Various ideas to make the game more interesting

Suggestions Balance
1

Here are some various ideas I’d love to see attempted in the game. Of course, these are just ideas I’d like to see the dev team experiment with behind closed testing to see if they are fun/workable at all. If it turns out it’s fun, then it can be released into the public game  :slight_smile:

 

  1. Enemies cannot lock onto players who fly very close to terrain. This way, ships can, in a way, “take cover” using terrain. So if you have missiles coming in at you, you could hug terrain very closely and the missiles would lose their lock. You’d become untargetable. In this way you could also sneak up on enemy commanders in Recon mode.

 

1a. The disadvantage of hugging the terrain? Greatly increased terrain collision damage. If you scrape a rock, prepare to suffer a lot of damage!

 

  1. Make all (or most) guns auto-aim. After locking on an enemy, the guns should be able to auto aim and fire for you. No need to aim at all. Their damage should probably be greatly reduced.

2a. Make all (or most) missiles dumb fire. These are the “skill shot” weapons that are only available to fire every 5-10 seconds. The damage could probably be greatly increased to compensate for the weakened guns.

 

The idea is that constantly having to manually aim your low damage guns is exhausting for many players (well, mostly me, apparently). I find my eyes are constantly straining to keep track of enemies, and I swear I’ve damaged my vision playing this game. All because I’m constantly tracking tiny targets with my crosshair. In most games, guns are VERY powerful and you only need to land a few shots on an enemy before they die. So you might have to focus on a small target in a game like Battlefield, but you don’t usually need to do so for long.

 

So guns would be like the equivalent of an auto-attack in a game like DOTA or League of Legends. While missiles would be the “skill shot” ability that you need to have good aiming/timing to use effectively. But since they can only be shot once every 5-10 seconds, the player would not have to constantly track the enemy’s lead indicator.

 

I also think this lightens the work load on a player and could allow players to focus more on teamwork and strategy.

2
  1. Interesting, but not many people want more damage when hitting rocks. Especially me. I’m already losing 50% hull hp in some ships if i hit rocks at the speeds i’m flying at. Also considering most maps have just tons and tons of rocks everywhere i can’t even imagine how much trolling there would be, especially from inties. As soon as you’re locked on hug the closest structure and voila, trollface engaged. If there’s a way to implement this it could be done through a new stat on ship’s called ‘sensor strength’ > x strength at y range with modules to improve it (CPU slot). LRFs would have great strength at great distances (they have to fire ‘across the map’ after all). Recons too. A command focused on buffing it’s team and not damage dealing could have lesser strength. On top of all, you shouldn’t really lose lock, just the lead indicator on the enemy through some random emp-like stutter. At close ranges this shouldn’t have any effect and only apply the current mechanics where youre only chance to lose the enemy is to go ‘behind’ said rock. A downside to add here is the lack of mods on certain ships. Another OBVIOUS downside is the induced rage of ‘unskilled’ players crying they can’t lock anything anymore. I’m fine anyhow, can’t even count how many times i hug rocks just to lose visual contact when in low health. I like it overall.

 

  1. No, just no. There’s Eve for that. I know it’s a strain on the eyes, i play with reduced gamma / brightness and when stuff gets hairy and i’m already tired i hang back more and analyze the map for strategy. If you want new types of guns, that’s a different story. Come up with ideas eventually.
3

more weapons… at leas 2 of every dmg type per class.

I want plasma gun on fighters and the comeback of heavy rails.

4
  1. Make all (or most) guns auto-aim. After locking on an enemy, the guns should be able to auto aim and fire for you. No need to aim at all. Their damage should probably be greatly reduced.

2a. Make all (or most) missiles dumb fire. These are the “skill shot” weapons that are only available to fire every 5-10 seconds. The damage could probably be greatly increased to compensate for the weakened guns.

Really, this idea disturbs me, in the end this game is a shooter. If you don’t have to aim at all, what’s the purpose of the game? There’s already space games where you don’t need to shoot (Battlestar Galactica comes to my mind right now).

