Author Topic: A cry for change  (Read 58500 times)

Offline Richard LeMoon

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 284
    • [Muse]
    • 33 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #105 on: January 19, 2017, 05:21:14 pm »

Offline Shas'ui

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [◥H◤]
    • 20 
    • 35
    • 18 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #106 on: January 19, 2017, 05:48:24 pm »
To clarify, I meant changes to the feedback and suggestion processes that resulted in the frustrations this thread set out to address, rather then balance / experimental changes.

Offline Keyvias

  • Member
  • Salutes: 83
    • [Muse]
    • 12 
    • 27
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #107 on: January 20, 2017, 11:09:06 am »
Well, currently in the player committee skype they're planning on what they want to see next (for ammo.)
And for their theory crafting we're proving logistics support like the exact formula we use for things like jitter.

So we're trying to be open and work with the community so they can say exactly what they want to see and test.

Offline TinyPixelBlock

  • Member
  • Salutes: 1
    • [PXLB]
    • 25 
    • 37
    • 31 
    • View Profile
    • Shitty Pixel Art
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #108 on: January 20, 2017, 12:27:01 pm »
If TankSpire changes are officially patched into the Devapp, I might just make an attempt to get in and help out :D

Thank you Keyvias for popping in and helping to give the lowdown on plans for post-Alliance content drops. I recognize you guys are pretty pushed, but of all the things I think needed most at this time, it's transparency. The update rundowns you guys do for Alliance are helpful to get a sense of progress, and ideally a bi-monthly timeline and content overview dedicated to Skirmish mode proposals and changes would be similarly appreciated. With two weeks between, that should be great for quick balance change updates and asset testing.

I do not recall having ever seen a survey or poll asking users on their general opinions of potential changes, nor an official sticky top thread for post-testing feedback - if these already occur, perhaps more in-game advertising is the answer? The Skype group sounds good, but I worry it is too behind the scenes hardcore for most players to ever get involved in, including me.


If I may suggest one thing here, for example, it's that many new people don't actually grasp the main damage types when choosing guns. It may be ideal to 'split' the guns more visibly into distinct type columns to help make it painfully clear - sort of like how Borderlands manages its skill tree system.

Also, #HowAboutHowitzer intrigues me greatly.

Offline Richard LeMoon

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 284
    • [Muse]
    • 33 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #109 on: January 20, 2017, 09:36:27 pm »
You should very much hop in devapp and play with it. She's a beast. Glorious Queen of battle!

#HowAboutHowitzer is related to the desire to have the old flak back, along with this https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,7654.0.html

Offline TinyPixelBlock

  • Member
  • Salutes: 1
    • [PXLB]
    • 25 
    • 37
    • 31 
    • View Profile
    • Shitty Pixel Art
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #110 on: January 21, 2017, 12:56:10 am »
Groovy - so in essence a Hull-killing Heavy Merc?

Offline Richard LeMoon

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 284
    • [Muse]
    • 33 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #111 on: January 21, 2017, 08:39:50 am »
Basically old flak with loch. One big, powerful shot.

Offline BobyWilliam

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • 8
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #112 on: January 23, 2017, 10:51:37 am »
I agree wholeheartedly with the people saying the PvP aspect of GOI needs some love, more content, balance etc. Thoses are truly needed for the game to prosper in time.

I have joined the game two years ago and nearly nothing has changed since then which is a shame because as good as Alliance is gonna be, you don't keep a game alive with PvE content until you give tools for the community to add more contents themself, something that I don't see coming so far. Just look at the Left 4 Dead franchise, second one lived because of the great modding support, now look at the first one or Alien Swarm, they died pretty quickly because of the lack of it and thoses are games supported by Valve, not an indie developper.

PvP is always more important for niche developpers if you want to keep a game alive. From a personal point of view, as exciting as PvE can be it will never be as good PvP for a game like GOI, fighting real players will always be more interesting considering how the game works, crew system, loadouts etc. This game is truly mean to be a PvP game in core, no matter how niche it is.
Spending all your ressources on making PvE content is a terrible decision in my opinion, even more if you do it after having developped the core game which is PvP, going from PvE to PvP developpement would have been fine but not PvP then PvE... This is the best way to loose all your vets that have mastered the mechanics over the year, because PvE content is often considered like an introduction, a tutorial to the rest no matter how good you make it. And the newcomers who will enjoy Alliance will get bored of it after some time and look for PvP as well but if you do not add content to it, everything will fall apart pretty fast.

