Forums » Suggestions
Deneb skirmish sectors should have asteroids.
Deneb skirmish sectors should have asteroids.
Background: Pilots who are getting low on armor and are facing imminent destruction are tempted to insta-jump out of Deneb skirmish.
Suggestion: Add roids to Deneb skirm missions. This will be similar to how Leviathan sectors have a ring of asteroids. The larger the skirm, the larger the roid field. Since it will be the same set of asteroids for each skirm, the NPC AI will be able to deal with the asteroids just fine.
Positives: No more instant leaving the field of battle. This gives opposing forces more of a chance to get a kill. Also means that pilots low on life will 'stick it out' more often.
Negatives: I could repeat positives here, as those could be seen as a negative.
Other thoughts: The turret sectors in Deneb already have asteroids, so this concept is not new.
Background: Pilots who are getting low on armor and are facing imminent destruction are tempted to insta-jump out of Deneb skirmish.
Suggestion: Add roids to Deneb skirm missions. This will be similar to how Leviathan sectors have a ring of asteroids. The larger the skirm, the larger the roid field. Since it will be the same set of asteroids for each skirm, the NPC AI will be able to deal with the asteroids just fine.
Positives: No more instant leaving the field of battle. This gives opposing forces more of a chance to get a kill. Also means that pilots low on life will 'stick it out' more often.
Negatives: I could repeat positives here, as those could be seen as a negative.
Other thoughts: The turret sectors in Deneb already have asteroids, so this concept is not new.
Asteroids add considerably more navigational complexity to the NPCs, as well as increasing the number of physics collision-detection events. This doesn't necessarily mean "actual visible collisions", but rather that the sector is having to check more often, which is more computationally intensive.
It has little to do with whether the AI will be "fine" at negotiating the sector, but rather the amount of CPU required to run the skirmish.
This is why skirmish sectors are generally empty.
Pilots who are getting low on armor and are facing imminent destruction are tempted to insta-jump out of Deneb skirmish.
Why is this.. bad? I understand that players may "want the kill" or something, but isn't this behaviour that would be expected of people fighting in a battle? There are already limits on jumping based on proximity of weapons fire, so people shouldn't be jumping out mid-PvP.
It has little to do with whether the AI will be "fine" at negotiating the sector, but rather the amount of CPU required to run the skirmish.
This is why skirmish sectors are generally empty.
Pilots who are getting low on armor and are facing imminent destruction are tempted to insta-jump out of Deneb skirmish.
Why is this.. bad? I understand that players may "want the kill" or something, but isn't this behaviour that would be expected of people fighting in a battle? There are already limits on jumping based on proximity of weapons fire, so people shouldn't be jumping out mid-PvP.
“Why is this.. bad? I understand that players may "want the kill" or something, but isn't this behaviour that would be expected of people fighting in a battle? There are already limits on jumping based on proximity of weapons fire, so people shouldn't be jumping out mid-PvP.”
I can’t say I’ve seen this in action. I have, under multiple occasions, been able to or have jumped while under immediate fire. I have also had targets do so.
I can’t say I’ve seen this in action. I have, under multiple occasions, been able to or have jumped while under immediate fire. I have also had targets do so.
No, you're right, I was pretty sleep deprived when I wrote that. I was conflating it with another concurrent discussion about a different system.
Still, we will not be solving this with asteroids. That creates a lot of other problems.
Still, we will not be solving this with asteroids. That creates a lot of other problems.
Inc's not joking about the CPU load.
We used to have skirmishes in the asteroid sectors and it was a big mess in the super dense foggy ice fields in the belt. Sometimes the fleets would end up so far apart that you could barely find what you were supposed to try and kill. Sectors would regularly lag for seconds at a time with NPCs drifting to rubber-band right in front of you. Mysteriously dying after a lag spike to an enemy you couldn't even see was pretty common.
It's not so bad in the more sparse "normal" sectors. You can trigger a new Fighter Skirmish in one of the roid sectors by killing the turret that camps out there. Those ones work fairly well, like a Hive Skirmish. Those would probably be fine even with capships.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you. It works OK to avoid fighters but typically you've turbo'd away a bit before jumping out anyway. Asteroids don't really change that much. There's no point in jumping out anyway since dying is basically free, unless...
