Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Moo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Gameplay / Re: New names under spots
« on: August 15, 2013, 12:15:34 pm »
This is a change that serves to help new players.

Great. Then make it an option, or as other's have said which I also like, only on the map and/or through the spyglass.
Or only in beginner matches... So the beginners can get used to recognizing the ships etc. before they move on to the "real game" where it's not so dumbed down. Or an option when creating a match. A per-player option would help the clutter aspect but wouldn't help the dumbing-down one. I expect people in clans would turn it off in normal matches to reduce the clutter but turn it back on in competitive matches where it may give them a slight edge.

Also, I wouldn't know the name of a ship with it's name on the side unless I had line-of-sight on that particular point, with which I'd then have to remember which is which. Who doesn't want customization though?
Which is why this magic ID system is unrealistic. Real ship names visible on the physical ships was something I suggested during the "testing", but an argument given against that would be that the text would have to be huge to be readable. There are places on all the ships where big enough writing would fit, and that would increase realism and immersion, rather than the current decreasing. It being hard to read writing through a spyglass also goes to show that identifying ships at a distance shouldn't be as easy as it currently is.

I'm on the side of the UI clutter to be clear. It was a zero issue before to communicate different targets to your allies, even if they are the same ships. This reminds me of when people wanted the goldfish to be a different color because it was somehow hard to tell if it was on red team or not.

But it wasn't a zero issue for everyone. It separated the better crews/teams from the less good ones. But now that is lost. No question which ship your allied captain is talking about going for. No question about which ship your captain is telling you to shoot. No question about what that ship behind the rock/in the clouds is. No question whether that pyra in the distance is the one with mercs or the one with flamers... I'd call that a loss of depth, and catering to new/poor players at the expense of the skill ceiling... Dumbing down.

Gameplay / Re: New names under spots
« on: August 13, 2013, 09:19:47 pm »
It's unrealistic, it's intrusive, and it's dumbing down. I don't like it.
By removing all ambiguity, you are requiring less skill.
A reasonable compromise that someone suggested is that the names only appear on spotted ships while looking at them through a spyglass. Other suggestions were enabling it only on beginners matches, or adding a game-creation option for whether it should be enabled for that match. All would be an improvement.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Gatling Tracers
« on: August 13, 2013, 09:13:09 pm »
The problem is that the crosshair, the tracers, and where the bullets hit (or rather don't) are all completely different when the ship is turning.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: UI Complaint
« on: August 13, 2013, 07:09:12 am »
All this UI stuff that's appearing (including enemy ship names when spotted) is all dumbing down the UI to chase a younger or stupider audience.

Agreed. This is what people were saying on the test build too...  ::)

Release Notes / Re: Version 1.3.1 Release Notes
« on: August 12, 2013, 06:38:28 am »
I would post a rant about how I feel testing should be done and how that's nothing like how it's actually done here, but it'd probably be ignored just like my more "positive" input, so I won't bother...

There's another recent thread with talk about viewing loadouts... Here.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Right click for details
« on: August 06, 2013, 02:32:22 pm »
Unresponsive people delaying matches starting already happens. If they are unresponsive but could be seen to have selected the loadout that was requested, or maybe even had it to begin with, it'd mean quicker rather than slower starting. There's also the times when people say they have one thing and actually take something else...
And yes, no real need for members of other crews to see what you have.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Class Specialization
« on: August 03, 2013, 08:08:36 am »
I think it would most benefit pilots, many never get off the helm anyway, so would have no problem losing their other things.
As for engineers, yes they wouldn't be able to shoot so well (or spot), but being able to take mallet, spanner, chemspray, extinguisher, and buffkit would probably make up for it.
Gunners... Well, having 3 ammo types is of questionable benefit a lot of the time... Would having 5 ever be worth it?

Gameplay / Re: The Mobula
« on: August 02, 2013, 07:42:19 am »
I don't think anyone would complain if the collision geometry of strange places to be, i.e. the tail and fins, or even the "beaks" at the front, were not quite right when the ship was almost dead. Especially if it only meant they could "walk on air"... So the fins becoming buckled and partially destroyed as a first stage of damage should work, and maybe they could be destroyed completely or very mangled as a second stage.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Profanity filter insanity
« on: July 31, 2013, 02:08:34 pm »
They probably only want that name as a means of "legitimately" using that word...

QKO is level 3, so level restrictions wouldn't help there. Also by preventing the low level players joining "normal" games, they'd take longer to discover "how it all works", unless they are lucky enough to get more structured training like you suggest. That'd include stuff like how it's a team game, and how ignoring everyone and just doing your own stuff isn't going to get you anywhere...

And for QKO... Yes, surrendering is less easy, but ragequitting is lame, so...
Quite likely the troublesome players will quit after the match, especially if you tell them why you surrendered. You can report them if they are persist in being nuisances. You can also create a new lobby, or just jump to another existing one. Presumably this is what you'd do if you had just quit, so surrendering doesn't really make a difference here...

In the circumstances you describe, with a dysfunctional crew, you could agree with the other captain(s) on your team to surrender, ending the match quickly. That way you don't have to quit, the game doesn't have to continue with basically a whole ship missing, and you won't have any problem with any quit-tracking measures.

The Gallery / Re: GOI - Screenshot Gallery!
« on: July 21, 2013, 05:48:19 pm »

Yes, that's a mallet at the right...

Edit: Why doesn't that one automatically resize?

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Removal/replacement of passive sonar
« on: July 20, 2013, 07:12:40 pm »
A way to have the music without it being a sonar would be to have it go to "you're near an enemy" when you are spotted or spot the enemy rather than when you are just near them. Then it doesn't provide any information not already visible. This could a per-match setting, as previously mentioned.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: How to Stop Ragequitting Pilots
« on: July 19, 2013, 06:45:31 pm »
Yeah, I proposed basically the same solution in the other thread. I think that would identify repeat offenders easily enough, without actually affecting their ability to play.

But yes. What the high-level captains can do to lessen the chance of the other team ragequitting is by avoiding stacking. When one captain on one team is higher level than all the captains on the other team added together, it's not likely to be a very enjoyable match for either side. Rather than having both high-levels on one team, why not just have one on each team. That way you both get a challenge, both lower-level captains might learn a thing or two, and much less chance of people ragequitting.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10