Actually, there is a way to deselect fighters or select individual units.
I hope you plan to remove this. Because otherwise, I am going to continue to whine about wanting 1/6th or 1/3rd bounty for the fighters/corvets, due to the ability to equip one as a epic tank, and hence always survive,(run away when the other 2/5 die) unless making a huge mistake.(or eating multiple proton bombs due to bad steering)
On the other hand, I would not mind being able to slightly reposition your fleet ships to move the damaged fighters to the back, so the stronger ones take the most punishment instead of losing a fighter.
3) The +% crew is for the benefit of larger ships. It doesn't make sense for 1 supplementary crew to give 100 crew to a Starship.
I agree, however, I still think that giving +x and +y% would be a better idea. So you get 10 crew and 20%, or w.e. That way, it effects small ships (10 crew gets +12, +10 flat and 20% giving 2), but it effects large ships way more(500 gets 110 crew, 10 + 20% or 100) (as opposed to being useless to one or the other, it works for both. This would give small ships larger percent boosts, but large ships smaller percent but larger absolute boosts (after all, move inventory gives more room, so to get the same percent it would take a few more slots))
Anyways, thanks for your feedback. Highly appreciated, though i would appreciate it even more if you would post future feedback @ www.fleetassault.com
I will register there at some point
(and yes, I know only part of this was actually replied to me)
One last thing. (some of this may have been changed, not positive) About the light shields, I feel that the deflection shield is extremely Underpowered. It has the same 250 shield boost, but without 2.5 regen. It also has the same +1 armor (after all, you added +1 armor to all the other shields, which I personally feel was a bad idea) and only gives a 10% damage reflection for a limited set of weapons. So I do not think it is really worth it, unless you are using a massive ship and want to reflect shots from someone who is using mass low-tech energy weapons (after all, photon missile, antimatter missile, proton bomb, so on, all the actual advanced weapons are physical instead of energy, I cant think of any advanced energy weapons)
I've made a "blueflame throwers" upgrade for turrets, just couldn't get the actual model changed because the hellion's flamethrower just looks bad on the turret even when scaled to fit the area. The upgrade increases their damage by 50%, but needs to be first researched at the lab, and then upgraded individually for each turret.
Can you tint the normal flames? Or does that look really bad?
I made the "Power Relay" structures invulnerable because they were pretty useless otherwise, as they just kept dying if there was no turret nearby to protect it... and if there was, the turret could've been used as a relay just as well. All structures have a small area around them that is always passable, so it's not possible to block any routes with them.
Don't they have far longer connection range than turrets?
Also, you could make power transfers one-way when powering turrets & similar.
@yukaboy: Go That seems unintuitive, and there's no way to modify ability tooltips on-the-fly, which prevents me from changing cost displays during the game (unless I'd make a separate tooltip for every possible variation of them). A downside of having an entirely trigger-based resource system...
There's no reason to make the structure limit look like a structure limit. It can just be the fact that there are too many enemy attacks going on to be able to maintain that many structures, which is how it's currently implemented. I just need to find a good balance for how much time the players need to spend repairing their structures.
Once I get some production upgrades done, it'll also be more cost-efficient to upgrade a structure instead of building another one.
Sorry for the unclear and confusing explanations, I haven't gotten much sleep during the past week. :P
Can you not use upgrades? Can you not use a tooltip reference? Does that update automatically?
Fighter Squadron and Corvette exploits leads to innovated thinking about weapon systems in general.
Fist off, I want to talk about the exploit. The trick is to leave your name beacon at the Mothership and open up the inventory and the item shop. This enables buying weapons and equipping weapons anywhere on the map. I think buying weapons when your not near the Mothership is a cheat; However, exchanging weapons from your cargo is legit with some thought. One questions came to my mind when playing and I thought up an answer. How would you change weapons to another with out all the clicking on the inventory screen while moving your unit around fighting and dodging? There would be another ship build options in the inventory screen where you would customize your second ship build and to the ships power functions you can have a button setup operating the ships secondary weapons setup from build 1 to 2 enabling the equipment of weapons. It would be cool to switch weapons in the middle of the battle.
