Forums » Suggestions
I'm going to disregard that fact this is most likely directed at me for the moment.
Er, no, it wasn't.
This is how capship comabt happens in VO regardless of how you want it to go or what the grand vision is:
Right, it's just not very important right now. I'm focused on the economy and a dozen other things, because we actually have development schedule. I did, however, try to engage here and come up with some possible solutions, that might not break or imbalance things in ways that would then add months of additional work.
Ship A has ZERO counter to this other than to disengage as there is no capship weapon that can reach out to a full turbo running capship and remotely do any type of damage.
That's why I was suggesting weapons to slow down and halt a running battle. Instead of just generically "increasing range of all energy weapons".
And not that I'm for wasting more of your time but if you can do forensics to find exploiters and can do a quick forensic investigation and see that what I have stated above is 100% fact and how the game really is played. I'm guessing you won't though becuase god for fucking bid I make a vaild observation and it might be right.
I've never actually claimed your observations were "invalid", as far as I can recollect (?). I just think the whole discussion is irrelevant, and you never want to hear me on that. But, more on that in a moment..
What's really bad for the game is players spending months building capships for them to be good for nothing other than dump trucks and an Earl Scheib for your fighters. Oh yeah I have spent all this time building this and it's useless and there is nohting else to do with it.
And here's the crux of the matter. You have expectations that are not, and were-not, in keeping with reality. But, because you're so attached to your expectations, over time you've become more and more embittered about my somehow.. not living up to them. Even though there have been a bunch of historical threads where I've talked about capship combat not being ready yet, and being a ways out.
Here's the blunt reality: Capships were a horrible hack that were shoved into the game (at player request), years before they were remotely ready, with a strong potential to be massively overpowered and basically subvert half the bloody game (so nerfing them was a guarantee, otherwise you have to re-write half the game).
I explicitly told people this, that they would basically be glorified lumbering examples of "look at me", until we figured out how to integrate the mechanics into the game, to give them more purpose, and that would probably take a long time. Go-back and re-read the initial threads where people begged me to add capships, and I was like "there isn't really a point to them", and now you're unhappy that.. I was correct?
I've run into what a horrible hack they were, every time I tried to do something with capships, from a design standpoint. Every single goal.. turret destruction, weapon loadout, cargo capacity, AI, ship variants (Type S/P).. everything I wanted to do was horribly freaking broken, or would completely break something else. Just moving player capships around the galaxy was fragile on the back-end (how many people "lost" capships?). And re-writing the whole thing would have taken two years of contiguous development, which was not an option we had.
I mean, we had to do months of work, just to try and get things to scale to a point where basic cap-battles didn't kill the server, and you're like "BUT WHERE R ALL MY GUNZ?@!# MOAR ROWRRRR!@#".
I have slowly evolved and improved many different aspects of capships (a lot of it last year, more of it this year), all the while telling people "it's a @#$@ing freighter, people".
But you, Wash, you just don't want to hear that. And at this point, you aren't even capable of having a reasoned discussion about it anymore. Case in point:
At this point I'm quite fucking done as this is at least the 4th or 5th time I have pointed this issue out. Fix it or stay in denial that it is not a problem I quite frankly don't give a fuck anymore.
Yeah, but it still isn't any more important than it was the first time you reported it. I know, you think your personal pet peeve is the most critical thing in the entire universe. But, again.. that's a problem between you and reality and your terrible goddamn attitude.
I've been willing to listen, and to try and add some other weapon to improve the situation; but no, I'm not going to generically increase the range of all energy weapons on capships: BECAUSE I ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES.
But, I am no longer interested in your feedback, Wash. You've always had a problem with being self-righteous and cranky, and this was pointlessly unnecessary and over the top. I was actually trying to solve your problem, and you're apparently unable to not behave like an ass. You're banned from Suggestions.
I'm open to continued discussion on this topic, from people who don't want to self-righteously blast me with their personal cognitive dissonance.
Er, no, it wasn't.
This is how capship comabt happens in VO regardless of how you want it to go or what the grand vision is:
Right, it's just not very important right now. I'm focused on the economy and a dozen other things, because we actually have development schedule. I did, however, try to engage here and come up with some possible solutions, that might not break or imbalance things in ways that would then add months of additional work.
Ship A has ZERO counter to this other than to disengage as there is no capship weapon that can reach out to a full turbo running capship and remotely do any type of damage.
That's why I was suggesting weapons to slow down and halt a running battle. Instead of just generically "increasing range of all energy weapons".
And not that I'm for wasting more of your time but if you can do forensics to find exploiters and can do a quick forensic investigation and see that what I have stated above is 100% fact and how the game really is played. I'm guessing you won't though becuase god for fucking bid I make a vaild observation and it might be right.
I've never actually claimed your observations were "invalid", as far as I can recollect (?). I just think the whole discussion is irrelevant, and you never want to hear me on that. But, more on that in a moment..
What's really bad for the game is players spending months building capships for them to be good for nothing other than dump trucks and an Earl Scheib for your fighters. Oh yeah I have spent all this time building this and it's useless and there is nohting else to do with it.
