Forums » Suggestions

Ship speeds increase

«123
Oct 01, 2012 Dr. Lecter link
The main problem is that back when they implemented a reduction in speeds to improve play on poor connections, they took the lazy/too busy to do it right approach and simply capped turbo speeds. This nerfed a handful of ships and left many others unchanged.

Had they taken the time to proportionally alter both boost and standard speeds for all ships, such that the max speed was at the current cap for the fastest ships and then everything else was slower in the same proportions as before, the gameplay would make a lot more sense.
Oct 04, 2012 drazed link
I never understood why the scales that are in place were choosen... 220m/s for a valk does seem rather slow, at 12m length...

If the whole universe were "scaled", so lets say a valk is suddenly 120m long, it would now have a max speed of 2200m/s (2.2km/s), which is damn fast for a short range propulsion, not to mention a rediculous acceleration that would liquify pretty much any solid matter.

Anyhow, just a thought, would be scale the whole universe, not necessarily to 10X... but 2X or 3X (a 24m or 36m valk would still be believable, and a 440m/s or 660m/s speed would be much more 'advanced') would still be reasonable sizes, with much faster speeds... All these sizes/speeds would of course be relative, and the actual "game" would not be scaled, just the numbers would all be equally increased to give the "illusion" to ppl like Vadtec that things have "progressed" over the last few thousand years, gameplay would remain unchanged/awesome in the proccess.
Oct 04, 2012 Pizzasgood link
Yes, and then every couple months the main version number of the game could be increased to give the impression of faster development.
Oct 04, 2012 drazed link
yes Pizza is good!

and also, all the browsers (and many softwares these days) use this development versioning model for a reason... well, mainly becausse the first guy started doing it and everyone else "looked" like they were falling behind (even though in reality they've all be on par for keeping up for the most par).

While I do get you're sarcasm pizza, and had a few hints of such in my own post, I do think this does help fool the average mind into thinking progress has increased. Though would never argue actual progress/changes happen due to something like this, imagine how many less "make things faster" posts we would have if all the numbers (both sizes and speeds) were increased. If only to save the hours of reading/replying/pondering/etc for both the devs, myself, and everyone else, this would be a welcome (and easy) change. It is often easier to "fool" the feable mind then to argue it, so why bother? Give them a "faster" speed with no actual game-play change, in their heads things will be flying by a million times faster and somehow they will believe they are having more fun :)
Oct 05, 2012 Pizzasgood link
A top speed of 400 m/s is no better than 200 m/s. They won't be happy with just a doubling. They will need several orders of magnitude to be happy, if it's even possible to satisfy them with less than 0.1 C (which would imply valks that are hundreds of km long).

The numbers we have right now make sense, spatially. So I say it's better to just ignore the complainers, or find a way to allow actual high speeds without damaging gameplay or confusing the server. Scaling the numbers is not the answer.
Oct 05, 2012 Alloh link
As I pointed out before, major problem isn't TOP speed, but the RELATIVE speed between an interceptor and a regular freighter as a Centaur: 11% to round up... yes, eleven percent... (200x225)

It is like saying that a cargo airplane, as an Hercules, or a freighter as a 747 or A320, were able to fly at 1,000 kh/h (or mph, doesn't matter), then the fighter jets as the F16 or SU22 would be limited to 1,150 km/h... OR that airlines fly at 2000mph and fighters are limited to 2250mph...

About combat, top speed is never used in combat... as supersonic jets have to slow down to be able to dogfight... (chasing evading ships is not combat!)
Oct 05, 2012 Kierky link
It's not going to change.