Customizing the ships what is good and what is bad. technically its not that bad only in high quantity.
You are not supposed to be able to leave the beacon back at base. In my experience, I was unable to deselect the beacon like that in any way, as any time I issued a command, it reselected the fighters as well as the beacon. However, if you can tell the exact steps to reproduce this bug, that would be appreciated.
As for changing equipment away from mothership, I think that ought not be possible, although being able to manipulate it, with the effects only refreshing when you go back to the mothership would be reasonable.
This is what good buy a weapon and focus on its attack speed and range. This is what bad focusing on the amount of weapons you have and your ship speed, shields, and armor. The ship with a 5 siege cannons in front firing with the 150% attack speed bonus from 15 command crew on the ship can crush any ship like a soda can. Putting plate is denying weapons on your ship and is just adding more time for the ship with the soda can crusher to come in and crush it.
Debatable. If you do not get any extra durability, then your ship will certainly die quickly, although It may be able to deal more damage before that occurs. I personally find extra speed to be required for any large ship, simply because they move so darn slow, meaning that while waiting on warp cooldown, you have to limp along, or effectively immobilize yourself when fighting. oh, and speed on smaller ships lets you easily dodge most weapons.
Light equipment definitely needs help across the board. There should be a light equipment item that increases your attack speed could be some type of computer weapons systems that is only for fighters. For the upgrades for the shields and health need some working on. really no benefits other than extra time to get shots off. There is two shield types in the equipment the small to planetary Shields that focus on the health and the Regen and the deflector shields focus on armor and hit rate, this is brilliant and should be explored more. The shield battery gives a little shield armor but has no added effects it looks like a blank slate and should have some effect. For the shield and the health of the ship I would explore the armor impact on total damage you take as you go up tier in the armor route. This way the ship can Stim of some of the damage a better than the regular ship designed. The gravitic boosters need to be better than +1 and the engine should be separate for fighters and capital ships so that engines for fighters are not expensive. The supplementary crew why is it 20% and not +# crew same with engineer crew, unlike the command module and the marine crew. The percent is not that big any ways unless you got a lot of crew.
About the squad ship's speed, attack speed, w.e., I have felt that this would be fair, Only if the effect of the engines were spread to all three/six ships. This would make engines a reasonable investment for fighters/corvets.
I agree with the crew percentage boosts being mostly a bad idea, although making it something like +x and y%, so like 10 crew and 10% crew, so that larger ships benifit more, might work as well.
As for the shield/armor stuff, I cannot figure out what you mean, can you clarify?
What is awesome about the game is the dodgeable projectiles. It has the makes of classic flight shooter game. The way you can customize your ship is simple and fast. Power controls put you in front controlling a star ship make for a better phantasy of being a ship commander. The individual ship abilities each ship has is very well thought out and brings a lot of perspective on how to use the ship. Good variety of weapons and types some can be overpowering if used properly but has a weakness. I have watched weapon be extremely effective in one game and then in another game are ineffective. I reflect on one game when I was with a player that just decimate the other team with flack cannon 27 kills total! and in the next game that was the weapon to get and almost everybody got it and it was not very effective against the opponent's ships' which some of them brought there own setup one of them had flack cannons.
I like the game for those reasons as well. Certain weapons have counters, like any missiles die to Point defences, especially point defence platforms, and your instant weapons like flack (which also deals little damage to shielded fighters) or siege cannon take a significant damage penalty for their damage output.
Buying stats for the ship Health, Energy, Speed, Crew, that is set t
How about you get some crew modules, engines, Armor, Or reactors?
I suppose that prevents you from making the "Teh ULTIMATRON 5000 super-efficient, no-risk, never-cooldown-ned, breeding-integrated, never-hungry Reactor" (Wait,wrong game, I suppose I should just say, Ship which can do everything and has no weakness)
The use of customizable slow moving platforms (0.01 move speed) that can be controlled by the person who bought it.
