargo gets there.
Also, the idea of large-scale cargo convoys might be interesting. A few super-freighters, protected by one or two frigates (I'm talking HW2-like frigates, not like the frig in alpha/beta), as well as a host of interceptors (Valks, Vults, Cents...).
Personally, I would give the capships zero or very little cargo space to prevent exactly that from happening.
Reason?
If you create super-freighters that are at the same time super-fortresses, it will be even harder to pirate than it is now, and piracy is a good thing in this game, at least in my opinion (I don't recall ever having pirated myself, though. Evidence leading to a contrary conclusion would be appreciated).
Instead, create super-freighters that can defend themselves only with a fighter cover. This, combined with targetable missiles, will ensure that the cargo gets there.
Also, the idea of large-scale cargo convoys might be interesting. A few super-freighters, protected by one or two frigates (I'm talking HW2-like frigates, not like the frig in alpha/beta), as well as a host of interceptors (Valks, Vults, Cents...).
Hi, I only skimmed this thread.. I'll come back and read it more thoroughly later. But I wanted to comment on one misconception:
We did not get rid of the AGTs as turrets because they didn't hit anything.
It's true, they didn't hit much. But they looked really neat and they did hit some stuff. The problem was network related. The sheer number of object-add packets per second for several HACs armed with 20-some rapid-fire AGTs each was becoming too much for a lot of clients.. and occasionally even for the server.
So, Andy put beam weapons on them. I never advocated this, and didn't know about it until after the fact. So now people assume they're supposed to have beam weapons.. but, no. They will eventually go back to more projectile-oriented weapons. Something more like the Leviathan's gauss turrets, perhaps. Limited rate of fire, to save on network bandwidth, but fast enough and large enough to be a serious threat to attackers (I know the Lev isn't much of a threat yet). The current Lev turrets are a first-generation attempt at messing with intentionally-designed cap ship turrets. I have a couple of others in the works, although I've been doing nothing but new-client stuff for the last month or two.
I also have some big shots for Cap-vs-Cap heavy artillery. Things like this:
http://www.incarnate.net/effect.jpg
Which doesn't really look like much in a screenshot.. but it's really neat when animating. Anyway, it has some issues. After we release the new client hopefully I'll get back to some of that.
Someday the Goliath cannon will appear. Ohhh yesss..
Anyway, I'm off. Keep the ideas coming, I'll be back to read them all before long.
We did not get rid of the AGTs as turrets because they didn't hit anything.
It's true, they didn't hit much. But they looked really neat and they did hit some stuff. The problem was network related. The sheer number of object-add packets per second for several HACs armed with 20-some rapid-fire AGTs each was becoming too much for a lot of clients.. and occasionally even for the server.
So, Andy put beam weapons on them. I never advocated this, and didn't know about it until after the fact. So now people assume they're supposed to have beam weapons.. but, no. They will eventually go back to more projectile-oriented weapons. Something more like the Leviathan's gauss turrets, perhaps. Limited rate of fire, to save on network bandwidth, but fast enough and large enough to be a serious threat to attackers (I know the Lev isn't much of a threat yet). The current Lev turrets are a first-generation attempt at messing with intentionally-designed cap ship turrets. I have a couple of others in the works, although I've been doing nothing but new-client stuff for the last month or two.
I also have some big shots for Cap-vs-Cap heavy artillery. Things like this:
http://www.incarnate.net/effect.jpg
Which doesn't really look like much in a screenshot.. but it's really neat when animating. Anyway, it has some issues. After we release the new client hopefully I'll get back to some of that.
Someday the Goliath cannon will appear. Ohhh yesss..
Anyway, I'm off. Keep the ideas coming, I'll be back to read them all before long.
Nice! so the capships will come with anti-fighter and anti-capship weaponry then?
Goliath....Cannon...***Drools***
That is something I was looking for after I read that backstory. I turned the universe upside down looking for it.
That is something I was looking for after I read that backstory. I turned the universe upside down looking for it.
My only request is that the cap ships get some heavy artillery with decent range; 7-8km or so, maybe longer. Animated, articulating turrets would also be very cool.
That weapon graphic looks sweet by the way. What's it called?