Also my personal feedback to make the game better as a whole, for everyone, is to expand the tasks an engineer/gunner has to do, most of the time bots can do better because their task is so repetitive in core, there is low skill involved and little reward.
Try to add some depths for using weaponry, more recoil, wind to take in consideration, things like that, make it more like skill shots so a high skilled gunner can keep improving his aim after hours and hours of gameplay. Contrary to right now where you use a gun for 10 min and pretty much will never improve past this point excepted some few special guns. Having different set of munitions is a good idea but it's not enough.

For the enginner, add some new concepts over repairing stuffs, like some QTE that if well executed allow to repair a component faster, or synergies/boosting, if one engineer is hammering a gun with a special tool while someone is shooting, it will shoot faster, or if he is constantly hammering the engine with a special tool the ship will manoeuvre faster. Try to reduce the tools the captain have to boost the ships, and make the enginners have most of them instead. Make them more directly impactful of the ship performance, they should feel always involved and not only active when a component go down, I would like to look outside the ship as an enginner and feel comited in the action, seeing a enemy ship following us, I could decide to improve the speed the best I can or boost the hull on the go, truly helping my capitain directly while executing a non repetitive task, adapting to the situations I am witnessing outside the ship, I will feel important and it will feel truly rewarding.
To go with it and avoid trolling allow the captain to give individual permission to an enginner, like for example as an enginneer I want to use Moonshine on the engine, it could send a quick request to the captain, if he press V for example it allows me to use it. He could also give all time permission via the board interface (where you mute people) to a trusted enginneer on the deck etc. Do a distinction between casual and ranked matches and add the long wanted kick option only in ranked matches.

To summarise you should really try to make thoses jobs more interesting and interdependant that they are right now, create a game in the game where being the pilot is not the only fun/rewarding position of the game and where everyone must work together for the greater good.

Though the game is great for a little indie game and the price I paid for it, I might be asking a bit too much out of you guys, I would like to express my cheer respects and I won't be mad if the game is considered done after Alliance release. After all you are the captain of this ship, and I had already my fair share of fun along the way (I own two accounts, that explains my low level on this one btw).  ;)
« Last Edit: January 23, 2017, 11:25:11 am by BobyWilliam »

Offline Richard LeMoon

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 284
    • [Muse]
    • 33 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #113 on: January 23, 2017, 06:59:27 pm »
They had some of those features you mentioned. You can see them in early videos on Muse Games youtube channel.  People did not like them, so it was changed. Adding complexity to a game where you are already busy most of the time would not be good. Asking engineers to load in moonshine? You would have riots.

Offline Solidusbucket

  • Member
  • Salutes: 93
    • [SkBo]
    • 29 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #114 on: January 23, 2017, 08:51:31 pm »
https://youtu.be/YCHOu_kuKCs?t=2m28s

Yea, seems like a neat idea. Until you try to explain the shit.

That being said, I would still like some sort of "skill shot" mechanic to rebuilding things. Right now the only one we have is when 3 people are rebuilding the same component and you get the mallet on it as its rebuilt before someone accidently gets a repair cooldown with the spanner (which makes me feel cool, btw).
« Last Edit: January 23, 2017, 09:05:08 pm by Solidusbucket »

Offline Shas'ui

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [◥H◤]
    • 20 
    • 35
    • 18 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #115 on: January 24, 2017, 05:46:15 am »
There is already two minor forms of these skill features in game: buff and chemspray. Done well, they can make a huge difference, but most players prefer the simplicity of the reactive tools.

The other issue is that a good engineer is rarely idle: they are either fixing something, firing a gun, buffing/chemming, or they are keeping any eye on arcs that the pilot/gunners might miss. The last may sound unimportant... until your balloon dies to an unseen carrofish. A good engineer keeps their eyes open, and glances about as they preform their duties; a single unspotted ship can ruin an entire team's push. .
Quote
Hey, didn't they have a galleon? Where'd it go? *engines exploding* oh, there it is!