Customizable platforms would be interesting, although the movement speed would make them rather useless, unless you could pick them up with your ship and redeply them, or they could use warp. (or acted like siege tanks)
Robots that invade the ship and kill the crew as a buy able ship ability.
Uhm, No, That is far too close to the old boarding system, which was insanely OP.
Beast missiles, spore cannon (I think), and boarding parties all would work to destroy enemy crew. Personally, I think the system has a few issues, but a flat+percent boost from those equipment would fix some of those.
Well, aside from the Photon cannons, Photon missiles, EMP bombs, EMP cannons, Plasma coils, Ion beam (or w.e. its called), Plenty of anti-shield wepaons that deal little damage to hull already exist. Why would you want zero damage to hull anyway?
worm hole that you can deploy and last for 60 seconds and any ship that goes through it will end up to a selectable area. you could deploy this in front of the mob and have them appear some where else.
Would screw with AI, but interesting as an idea, if possible.
Equipment that can increase attack range for short range weapons.
No, Short range weapons are short ranged weapons. Their short range gives them emmence damage output/cost. What would be interesting (but possibly OP) would be higher level types of those short range weapons,
Also, there is no method to do this anyhow in the SC2 engine. You can only globally increase attack range for all weapons on a ship, and not by a percent, which would be required.
It hasn't been that long since I even started the project (about two months). I've been busy for a month or so with other things (one of them being Skyrim, but I'm done with that now... took an arrow in the knee if you know what I mean), but as soon as I have time to continue mapping, it will be with this project.
So, basically, Hes restin', Or, possibly, Pinin' for the fiords...
Alright, So it compares distance. Meaning frame skipping could be a problem with high enough speed objects.
It does add both object's radius together, right?
Also, I noticed ships that are touching tend to get stuck, rather than rebounding, exploding, taking damage, etc. Perhaps add some collision damage proportional to force?
Hmm...
I may be interested, Seeing as I had a project that is rather similar in WC3.
Gravity seems to work rather well.
About missiles, I think that it would be required to trigger those for wrapping mechanics to work right. If you use a larger tick period for them, Unlike wc3, can still look quite good, Due to the Instant-move function also able to smooth the model's motion. Frame skipping would not be a big issue, seeing as line collision works quite well.
The AI is actually quite good for a start, even though it has a few issues, such as it not avoiding planets quite well enough, and aiming at the current position. The first is a bit more difficult, although maybe biasing the destination away from sources of gravity, proportional to gravitational sources (Like how you aim a ball upwards so it goes farther, rather than hitting the ground right away) Would work. Not sure, would require some experimentation.
Aiming wise, The aim equation is something I had a ton of issues with, but it is fully possible to do (just have to add some artificial stupidity to avoid the AI getting constant perfect snipes, like +-10 degrees)
For the AI, Can you add some leading for the Aim ai, except add a random factor in?
I think missiles are a bit too powerful, and at least should have a timed life.
Do projectiles wrap? If so, I suggest you use the torus equation for range finding as well as angle finding. Also, Is it viable to display some *dummies* for objects to help with the map wrap illusion? Like show four (or 8 counting the dyagonals) more ships that have the same position and rotation, possibly stats as well, Offset a map width so that you can see enemies past the border of the map.
Also, Gravity could actually be translated the same way, just taking into account which method gives the lowest distance.
You know, About the music, I really think the old music, Which I had forgotten about until I found a video, Is far more epic than the current star-wars theme (which is against TOS I think, but you know that), and unless it is also copyrighted, I think it would be better at least as a placeholder, if not permanently.
In any case, Can you tell me what is is called? I would like to be able to listen to it, while muting the ingame music :p
0
(It is infuriatingly difficult for me to figure out how to quote this properly, so yea...)
