Messages

1

Feedback and Suggestions / Class loadouts by ship

« on: July 04, 2013, 01:58:02 pm »

Simple suggestion:
 Save equipment loadouts by ship rather than a single tool setup saved and needing editing per ship.

First off, I know this wouldn't work amazingly well for gunners in pugs, but it has use for engineers and the lack of it is painful as a pilot. Changing from a galleon to a junker to a pyramidion requires going into my loadouts and swapping around at least 2 of my 3 tools.
As with any feature it would have to be toggleable.

Would also benefit more organised play, allowing teams to rapidly cycle through prebuilt layouts and equipment to throw off enemy setups trying to counter their specific ship. (In other news I'd also like to be able to "hide" my ship setup to prevent this more simply.)

2

Community Events / Re: Proposal: Newcommers tournaments.

« on: June 27, 2013, 03:49:39 pm »

would you be interested in a league that makes new teams and casual teams play eachother, and let the elite and try hard teams play eachother?

Can't quite tell if that was meant to be a slight or not...
 If it's about casting and how people view it, a lot of people watch minor leagues just for the difference and breaking things up a bit. High end games in sport tend to see a handful of ways of playing with only minor variants and can get quite dull, lower end play you see a lot more risks taken and experimentation.

Also low end doesn't mean casual, I wouldn't be surprised if some serious competition came about from some of the games, the point is more about getting newcommer to "wet their feet". The idea of the seperate tournaments makes it possible for people to get on the ladder without just getting stomped as they would in the major contests (hence in real life you see under 18's and under 21 teams).

You don't need 1v1 for single-crew competitions.  There is a very simple format for this being developed as a single-event contest that could be completed in a couple of hours.  The 2v2 format (four crew mini-league) is about to be tested to confirm the scoring system, the 3v3 format  (6 crew mini-league) which would permit CP/KOTH as well as DM is under-development but probably some way off.

Not sure I quite follow, is there a link to this somewhere? (Another reason to wish for a community scenario editor :p)

3

Community Events / Re: Proposal: Newcommers tournaments.

« on: June 27, 2013, 06:40:31 am »

 Yeah, the inclusion of newer players would mean heavy advertising ingame, though for organisation and ideas I value the more experienced players views.

Single ship is what I'm leaning towards (permitting AI crew if they want/need) but systems for it are a little clunky in group matches. I've seen a fair few people grab a 4-pack to play with friends (how I got in) and the short tournaments should offer some incentive to keep playing passed the initial new game buzz; at least help those who do stick find new teams and people to play along side once their initial friends group drift away.

4

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Other than Airships

« on: June 27, 2013, 06:05:13 am »

Automatic match generation and team placement coudl be used for a lot of things... notably automated tournaments... was about to suggest it myself (will make a new topic for it though, we're so far deviated from the original ideas).

5

Community Events / Proposal: Newcommers tournaments.

« on: June 27, 2013, 06:00:21 am »

I was thinking about this for a while but hit a few problems with it and was wondering what the interest would be like.

Essentially, whilst the Cogs and cEsports push at the high level play, getting on the ladder seems quite unapproachable (the cEsports document looks like a technical report not a guide to how to get involved/link in (also from what I understood is a bit long reaching)).
All current tournaments, even just competitive play beyond the one match, are liable to be quickly mobbed with far more experienced groups, forcing out those with interest but not the super high end playstyles and team. I was thinking of organising smaller scale "just for fun" tournaments for newer players as a stepping stone or "minor league".

Basic concepts:

• Cap on "skill" level:
   Awkward but I was considering something like no players above level 5. Needs work but something needs to be put in to prevent high end players and the same teams continually returning, winning and pushing newcommers away.
  
• Small teams:
   I'm hoping to devise a system to allow a single 4 man crew compete to keep the entry barrier as low as possible but the game simply isnt designed around 1v1. Currently considering Elo.
  