... unless you're talking about player capships. That's the only thing that makes sense to jump out and try not to die with. Is it a problem that the only way to not have your hull instantly dissolved when the game warps a Teradon or Constellation right on top of you is to jump out, removing your ship from the battle? What we have is pretty fragile compared to the kinds of things floating around the skirmishes already.
We used to have skirmishes in the asteroid sectors and it was a big mess in the super dense foggy ice fields in the belt. Sometimes the fleets would end up so far apart that you could barely find what you were supposed to try and kill. Sectors would regularly lag for seconds at a time with NPCs drifting to rubber-band right in front of you. Mysteriously dying after a lag spike to an enemy you couldn't even see was pretty common.
It's not so bad in the more sparse "normal" sectors. You can trigger a new Fighter Skirmish in one of the roid sectors by killing the turret that camps out there. Those ones work fairly well, like a Hive Skirmish. Those would probably be fine even with capships.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you. It works OK to avoid fighters but typically you've turbo'd away a bit before jumping out anyway. Asteroids don't really change that much. There's no point in jumping out anyway since dying is basically free, unless...
... unless you're talking about player capships. That's the only thing that makes sense to jump out and try not to die with. Is it a problem that the only way to not have your hull instantly dissolved when the game warps a Teradon or Constellation right on top of you is to jump out, removing your ship from the battle? What we have is pretty fragile compared to the kinds of things floating around the skirmishes already.
Sectors would regularly lag for seconds at a time with NPCs drifting to rubber-band right in front of you.
So, just to clarify, that's actually not what I was talking about above..
The server side codebase has been through a lot of big improvements over the last few years, and stories "of old" are not really representative anymore.
It's unlikely that players would see any performance issues from having asteroids in any current battle sector. However, we (the devs) would see increased usage in aggregate on the server, a lot more computationally intensive activity, and that would diminish our ability to serve other things, or require changes to the server architecture.
Basically, I put a bunch of development time into improving server efficiency with the goal of having larger and more intense space battles. But, if we put big battles in asteroid fields, well, then I can't really increase the scale of the battles, as the asteroids basically use up that available CPU time.
Unless there's some super compelling reason to put asteroids in battle sectors, it isn't going to be high on my priority list.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you. It works OK to avoid fighters but typically you've turbo'd away a bit before jumping out anyway. Asteroids don't really change that much. ... unless you're talking about player capships.
That's a good point. What kind of ships are you talking about, WaF? Because player-owned capships aren't really intended for Deneb at all (and are likely to become even more restricted), and they aren't really the top priority in this situation.
What is the specific "problem" that we're trying to fix, here?
So, just to clarify, that's actually not what I was talking about above..
The server side codebase has been through a lot of big improvements over the last few years, and stories "of old" are not really representative anymore.
It's unlikely that players would see any performance issues from having asteroids in any current battle sector. However, we (the devs) would see increased usage in aggregate on the server, a lot more computationally intensive activity, and that would diminish our ability to serve other things, or require changes to the server architecture.
Basically, I put a bunch of development time into improving server efficiency with the goal of having larger and more intense space battles. But, if we put big battles in asteroid fields, well, then I can't really increase the scale of the battles, as the asteroids basically use up that available CPU time.
Unless there's some super compelling reason to put asteroids in battle sectors, it isn't going to be high on my priority list.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you. It works OK to avoid fighters but typically you've turbo'd away a bit before jumping out anyway. Asteroids don't really change that much. ... unless you're talking about player capships.
That's a good point. What kind of ships are you talking about, WaF? Because player-owned capships aren't really intended for Deneb at all (and are likely to become even more restricted), and they aren't really the top priority in this situation.
What is the specific "problem" that we're trying to fix, here?
Basically, I put a bunch of development time into improving server efficiency with the goal of having larger and more intense space battles. But, if we put big battles in asteroid fields, well, then I can't really increase the scale of the battles, as the asteroids basically use up that available CPU time.