I hope you plan to remove this. Because otherwise, I am going to continue to whine about wanting 1/6th or 1/3rd bounty for the fighters/corvets, due to the ability to equip one as a epic tank, and hence always survive,(run away when the other 2/5 die) unless making a huge mistake.(or eating multiple proton bombs due to bad steering) On the other hand, I would not mind being able to slightly reposition your fleet ships to move the damaged fighters to the back, so the stronger ones take the most punishment instead of losing a fighter.
I agree, however, I still think that giving +x and +y% would be a better idea. So you get 10 crew and 20%, or w.e. That way, it effects small ships (10 crew gets +12, +10 flat and 20% giving 2), but it effects large ships way more(500 gets 110 crew, 10 + 20% or 100) (as opposed to being useless to one or the other, it works for both. This would give small ships larger percent boosts, but large ships smaller percent but larger absolute boosts (after all, move inventory gives more room, so to get the same percent it would take a few more slots))
I will register there at some point
(and yes, I know only part of this was actually replied to me)
One last thing. (some of this may have been changed, not positive) About the light shields, I feel that the deflection shield is extremely Underpowered. It has the same 250 shield boost, but without 2.5 regen. It also has the same +1 armor (after all, you added +1 armor to all the other shields, which I personally feel was a bad idea) and only gives a 10% damage reflection for a limited set of weapons. So I do not think it is really worth it, unless you are using a massive ship and want to reflect shots from someone who is using mass low-tech energy weapons (after all, photon missile, antimatter missile, proton bomb, so on, all the actual advanced weapons are physical instead of energy, I cant think of any advanced energy weapons)
0
Can you tint the normal flames? Or does that look really bad?
Don't they have far longer connection range than turrets? Also, you could make power transfers one-way when powering turrets & similar.
0
@A1win: Go
Ah, I see. I didnt realize that resources were triggered totally.
And yea, ofc its silly to make buildings cost more each time. It is just hard to find a way to limit this.
0
Can you not use upgrades? Can you not use a tooltip reference? Does that update automatically?
0
While I am not the developer, I do have some responses to this. Although they may not all agree with Kildare.
You are not supposed to be able to leave the beacon back at base. In my experience, I was unable to deselect the beacon like that in any way, as any time I issued a command, it reselected the fighters as well as the beacon. However, if you can tell the exact steps to reproduce this bug, that would be appreciated.
As for changing equipment away from mothership, I think that ought not be possible, although being able to manipulate it, with the effects only refreshing when you go back to the mothership would be reasonable.
Debatable. If you do not get any extra durability, then your ship will certainly die quickly, although It may be able to deal more damage before that occurs. I personally find extra speed to be required for any large ship, simply because they move so darn slow, meaning that while waiting on warp cooldown, you have to limp along, or effectively immobilize yourself when fighting. oh, and speed on smaller ships lets you easily dodge most weapons.
About the squad ship's speed, attack speed, w.e., I have felt that this would be fair, Only if the effect of the engines were spread to all three/six ships. This would make engines a reasonable investment for fighters/corvets. I agree with the crew percentage boosts being mostly a bad idea, although making it something like +x and y%, so like 10 crew and 10% crew, so that larger ships benifit more, might work as well. As for the shield/armor stuff, I cannot figure out what you mean, can you clarify?
I like the game for those reasons as well. Certain weapons have counters, like any missiles die to Point defences, especially point defence platforms, and your instant weapons like flack (which also deals little damage to shielded fighters) or siege cannon take a significant damage penalty for their damage output.
Try support platforms. Pretty dang close.
Probably a bad idea, because aside from the large system rewrite required, it would be nearly impossible to balance.