• Guildwars style "flux":
   Mix things up, again to prevent stagnation and promote the "just for fun", small rules changes for each tournament/match. Things such as: "sudden death" timers by referee (winner declared as highest score at X time regardless of final match score if it continues); gun/ship restrictions to mix up the meta; a temporarily lowered level cap to draw in newer players; Fixed loadouts (either secret pre-submission or select from pre-built layouts) etc.
  
• Short cycles:
   A major point here is getting the time from signing up to end of tournament as small as possible, 1 month is probably the limit on how long the tournement can go on for (sign up during previous one). The whole point I'm trying to get is the idea of rapid small scale competitions to help with player retention and give a greater sense of progress/meaningful battles rather than the detached battle and reset we currently have (with achievements and levels on the side). Adventure mode will definitely help with this but its a fair way off.
  

With some automation small tournaments could be automatically generated and played through in a single day (matter of a few hours for small 4 team setups) but in the mean time something to act as "an intoduction to competition" would fill the fairly wide gap we currently have between "non-begginers" matches and the E-sports level play.

Feedback/interest gauges appreciated.

6

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Balloon Buffing

« on: June 22, 2013, 06:12:49 am »

You could make it immune to the negative effects of the pilot's tools. Still get the rise from Hydrogen, same drop as Chute Vent, just no damage to the balloon.

Or perhaps make it so that a damaged balloon still handles like a fully repaired one.

Good ballance there, only issue I see with it is it requires tools that aren't always used. Could counter it with a heal over time, counters ballon damaging tools whilst still having a use for those without it.

Overall the balloon buff really need some thinking about, as is the time to buff is just too high to have the time for in combat and the duration is too short to throw up pre-combat. It's the only non-gun buff that has to be applied in combat, even a reduced effect with increased duration would be good (and fit more with the general feel of the buff hammer being longer term smaller boosts rather than the pilot being short term high intensity boosts)

7

Gameplay / Re: pyramidions, pyramidions everywhere

« on: June 20, 2013, 01:18:33 pm »

Like Heavy Gat/Glak galleons and Heavy Gat Flak Spires? xD

Hey, at least those 2 ships pay for it in terms of sluggishness and being made of paper, respectively. The pyrmi is pretty fast and decent hp. (Also the galleon can't do it whilst aggressively persuing like the pyrmi can).

Didn't say it wouldn't bring other ships to the same flawed meta, but atleast you would see more than Junkers and Pyramids.

8

Gameplay / Re: pyramidions, pyramidions everywhere

« on: June 20, 2013, 12:18:12 pm »

A piercing heavy gun would go a long way for this... just saying.
If suddenly another ship had easy access to armor and integrity destruction it would be a huge difference. As is, light slots are in many places preferable to medium due to light having the guns that really tear apart the armor (and usually share an arc with another slot that can pop in the explosive damage to make it count).

 Galleon technically has it on the left side but separate decks for the pierce and heavy explosive damage make it awkward to co-ordinate, all options sacrifice a needed member of the team (currently, downgrading one of the mediums for a gat looks like it would be a massive boost...).
 Spire has the light+medium on same facing but is again hard to get them co-ordinated... combined with it's low health make it a priority target and get it destroyed before it has much chance.

A pierce damage heavy gun (why not simply a heavy chain gun?) would open up killer goldfish to counter pyrmi but that could just open up another can of worms...

9

Gameplay / Re: Kerosene vs Moonshine vs Phoenix Claw

« on: June 20, 2013, 11:16:16 am »

I'd argue Moonshine use is OP when usable as a ship stabiliser, it should only prevent voluntary turning, getting rammed and terrain should still screw you over.

10

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Other than Airships

« on: June 20, 2013, 10:27:52 am »

They could even have the teams rotate every round! The trick would be making each round short enough so all three teams could go without the game taking more than 10 - 20 minutes.

I really like the idea of working with a different ally (or working on your own) every round.

The rotation may take a little work but a feature I'd want to see anyway (forming a small team/single ship that gets randomly slotted in to matches as a whole unit).

 Keeping it fast would be pretty easy, no respawns and a course length in the region of 4x length of dunes.
I really want to play this now...

