Forums » Suggestions
Reduce or regroup cap ships in BS
BS presumably is all about getting players involved in the Serco/Itani conflict.
What it really turns out to be is a swarm fest of players vs. NPC cap ships. The cap ships are typically grouped together and include HACs, Connies, Tridents, etc.
There are two issues as I see it: 1) Players who get good FPS everywhere else including NW get terrible FPS in the BS sector and 2) the current scheme really pits players vs. caps - a lot of swarming goes on, not so much player vs player or even player vs. small fighters.
Issue 1:
This has been reported before. Not sure what the issue may even be here, but it should get a serious look rather than the "buy a new computer" response it's gotten so far. It's happening to more than one person -- perhaps related to platform/textures/or the amount of swarms in the sector? Who knows at this point....
Issue2:
This would be a tweak to the number or configuration of caps. Some suggestions would be:
1) Don't lump all the caps in a big ball. Maybe spread them out in a more traditional naval sense.
2) Maybe have groups of them further from the jumping in points to give time for ambush of heavy bombers prior to them unloading on the caps.
3) Perhaps big bonuses for killing player ships vs. NPCs?
Anyway this is to get serious discussion going on this. Maybe everyone likes BS the way it is, but I know I have talked to others who would like to see it tweaked in some manner....
What it really turns out to be is a swarm fest of players vs. NPC cap ships. The cap ships are typically grouped together and include HACs, Connies, Tridents, etc.
There are two issues as I see it: 1) Players who get good FPS everywhere else including NW get terrible FPS in the BS sector and 2) the current scheme really pits players vs. caps - a lot of swarming goes on, not so much player vs player or even player vs. small fighters.
Issue 1:
This has been reported before. Not sure what the issue may even be here, but it should get a serious look rather than the "buy a new computer" response it's gotten so far. It's happening to more than one person -- perhaps related to platform/textures/or the amount of swarms in the sector? Who knows at this point....
Issue2:
This would be a tweak to the number or configuration of caps. Some suggestions would be:
1) Don't lump all the caps in a big ball. Maybe spread them out in a more traditional naval sense.
2) Maybe have groups of them further from the jumping in points to give time for ambush of heavy bombers prior to them unloading on the caps.
3) Perhaps big bonuses for killing player ships vs. NPCs?
Anyway this is to get serious discussion going on this. Maybe everyone likes BS the way it is, but I know I have talked to others who would like to see it tweaked in some manner....
I don't think it's all the computer's fault last time I checked, in the BS sector my bps in/out was very high, it was hovering around 1800 I believe. If I'm reading it correctly then that means a little over 50% of my bandwidth is taken up during BS (I have a 3mbps DSL line). People with major FPS issues in BS but not elsewhere could be taking FPS hits due to their connection being unable to pipe in all the position data.
In my case I have a 10mbps DSL line, so hopefully it isn't saturating that :) But perhaps the data flow up from the client would be worth checking out -- that's significantly less for me.
I find BS fun, I take shots at fighters and capships
Last time I was on I was fighting almost all fighters until Itani got really behind then I grabbed a bomber and wrecked some capships and we crushed those pathetic serco!
:D
Last time I was on I was fighting almost all fighters until Itani got really behind then I grabbed a bomber and wrecked some capships and we crushed those pathetic serco!
:D
Relating to the spreading of capital ships out:
I have seen the capital-classes spread out so far that some fell off radar even sitting at the center-point of the battle-sphere.
Adding to this, we need the capital class to be relatively close to one another, so that they can engage one another. This also provides the advantage of allowing players a FARRP (Forward Area Rearm/Refuel Point) which allows the player to remain in combat and keep it moving as opposed to long-range recovery missions.
Mentioning also, the Dev's have noted some of the errors with the NPC behavior in BS where NPC Fighters target cap-ships with little effect. They're working to make BS more realistic on that front.
I do agree though that perhaps there's a need to re-look at the performance of the system in BS, because while I haven't had a problem before, I know others have.
I have seen the capital-classes spread out so far that some fell off radar even sitting at the center-point of the battle-sphere.