It’s ok to have ideas to make the game better, but you’re proposing ideas to change the game completely, almost making another game…

5

Well personally I think this game does not have a chance at being a success, at least in the USA. For whatever reason, it is not gaining popularity in the US. I get stuck in USA matchmaking for 5-10 minutes before I get a match. So i think radical changes to the game is necessary. Are my changes the changes that will make the game a big hit? I don’t know, but new and big ideas should be tried.

 

This game is a shooter but the constant need to track tiny targets with relatively weak weapons is a big problem. Popular shooters have long abandoned this kind of gameplay. The popular games let you kill your targets usually within 1 second of aiming at them. It’s not just because games are trying to simulate realistic infantry combat. it’s also because people get fatigued by aiming and tracking for long periods of time.

Plus, popular shooter games realized people like their targets to be at relatively close ranges, so they are not tiny specks on the horizon. In real world infantry combat, you’re usually shooting at people 100-200 yards away. No popular shooter has map design that simulates that because they found it was not entertaining for people. So you get a lot of close quarters areas.

 

Star conflict’s combat tosses all those game design lessons out the window. Small targets, long distances, weak weapons. It’s like the rail gun battles of Quake 3, and no one plays rail gun Quake 3 anymore.

 

Plus, it doesn’t help that the space ships in this game are able to make rapid changes to their direction and speed with ease. In the popular tank games, it’s easy to line up on a shot on a tank. They are slow targets and they usually only move horizontally. Plus they cannot rapidly change direction. So people have an easy time tracking and shooting targets.

 

In War Thunder, Gaijin’s other mouse aim game, the planes also move around gradually. It’s not as slow as a tank game but it’s much less “spazzy” than Star Conflict’s ships. Plus any rapid turns drains the speed and “rotation speed” of the planes. In Star Conflict, there’s no energy drain and everything is a hyper speed version of War Thunder.

 

To me Star Conflict’s combat has things backwards. The high skill, high concentration weapons require too much work with too little reward (tracking and shooting enemies with guns). Meanwhile, the low skill, no concentration weapons require no work and have a lot of reward (guided missiles). This should be flipped around.

6

Plus, popular shooter games realized people like their targets to be at relatively close ranges, so they are not tiny specks on the horizon. In real world infantry combat, you’re usually shooting at people 100-200 yards away. No popular shooter has map design that simulates that because they found it was not entertaining for people. So you get a lot of close quarters areas.

And that’s why I prefer the non-so-popular games. Speaking of shooters (to keep in line), I love games like ArmA, or Operation Flashpoint with BIG maps, FAR away everything and many other “hard” things, like teamwork and all that stuff that people don’t even care in “popular” (aka casual) games… But everyone has his tastes you know. There’s people that like playing games that require little to no effort, both physical (hands) or mental (thinking) and there’s people that like to put themselves to the limit.

7

If the idea of autoaim guns is too hard to swallow, another idea is to make all the ships much larger in size. Fighters/Interceptors should perhaps be doubled in size, and Frigates will get bigger too.

 

Also, they could be reduced in speed, or at least reduced in rotation rate. That way they cannot twist around so easily. Perhaps all ships would lose rotation rate/speed due to rapid manuevers too, like in War Thunder. Yes, I know we are in space and there is no friction in space, but this game doesn’t follow Newtonian physics anyway

 

Another option to try is to just make the hitboxes on ships larger. In games like X-wing Alliance and Wing Commander, hit boxes on ships were pretty large. In Wing Commander, enemy ships were HUGE. And I’m talking about just the fighters. That game really got the player up close and personal to enemy ships.

 

I think Star conflict’s ship sizes are more like X-wing’s than Wing Commander’s. Star conflict’s ships seem faster than any other space sim I’ve ever seen though. Ships were pretty slow in X-wing, except when you started going up against the annoying TIE Defender.

8

And that’s why I prefer the non-so-popular games. Speaking of shooters (to keep in line), I love games like ArmA, or Operation Flashpoint with BIG maps, FAR away everything and many other “hard” things, like teamwork and all that stuff that people don’t even care in “popular” (aka casual) games… But everyone has his tastes you know. There’s people that like playing games that require little to no effort, both physical (hands) or mental (thinking) and there’s people that like to put themselves to the limit.