How about you get some crew modules, engines, Armor, Or reactors? I suppose that prevents you from making the "Teh ULTIMATRON 5000 super-efficient, no-risk, never-cooldown-ned, breeding-integrated, never-hungry Reactor" (Wait,wrong game, I suppose I should just say, Ship which can do everything and has no weakness)
Customizable platforms would be interesting, although the movement speed would make them rather useless, unless you could pick them up with your ship and redeply them, or they could use warp. (or acted like siege tanks)
Uhm, No, That is far too close to the old boarding system, which was insanely OP. Beast missiles, spore cannon (I think), and boarding parties all would work to destroy enemy crew. Personally, I think the system has a few issues, but a flat+percent boost from those equipment would fix some of those.
Well, aside from the Photon cannons, Photon missiles, EMP bombs, EMP cannons, Plasma coils, Ion beam (or w.e. its called), Plenty of anti-shield wepaons that deal little damage to hull already exist. Why would you want zero damage to hull anyway?
Would screw with AI, but interesting as an idea, if possible.
No, Short range weapons are short ranged weapons. Their short range gives them emmence damage output/cost. What would be interesting (but possibly OP) would be higher level types of those short range weapons, Also, there is no method to do this anyhow in the SC2 engine. You can only globally increase attack range for all weapons on a ship, and not by a percent, which would be required.
0
So, basically, Hes restin', Or, possibly, Pinin' for the fiords...
0
@SouLCarveRR: Go
Alright, So it compares distance. Meaning frame skipping could be a problem with high enough speed objects.
It does add both object's radius together, right?
Also, I noticed ships that are touching tend to get stuck, rather than rebounding, exploding, taking damage, etc. Perhaps add some collision damage proportional to force?
0
True. Questions, what is the tick duration, and does collision rely on distance checking?
0
Hmm... I may be interested, Seeing as I had a project that is rather similar in WC3.
Gravity seems to work rather well.
About missiles, I think that it would be required to trigger those for wrapping mechanics to work right. If you use a larger tick period for them, Unlike wc3, can still look quite good, Due to the Instant-move function also able to smooth the model's motion. Frame skipping would not be a big issue, seeing as line collision works quite well.
The AI is actually quite good for a start, even though it has a few issues, such as it not avoiding planets quite well enough, and aiming at the current position. The first is a bit more difficult, although maybe biasing the destination away from sources of gravity, proportional to gravitational sources (Like how you aim a ball upwards so it goes farther, rather than hitting the ground right away) Would work. Not sure, would require some experimentation. Aiming wise, The aim equation is something I had a ton of issues with, but it is fully possible to do (just have to add some artificial stupidity to avoid the AI getting constant perfect snipes, like +-10 degrees)
0
Hitting a moving Target: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/recipes/Missile_Guidance_System.aspx
Distance on a torus (or rather a wrappng plane): http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2123947/calculate-distance-between-two-x-y-coordinates sqrt(min(|x1 - x2|, w - |x1 - x2|)^2 + min(|y1 - y2|, h - |y1-y2|)^2) Angle is easy to caclulate as well
0
@Kildare88: Go
Thanks :P
0
@SouLCarveRR: Go
Ah, ok. I understand.
For the AI, Can you add some leading for the Aim ai, except add a random factor in?
I think missiles are a bit too powerful, and at least should have a timed life.
Do projectiles wrap? If so, I suggest you use the torus equation for range finding as well as angle finding. Also, Is it viable to display some *dummies* for objects to help with the map wrap illusion? Like show four (or 8 counting the dyagonals) more ships that have the same position and rotation, possibly stats as well, Offset a map width so that you can see enemies past the border of the map.
Also, Gravity could actually be translated the same way, just taking into account which method gives the lowest distance.
0
I am on NA, and I cannot locate the game via search, unless it is intended for only 2 players at this time. Is there a way to increase that?
0
Oh Good, An update. I cant wait!
0
You know, About the music, I really think the old music, Which I had forgotten about until I found a video, Is far more epic than the current star-wars theme (which is against TOS I think, but you know that), and unless it is also copyrighted, I think it would be better at least as a placeholder, if not permanently.
In any case, Can you tell me what is is called? I would like to be able to listen to it, while muting the ingame music :p