That weapon graphic looks sweet by the way. What's it called?
incarnate,
does this mean you intend to completely eliminate the beam cannons as capitle ship weapons?
i'd personaly like to see the remain, but be outclassed range wise by perjectile weapons thus making them a less common fixture on capitle ships.
toshiro,
the trade mission issue doesn't realy affect the need for the cap ship captain to be able to switch to controling a turret if needed. with the player base what it is, i don't expect many there will be enough players to operate more than 1 or 2 cap ships online at a time. heck i've rairly ever seen enough people for a fighter squadren (roughly 14-20 pilots) in one place at a time.
as for cargo capacity of combat cap ships, i agree that it should be negligable (200- 300 cu). complemented by extreemly slow (max speed 20 turbo 50) freighters that can carry as much as 1000-2000cu of cargo (those are the "slow tanks" the pirats keep saying the moth should be).
additionaly i think that fighters should take up cargo space on capitle ships
does this mean you intend to completely eliminate the beam cannons as capitle ship weapons?
i'd personaly like to see the remain, but be outclassed range wise by perjectile weapons thus making them a less common fixture on capitle ships.
toshiro,
the trade mission issue doesn't realy affect the need for the cap ship captain to be able to switch to controling a turret if needed. with the player base what it is, i don't expect many there will be enough players to operate more than 1 or 2 cap ships online at a time. heck i've rairly ever seen enough people for a fighter squadren (roughly 14-20 pilots) in one place at a time.
as for cargo capacity of combat cap ships, i agree that it should be negligable (200- 300 cu). complemented by extreemly slow (max speed 20 turbo 50) freighters that can carry as much as 1000-2000cu of cargo (those are the "slow tanks" the pirats keep saying the moth should be).
additionaly i think that fighters should take up cargo space on capitle ships
wow, I'm glad I said something!
I've always thought the animated series Star Blazers (think it might have been Yamoto in japan) had a great concept of their Capships... they had turrets and medium range weapons, and one giant cannon that could be directed towwards another ship, or sometimes small planets... it always made sense to me. http://www.starblazers.com
I love the other take over ideas I just read, as far as disablement etc... and I really think that the bloodlust described would be a good thing. Yeah, it might cause some stress, but it could also create peace treatise and alliances. perhaps 2 or three guilds all park their capships together to maximize security.
I think another important question to ask is whether a cap ship should be able to dock.
I personally don't think so. I think it should be like a station, and perhaps it can dry dock next to a station, but it shouldn't be able to disappear into it... it seems too unreal.
If you assume it can't dock, then it needs constant guarding and good hiding spots, especially when players are logged off. Maybe the ships have on and offline modes
where a ship with no driver can be found, and it's automatic weapons disabled, but not destroyed or captured. Maybe they orbit a planet at such a high speed, that they can't be easily overtaken.
I think that imagining solutions that would make sense in some future real life scenario will bring the best gameplay.
I've always thought the animated series Star Blazers (think it might have been Yamoto in japan) had a great concept of their Capships... they had turrets and medium range weapons, and one giant cannon that could be directed towwards another ship, or sometimes small planets... it always made sense to me. http://www.starblazers.com
I love the other take over ideas I just read, as far as disablement etc... and I really think that the bloodlust described would be a good thing. Yeah, it might cause some stress, but it could also create peace treatise and alliances. perhaps 2 or three guilds all park their capships together to maximize security.
I think another important question to ask is whether a cap ship should be able to dock.
I personally don't think so. I think it should be like a station, and perhaps it can dry dock next to a station, but it shouldn't be able to disappear into it... it seems too unreal.
If you assume it can't dock, then it needs constant guarding and good hiding spots, especially when players are logged off. Maybe the ships have on and offline modes
where a ship with no driver can be found, and it's automatic weapons disabled, but not destroyed or captured. Maybe they orbit a planet at such a high speed, that they can't be easily overtaken.
I think that imagining solutions that would make sense in some future real life scenario will bring the best gameplay.
Wave Motion Cannon is the name of the main weapon, and the series are called Space Battleship Yamato (there were over 6).
I agree with the main cannon, be it a mass driver or an energy/beam weapon.
On docking: As far as I know, the devs never intended the capships to disappear in the stations, instead they had concepts for different dock sizes. I guess cap ships will have those bendy 'fingers' they use at airports.
I agree with the main cannon, be it a mass driver or an energy/beam weapon.
On docking: As far as I know, the devs never intended the capships to disappear in the stations, instead they had concepts for different dock sizes. I guess cap ships will have those bendy 'fingers' they use at airports.