And here's the crux of the matter. You have expectations that are not, and were-not, in keeping with reality. But, because you're so attached to your expectations, over time you've become more and more embittered about my somehow.. not living up to them. Even though there have been a bunch of historical threads where I've talked about capship combat not being ready yet, and being a ways out.
Here's the blunt reality: Capships were a horrible hack that were shoved into the game (at player request), years before they were remotely ready, with a strong potential to be massively overpowered and basically subvert half the bloody game (so nerfing them was a guarantee, otherwise you have to re-write half the game).
I explicitly told people this, that they would basically be glorified lumbering examples of "look at me", until we figured out how to integrate the mechanics into the game, to give them more purpose, and that would probably take a long time. Go-back and re-read the initial threads where people begged me to add capships, and I was like "there isn't really a point to them", and now you're unhappy that.. I was correct?
I've run into what a horrible hack they were, every time I tried to do something with capships, from a design standpoint. Every single goal.. turret destruction, weapon loadout, cargo capacity, AI, ship variants (Type S/P).. everything I wanted to do was horribly freaking broken, or would completely break something else. Just moving player capships around the galaxy was fragile on the back-end (how many people "lost" capships?). And re-writing the whole thing would have taken two years of contiguous development, which was not an option we had.
I mean, we had to do months of work, just to try and get things to scale to a point where basic cap-battles didn't kill the server, and you're like "BUT WHERE R ALL MY GUNZ?@!# MOAR ROWRRRR!@#".
I have slowly evolved and improved many different aspects of capships (a lot of it last year, more of it this year), all the while telling people "it's a @#$@ing freighter, people".
But you, Wash, you just don't want to hear that. And at this point, you aren't even capable of having a reasoned discussion about it anymore. Case in point:
At this point I'm quite fucking done as this is at least the 4th or 5th time I have pointed this issue out. Fix it or stay in denial that it is not a problem I quite frankly don't give a fuck anymore.
Yeah, but it still isn't any more important than it was the first time you reported it. I know, you think your personal pet peeve is the most critical thing in the entire universe. But, again.. that's a problem between you and reality and your terrible goddamn attitude.
I've been willing to listen, and to try and add some other weapon to improve the situation; but no, I'm not going to generically increase the range of all energy weapons on capships: BECAUSE I ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES.
But, I am no longer interested in your feedback, Wash. You've always had a problem with being self-righteous and cranky, and this was pointlessly unnecessary and over the top. I was actually trying to solve your problem, and you're apparently unable to not behave like an ass. You're banned from Suggestions.
I'm open to continued discussion on this topic, from people who don't want to self-righteously blast me with their personal cognitive dissonance.
I like the fact that for a couple of tridents to bust each other up they need to get close. I have a lot of opinions on capship fighting but they mostly don't fit this thread title so I'll save them for another time.
I like the fact that for a couple of tridents to bust each other up they need to get close. I have a lot of opinions on capship fighting but they mostly don't fit this thread title so I'll save them for another time.
Well, I would welcome a different thread, if it would help drive more helpful discussion and meaningful solutions.
I mean, strictly speaking, I'm not that interested in generally changing "turret ranges", so none of my suggestions really fit here either.
So, another thread would be fine.
Well, I would welcome a different thread, if it would help drive more helpful discussion and meaningful solutions.
I mean, strictly speaking, I'm not that interested in generally changing "turret ranges", so none of my suggestions really fit here either.
So, another thread would be fine.
Personally I disagree with csgnol for reasons outlined in my previous post. I wonder though, could we try pcb turrets with a range of 2km? I don't know how much problem that might create, but it is at least limited in scope.
I wonder though, could we try pcb turrets with a range of 2km? I don't know how much problem that might create, but it is at least limited in scope.
Is there some reason why you desperately want an existing weapon to have an extended range, rather than a new usage-specific weapon, like I suggested previously?..:
There are lots of possibilities. Tractor beams that induce drag, gravity-wells that attach vessels to a point in space for a period of time, cap-scale PCB type weapons that impact an enemy vessel's ability to turbo for a limited period of time, etc etc.
Is there some reason why you desperately want an existing weapon to have an extended range, rather than a new usage-specific weapon, like I suggested previously?..:
There are lots of possibilities. Tractor beams that induce drag, gravity-wells that attach vessels to a point in space for a period of time, cap-scale PCB type weapons that impact an enemy vessel's ability to turbo for a limited period of time, etc etc.
Not particularly, I just didn't bother mentioning them.
Okay, well, those suggestions have a much narrower scope than a currently existing weapon. Particularly because I can do things like make them capship-specific (ie, only affecting capships), whereas a PCB is just a PCB, and is expected to work like a PCB.
Therefore, if we make a long-range PCB, it will be usable against fighters, potentially against NPCs, and whatever other cases.
A "new" weapon type has none of those problems.
That's why I keep asking about the basic problem, to see if there's some alternative way to resolve it.
I thought that would be intriguing to people, but there hasn't been any interest.
Therefore, if we make a long-range PCB, it will be usable against fighters, potentially against NPCs, and whatever other cases.
A "new" weapon type has none of those problems.
That's why I keep asking about the basic problem, to see if there's some alternative way to resolve it.
I thought that would be intriguing to people, but there hasn't been any interest.