Oh man, no one likes the games you play. j/k

 

Seriously though, if Gaijin is fine with the crowd they are going to attract now, then that’s up to them of course. But perhaps they could cater to you and me at the same time, just with different modes of gameplay.

 

In War Thunder, there is an arcade battle mode that I and most other WT players love. Then there is Full Real mode that a tiny but dedicated number of players prefer. IMO, once someone makes a game, with all the graphics, programming and all the other work that involves, developers should try to provide all sorts of interesting gameplay modes so that a wide group of people will enjoy the game.

 

For example, everytime I see a video of EVE Online, I think “Wow that’s awesome!” but once I start playing, I think, “this is the most boring POS i’ve ever seen”

 

If they would just take the game and create a mode for more action-oriented players, I’d sign up right away

9

I’m 100% with the idea of making an EXTRA game-mode with “special” conditions for those that don’t like certain aspects of the game, but the meta must be respected. Any game that loses focus on the meta, end up being anything except what it aspired to be, and end up in failure. Don’t change the game per se, but add additional modes with a variety of options so everyone can be happy. Of course, the main game will remain the same, but they can opt to not play that mode (losing all the obvious stuff from it, be it Sector Conquest, stats, progression, etc.).

10

What you’re proposing right now is exactly what we call ‘dumbing down’ and it’s a negative effect on the experience with the game. So if you’re trying to make it even less skillful than it is you can just stop.

 

One at hand: this isn’t CoD, CS, Battlefield, Quake or any of the type. Those games are at core just a copy-paste of each other. There you fight in RL simulated towns and cities where you count stuff in centimeters, meters and eventually kilometers. Here you fight in space where measurements are basically done in tons of kilometers, AU (1AU=150m km) or LY (1 light year = @ 9000bil+ km). For space 25km is an  absolutely extremely short  range. Those copy-paste games are already getting more boring with each title. Even GTA series is becoming boring, like, ‘Here! Same game, but with actually flip-flopping flip-flops!’ More detail is not going to make them better.

 

Two: simply because the game is new and tries to be different instead of blending (read: fading) in the crowd is not necesarily a bad thing, it stands out as something different and is treated as such. This doesn’t need to become a copy-paste effect of x-wing, wing commander, freespace, descent etc etc, don’t even compare these games to SCon, just stop. There you had a fixed crosshair on the screen you were supposed to aim with your entire ship at the enemy. Here you have the freedom to move the cursor anywhere on the screen. If you make it slow paced it’s just going to become a ‘stand still and hunt flying ducks’ game. The speed matches this concept just fine.

 

Three: ignoring current low playerbase and the matchmaking system, the game is fairly in a good shape right now. Now it needs a sh*tload of suggestions that the devs should actually read and find workarounds for  PROPER  implementation (after launch anyway imo).

 

 

You want to learn the definition of ‘speed’ in a game that’s CLEARLY not meant for casual players? Try out Super Monday Night Combat when the dev team restarts support again - also an online game. This game is SLOW AS HELL compared to that where mashing random buttons on the keyboard with your head is the most likely tool to bring you success instead.

11

Auto aim… no , just no

12

Sooo here’s what I think should be added, just one little thing =]

 

Personally, I play Federation/Empire/Jericho fairly evenly.  I also have read through a lot of the lore on this game and understand the storyline.  So it doesn’t make sense to me why, in PVP, I face ships from the same race. 

 

Obviously, in PvP, you choose a sector to engage in based off of which faction you’re contracted to.  So shouldn’t it make sense that you could only play that faction’s ships?  I think it’s a bit silly getting the “Destroy 5 ships not belonging to the [Faction]!” achievement in *chuckle* another faction’s ship.  It just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.  But really…what’s the point of PvP if it’s not a HUGE war between all of the races?  Why should you fight your own race?  If I’m playing Vanguard, I don’t want to play other Federation ships!  I want to be fighting JUST the Jericho, JUST the Empire, OR BOTH!  Think about it…it’s a pretty easy change (at least from what I could guess) and it would make the game much more intriguing.  It would REALLY stress the importance of choosing a faction that fits the pilot the best. 