I mean really only a couple roids will do, make them huge. Are you really saying after 20 some years of development you are admitting that massive battles and asteroids are just not gonna mix? You couldn't figure that out?
I mean really only a couple roids will do, make them huge. Are you really saying after 20 some years of development you are admitting that massive battles and asteroids are just not gonna mix? You couldn't figure that out?
I mean really only a couple roids will do, make them huge. Are you really saying after 20 some years of development you are admitting that massive battles and asteroids are just not gonna mix? You couldn't figure that out?
Eh? ..No?
First of all, it's not like we've spent "20 years" working on optimizing collision detection and AI avoidance between NPCs and asteroids. Or even "a year" or "half a year" in sum-total-aggregate. That's not how development works.
Mostly, the related systems were written back around 2001. We've expanded and improved aspects a few different times, but mainly trying to make things work a bit better or faster, but not fundamentally changing it.
But aside from that, "giant complex battles inside asteroid fields" was never specifically a goal? I don't think asteroids substantially enhance a really big space battle, and they make it more technically complex.
For example: AI navigation around fixed points (asteroids) works differently than AI navigation around moving points (NPCs, weapons fire), they benefit from different algorithms and data structures. Which isn't to say that one cannot do both at the same time, but that there are tradeoffs, like there always are in engineering.
The relevant question here is: What exactly are we trying to do, and why do we NEED asteroids to do that? Because, again, I have yet to hear a clear description of an actual "problem". (What is the specific case, ship-loadout, location, example, and how often does it happen?)
And, even if there is a problem, I'm not convinced that the only solution is "a few giant roids in every battle sector". That sounds like a really bad solution that will look silly, and we're doing it.. why? Because some solo vet couldn't kill some other vet's Trident fast enough? Really?
Also, Greenwall, try not to be such an acerbic dick, okay? If you wanted to push back and ask about what options were possible, you didn't have to accuse me of being a failure to do that.
Eh? ..No?
First of all, it's not like we've spent "20 years" working on optimizing collision detection and AI avoidance between NPCs and asteroids. Or even "a year" or "half a year" in sum-total-aggregate. That's not how development works.
Mostly, the related systems were written back around 2001. We've expanded and improved aspects a few different times, but mainly trying to make things work a bit better or faster, but not fundamentally changing it.
But aside from that, "giant complex battles inside asteroid fields" was never specifically a goal? I don't think asteroids substantially enhance a really big space battle, and they make it more technically complex.
For example: AI navigation around fixed points (asteroids) works differently than AI navigation around moving points (NPCs, weapons fire), they benefit from different algorithms and data structures. Which isn't to say that one cannot do both at the same time, but that there are tradeoffs, like there always are in engineering.
The relevant question here is: What exactly are we trying to do, and why do we NEED asteroids to do that? Because, again, I have yet to hear a clear description of an actual "problem". (What is the specific case, ship-loadout, location, example, and how often does it happen?)
And, even if there is a problem, I'm not convinced that the only solution is "a few giant roids in every battle sector". That sounds like a really bad solution that will look silly, and we're doing it.. why? Because some solo vet couldn't kill some other vet's Trident fast enough? Really?
Also, Greenwall, try not to be such an acerbic dick, okay? If you wanted to push back and ask about what options were possible, you didn't have to accuse me of being a failure to do that.
ok i'm sorry for being an acerbic dick
That's a good point. What kind of ships are you talking about, WaF?
I have been putting together a much longer response, but to quickly answer your question, yes to the cap ship issue. Though it is an issue with smaller ships as well. Itani pilots can just disengage from battle and instantly run to a guarded sector. Once safe, Itani pilots can jump right back in. (I understand that Serco pilots who get to Itani dislike can do the same thing, but most Sercos are not going to do that. And many won't even know that is an option).
There is NO safe place for an Itani hate/kos pilot to jump to in Deneb.
Since the roids will cause CPU issues, then maybe make jumping away while close to a large hulk hard to do. Blame it on interference from a blown up reactor.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you.