As it is, there are times when three engineers can't keep the ship running, much less two. (On a squid: captain brought moonshine, tar, claw. Used scroll wheel; was forgetful.) Even on the "simple" ships, such as the goldfish, a well organized crew can bring buff/chem, and keep busy with those.

As for the skill involvement, in my mind it comes down to knowing what to repair, when to do so, and how best to get there. AI may be better on some ships, but there's a reason AI engineered mobulas are rare. Learning the optimal routes, and when you may need to leave your post to make it before the armor break, can be the difference between a healthy ship and a smoking wreck.

The guns are similarly divided between those the AI can use well, and those it cannot. I've never seen an AI gunned munker, and while I can't be sure (having not seen one), I doubt it would be effective. Loosing special ammos means that a decent human can always outperform the AI, even if it's only getting in a few extra shots by starting with lesmok. Others benefit from timing/context: as anyone teaching new players how to run a metamydian knows: "hold until red!". At long ranges, some rely on predicting where it will be, which is again easier for humans then AI.

To summarize: there is a lot of skill involved in engineering and gunning, but it is a learned, knowledge based skill rather then quick reflexes arcade-style skill.

Offline Miki 'nEad

  • Member
  • Salutes: 3
    • [✦✦45]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 34 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #116 on: January 24, 2017, 08:03:45 am »
I've never seen an AI gunned munker, and while I can't be sure (having not seen one), I doubt it would be effective. Loosing special ammos means that a decent human can always outperform the AI, even if it's only getting in a few extra shots by starting with lesmok.

AI don't fire mines, just like the flare they simply won't touch it.

Offline Solidusbucket

  • Member
  • Salutes: 93
    • [SkBo]
    • 29 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #117 on: January 24, 2017, 08:13:53 am »
Explains what engineering is.

Yea, that's my point. I didn't bother elaborating on what engineering consists of because most people in this thread already know.

Here, I'll take what you typed and make it simpler.

Prioritization, time management, and situational awareness.



Offline BobyWilliam

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • 8
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #118 on: January 24, 2017, 02:37:44 pm »
The core thing that I am trying to say is being a gunner/engineer is boring imo, it's a very repetitive task and not rewarding, you are like slaves to the captain's will pretty much.
That's why bots are decents at doing this job and outplay most average players because it's a pretty boring and repetitive job. Yes you are busy all the time, but doing not very fun/rewarding things. I won't be against a rework on how you manage your time on the ship, mostly as engineer, faster repairing could allows more room for other more interesting stuffs, for example.
I am not saying the ideas I am proposing are the ones you must apply at all costs, just the general direction I would like thoses jobs to improve in the future.
Peace. ;)

Offline Naoura

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [Sass]
    • 31 
    • 45
    • 32 
    • View Profile
Re: A cry for change
« Reply #119 on: January 24, 2017, 04:23:29 pm »
Boby, that's just experience telling. Engineering is probably the most important role, aside from captaining. Platforming and time management are what make Engineering the most entertaining. You are the one keeping the ship alive, and you are the one who is responsible for the insane movements the Captain is trying to pull off.

You're not a slave to the actions, you're responsible for the actions, at least under a good captain. If the cap doesn't have engines, the ship can't avoid an incoming hwacha barrage, not effectively. Your balloon goes down, your ship is likely going to crash, meaning you are responsible to keep the ship alive.

Complicating the engineering process locks down the engineer, the opposite of what you want. An engineer needs to be fast and mobile, hitting every component he or she can before something else comes in to kill the ship.

Bots are moderately effective, but not nearly as effective as a skilled engineer who knows how to prioritize more effectively. Being able to react on the fly to incoming threats, incoming damage, and potential damage is incredibly important, as is predicting what damage is going to be coming in at what time.

An engineer has to be more aware than even the Captain. While the captain has to strategize with the other captain, keep an eye on the enemy, figure out if he's in arc, watch the engine health, etc, the engineer has to watch what ships are incoming so that the captain can be alerted, spot them, realize their armament, brace for incoming attacks, react to captain's use of the engines, repair the engines as they come, quickly do hull repairs while keeping some of the weapons alive so that the gunner has a chance to counter the enemy as they come in, all while keeping an eye on any and all component damage so as to react to any other incoming threats.

Don't fret. Engineering is integral to the ship, and it is quite entertaining, even if it may not feel as rewarding. A lot of people have those concerns, simply because engineering is so critical.