11

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Map & Scenario editor

« on: June 20, 2013, 10:22:25 am »

If I remember correctly, the system for building the maps requires a lot of fettling to get collision maps to work and get the graphical elements right.  I don't think they are built as assemblies of modular elements.

I'd also love to see player-built maps, and I'd accept it if they had to be less polished.

The first part makes it sound like this would a very useful tool to make for the developers too then
Player built maps being less polished isn't much of an issue as you said, besides there's often a few diligent souls who will work their hardest just to one up the developer's map quality (even if just by putting so many more hours into it).

Even if the physical map was hard to edit, scenario editing would be a wonderful thing to see just for trying new game modes. Would probably want an extended map info sheet for complex ideas and map designs though... click preview map for an expanded map and fluff info sounds sensible (loading screen isnt enough time for reading the fluff as is).

12

General Discussion / Re: Any chance of an extended donations with incentives (non-kickstarter)

« on: June 20, 2013, 04:40:32 am »

Hadn't seen that page, thanks for link! Though, yes, a little tracker and a couple of fluff tiers (cosmetic/badges) would be great to see added in to fill the gap from the $10 and $55. If you decide to upgrade to the other one later is previous donation counted or do you need to put it all in at once?

13

General Discussion / Any chance of an extended donations with incentives (non-kickstarter)

« on: June 19, 2013, 07:40:28 pm »

A lot of kickstarter projects close well before the project is anywhere near completion, a fair few of these offer another system to donate with similar/identical rewards after the kickstarter closes.
Any chance GoIo will be offering something like this? I'd love to still be able to push for further stretch goals and get a pre-order in (a duster coat/other decent costume wouldn't go amiss either I must say) but didn't really get much of a chance to see the game before the donations closed.
I'm sure there are others in the same situation as me. Also means you get to keep the full donations, no kickstarter taking their cut

14

General Discussion / Re: Sometimes it's like MUSE doesn't want any money.

« on: June 19, 2013, 07:17:51 pm »

A Free Steam Weekend is about the only thing I could think of that they could do different..

This would be an awesome hype driver for adventure mode... limit it ofcourse... don't want the usual "Free weekend? I'll just suck all the gameplay out this weekend then."

I would prefer if new people didn't captain until they learn the other two classes first.

This is more of a strcuture issue thats a tough call, though I agree, there should be at least a pop up warning explaining you should probably crew for a bit first.

15

Feedback and Suggestions / Map & Scenario editor

« on: June 19, 2013, 06:45:19 pm »

Thinking about the list of ideas I keep spouting I think I can reduce the list of things I'd love to see massively by inclusion of a map + scenario editor. It would need at least:

• Terrain editor: A basic requirement. Hills, map size, limits etc.
• Scenery editor: Wrecks, buildings, clouds. Made separate as some of these may warrant special effects (eg. damaging areas) or be slightly dynamic (eg. moving Koth points, potentially collapsing areas).
• Team editor: I'd say allow up to 4 teams (classic RBGY) to maintain atleast 2-a-side while keeping to 8 ships max.
• Victory condition editor: Preset ones for DM and templates for a couple of other basic ones (Koth etc.) but should be able to script in custom ones.
• Spawn editor: Not just spawn locations but teams and conditions that allow/select locations.

(More than 2 teams may require the compass and "spot-boxes" to display in their team's colour, something I'd like to see anyway for the compass.)

I can see this would generate a lot of imballanced maps, but they could easily be an aside "custom map/match", a vote system for them could allow the best ones to be easily found and downloaded; Possibly even added into regular match cycles if deemed good enough by community and/or muse.

If implemented nice additional features to see would be:

• Maps only downloading and saving once, only using separate scripting for the alternate modes on the map.
• Donations to map makers, to draw in more skill and finesseful maps.
• "Trigger editor" a simplistic GUI for basic scripting, usable by newbies.
• Extension for adventure mode when it releases, allowing cutom mini-storylines (even if without rewards the stories can be fun)

Would also allow muse developers to focus a bit more on bug fixing and ballancing, offloading some content generation to the community. Almost always comes up with something new/amazing (just look at ARTS games and TD's, entire genres spawned from community map editing/modding).