I don't have that issue. Make sure you have the cinematic jump camera set to first person view.
I have been putting together a much longer response, but to quickly answer your question, yes to the cap ship issue. Though it is an issue with smaller ships as well. Itani pilots can just disengage from battle and instantly run to a guarded sector. Once safe, Itani pilots can jump right back in. (I understand that Serco pilots who get to Itani dislike can do the same thing, but most Sercos are not going to do that. And many won't even know that is an option).
There is NO safe place for an Itani hate/kos pilot to jump to in Deneb.
Since the roids will cause CPU issues, then maybe make jumping away while close to a large hulk hard to do. Blame it on interference from a blown up reactor.
You can't really jump out in the middle of a fight in Deneb or the capgauss will get you.
I don't have that issue. Make sure you have the cinematic jump camera set to first person view.
I have been putting together a much longer response, but to quickly answer your question, yes to the cap ship issue.
Okay, but like I wrote above..
Because player-owned capships aren't really intended for Deneb at all (and are likely to become even more restricted), and they aren't really the top priority in this situation.
Additionally..
There is NO safe place for an Itani hate/kos pilot to jump to in Deneb.
That's more of a well-established issue in which Serco have no station Deneb, which should be remedied. But, that has nothing to do with adding asteroids in all sectors.
Since the roids will cause CPU issues, then maybe make jumping away while close to a large hulk hard to do.
Not for player-capships, no. Player capships are not intended for use in Deneb, and will eventually be impossible to use there.
Okay, but like I wrote above..
Because player-owned capships aren't really intended for Deneb at all (and are likely to become even more restricted), and they aren't really the top priority in this situation.
Additionally..
There is NO safe place for an Itani hate/kos pilot to jump to in Deneb.
That's more of a well-established issue in which Serco have no station Deneb, which should be remedied. But, that has nothing to do with adding asteroids in all sectors.
Since the roids will cause CPU issues, then maybe make jumping away while close to a large hulk hard to do.
Not for player-capships, no. Player capships are not intended for use in Deneb, and will eventually be impossible to use there.
Not for player-capships, no. Player capships are not intended for use in Deneb, and will eventually be impossible to use there.
I meant hulks in general, not player capship hulks.
I meant hulks in general, not player capship hulks.
No, I mean, I'm not going to limit people jumping out of sectors in Deneb, simply because of a temporary issue with chasing player capships.
Ahhh ok.
Not for player-capships, no. Player capships are not intended for use in Deneb, and will eventually be impossible to use there.
No.
Fun.
Allowed.
I don't have that issue. Make sure you have the cinematic jump camera set to first person view.
Ah, thank you for the reminder. This is heavily exploited and maybe somebody should tell Inc about it. 🤔
No.
Fun.
Allowed.
I don't have that issue. Make sure you have the cinematic jump camera set to first person view.
Ah, thank you for the reminder. This is heavily exploited and maybe somebody should tell Inc about it. 🤔
No.
Fun.
Allowed.
So, to be clear, there are some lengthy threads where people were complaining about use (and abuse) of player-capships in Deneb. I often make these kinds of choices based on feedback, and this is no exception.
Deneb was always intended to be a "level playing field" (at least in terms of character finances), where participation and advancement uses a military structure, and is funded by a respective Nation. So, usage of personal capships doesn't really fit into that, and if they're able to have a big influence, creates a further problem of "haves" (those with personal capships) vs "have-nots" (those without) which is exactly the opposite of what Deneb was intended to do.
Fun.
Allowed.
So, to be clear, there are some lengthy threads where people were complaining about use (and abuse) of player-capships in Deneb. I often make these kinds of choices based on feedback, and this is no exception.
Deneb was always intended to be a "level playing field" (at least in terms of character finances), where participation and advancement uses a military structure, and is funded by a respective Nation. So, usage of personal capships doesn't really fit into that, and if they're able to have a big influence, creates a further problem of "haves" (those with personal capships) vs "have-nots" (those without) which is exactly the opposite of what Deneb was intended to do.