Adding to this, we need the capital class to be relatively close to one another, so that they can engage one another. This also provides the advantage of allowing players a FARRP (Forward Area Rearm/Refuel Point) which allows the player to remain in combat and keep it moving as opposed to long-range recovery missions.
Mentioning also, the Dev's have noted some of the errors with the NPC behavior in BS where NPC Fighters target cap-ships with little effect. They're working to make BS more realistic on that front.
I do agree though that perhaps there's a need to re-look at the performance of the system in BS, because while I haven't had a problem before, I know others have.
Vardonx: I hope you don't feel like Guild's official response was "get a new computer". We certainly don't feel that way and are well aware that a number of people experience seemingly-out-of-proportion FPS hits in the BS and large HS sectors. We are very concerned about this and some server side performance issues in the same sectors. We've taken a few steps on both fronts, and we will continue to try to solve this problem.
As far as the ships being more spread out and making the combat dynamics into something better than a "swarm fest of players vs. NPC cap ships," with any luck, you'll see some progress on that front tonight.
As far as the ships being more spread out and making the combat dynamics into something better than a "swarm fest of players vs. NPC cap ships," with any luck, you'll see some progress on that front tonight.
Ooh, mysterious!
I participate on BS on a regular basis, and it is only in VERY rare circumstances (or when I want to) that I need to grab a bomber and swarm cappies. 99% of the time I've occupied myself in a fighter killing players (usually) or bots.
Just a general FYI.. the current version of Border Skirmish is not, by any means, considered "final". If anything, this is a progressive testbed for general large-scale combat (compare it to the original Border Skirmish.. we've come a long way). We know there are a lot of problems, and we're trying to fix them, improving performance, etc. Some of the problems are easier to solve than others.. Michael and Andy recently spent a lot of time reworking the way bots prioritize targets throughout the entire game, this is a game-wide change that is basically happening because of Border Skirmish development (and the desire to create a lot more large-scale combat, and multi-sector, and so on).
We always try to make gameplay that is accessible to the broadest cross-section of computers, and this is no exception. The wide selection of hardware that our game will run on is a testament to this fact.
Keep in mind that as we make more intense gameplay (with tons of stuff flying around and big space battles).. it will be more system/bandwidth intensive than say.. sectors with a few mining bots. But, we're trying to get the most "bang for the buck" that we can, and a lot of that is going to be a work in progress (experimentation/testing, and lots of feedback from you guys).
We always try to make gameplay that is accessible to the broadest cross-section of computers, and this is no exception. The wide selection of hardware that our game will run on is a testament to this fact.
Keep in mind that as we make more intense gameplay (with tons of stuff flying around and big space battles).. it will be more system/bandwidth intensive than say.. sectors with a few mining bots. But, we're trying to get the most "bang for the buck" that we can, and a lot of that is going to be a work in progress (experimentation/testing, and lots of feedback from you guys).
momerath & incarnate,
No I did not think that Guild's solution was to just buy better hardware, but that has been expressed by other players as "the solution" when various people have mentioned the issue in the past...
No I did not think that Guild's solution was to just buy better hardware, but that has been expressed by other players as "the solution" when various people have mentioned the issue in the past...
Just curious, if you were trying to reduce bandwidth intensity... why do put swarms on cappies?
I think the better question is, "Why do swarms still lag the game?"
Very thoughtful post vardonx. I think that it is particularly insightful that you draw our attention to the importance of pitting players against players. I believe that player vs player action is the most rewarding part of the game.
As most players hang out in grey space, here's a simple idea which could generate some action down there.
I'll title it "the easter bunny is down the tube!"
Every night at 9pm EST seed one of the race tubes with 2,000 sedina chocolates. Let the guilds sort out who will take home the chocolate.
This should provide some epic battles in grey space.
For fun, drop a corvus HAC in the sector for repairing.
Cheers!
As most players hang out in grey space, here's a simple idea which could generate some action down there.
I'll title it "the easter bunny is down the tube!"
Every night at 9pm EST seed one of the race tubes with 2,000 sedina chocolates. Let the guilds sort out who will take home the chocolate.
This should provide some epic battles in grey space.
For fun, drop a corvus HAC in the sector for repairing.
Cheers!