 

I can see the problems that might emerge from something like this, but I believe that the community could help the Devs think of what might need tweaking.  First off, I could imagine that one faction would have a huge advantage.  Obviously, their ships would just be nerfed (or other factions buffed) to make the games more dynamic.  Second, I can see certain roles be missing from teams entirely, causing a catastrophic team failure or even a faction failure.  For instance, the Empire has long range, and Jericho does, too…Federation doesn’t at all.  What would this mean?  It would mean a few things.  First, it means that all of the players would have to work together to eliminate the long range frigs, but it could also mean that they get annihilated by long range if they don’t.  Perhaps (in the long run of this game) there can be access to all of the classes on EACH faction, or use the imbalance to fuel strategies.  My thought is, "Well…they are in the year 4000 or so…how is it that each faction doesn’t have each type of ship?  

 

So think about it!  No more randomized ship battles.  What if they were factions against factions!?  It’d be pretty epic to see Empire V Jericho…considering their…captivating history.  Pun intended =]

13

Auto aim… no , just no

 

I agree, my suggesting auto aim was a bad idea. But I still think my later idea, that ships should be made much larger in size, so they are easier to hit, is a good idea. :slight_smile:

14

What you’re proposing right now is exactly what we call ‘dumbing down’ and it’s a negative effect on the experience with the game. So if you’re trying to make it even less skillful than it is you can just stop.

 

One at hand: this isn’t CoD, CS, Battlefield, Quake or any of the type. Those games are at core just a copy-paste of each other. There you fight in RL simulated towns and cities where you count stuff in centimeters, meters and eventually kilometers. Here you fight in space where measurements are basically done in tons of kilometers, AU (1AU=150m km) or LY (1 light year = @ 9000bil+ km). For space 25km is an  absolutely extremely short  range. Those copy-paste games are already getting more boring with each title. Even GTA series is becoming boring, like, ‘Here! Same game, but with actually flip-flopping flip-flops!’ More detail is not going to make them better.

 

Two: simply because the game is new and tries to be different instead of blending (read: fading) in the crowd is not necesarily a bad thing, it stands out as something different and is treated as such. This doesn’t need to become a copy-paste effect of x-wing, wing commander, freespace, descent etc etc, don’t even compare these games to SCon, just stop. There you had a fixed crosshair on the screen you were supposed to aim with your entire ship at the enemy. Here you have the freedom to move the cursor anywhere on the screen. If you make it slow paced it’s just going to become a ‘stand still and hunt flying ducks’ game. The speed matches this concept just fine.

 

Three: ignoring current low playerbase and the matchmaking system, the game is fairly in a good shape right now. Now it needs a sh*tload of suggestions that the devs should actually read and find workarounds for  PROPER  implementation (after launch anyway imo).

 

 

You want to learn the definition of ‘speed’ in a game that’s CLEARLY not meant for casual players? Try out Super Monday Night Combat when the dev team restarts support again - also an online game. This game is SLOW AS HELL compared to that where mashing random buttons on the keyboard with your head is the most likely tool to bring you success instead.

 

Quake is not a copy-paste of the other games you mentioned. I think Quake has faded away because there is little demand for games like that, where people are constantly aiming at fast moving targets. At one point they released Quake 3 as a free browser game and no one really cared.

 

I get that realistically speaking, ships should be small and fast. Just like in flight sims, jets are very fast and are usually shot at by missiles from 15-50 miles away. But take a look at the jet flight sim genre. Try really hard because it is impossible to see!

 

My view is that this game is fundamentally designed in an unpopular way. There’s a dedicated fanbase but that fanbase will not bring in enough money for the devs. So if the devs keep catering to them, the game will go nowhere. But we’ll see who is right a few years from now. :slight_smile: