Author Topic: Suggestions  (Read 60530 times)

Offline Revenantus

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,063
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #135 on: July 25, 2009, 07:53:18 pm »
Bug Reports

Teleporting engineers ordered into free roaming defender mode at a point outside the gravity well will jump back and forth between the gravity well and that point indefinitely.

When auto-placing harvesters if there is an AI force field covering the resource point the harvester will spawn at the edge of the force field, rather than on top of the resource point.

Possible error with group move, while holding shift and queuing up moves some ships can become out of sync with the orders, and miss out certain waypoints, leading to multiple paths being created for the single group. Unable to determine the exact circumstances that cause this to happen but seems to be more likely with larger groups of ships.

AI Behaviours

The AI will futilely chase teleporting ships around the gravity well, allowing the player to stall the attacking AI ships indefinitely. I'd suggest that non-combat teleporting ships should be very low priority targets for the AI.

AI physical attack ships will not leave the protection of their force field even whilst being destroyed by ships such as infiltrators. I think they'd be better off venturing a short distance outside the field to fight back - it may expose them to fire from other ships but it still seems less wasteful than simply dying without inflicting any damage at all.

Mobile Repair Station

Tugs that are spawned from the mobile repair station should inherit the station's current move orders, to prevent the tugs from being left strewn about the map.

Waypoints

The ability to place attack and move orders in the same queue would be handy.

I would like to be able to set spacedock rally points to a specific point in another system, rather than having ships stop at that system's wormhole when they arrive.

Interface

When AI ships are group moving I don't think they should be drawn with a blue outline - what the AI is doing is its own business! :).

Before AI science labs and ARSs are captured they still show the current system Knowledge level above them, I'd suggest it should only be shown on ships that the player controls.

Other Issues

I was experiencing the constant teleport 'bamfing' sound effect whilst attacking an AI system. I had no engineers in the system at the time, so it must have been due to the AI's tech III cloaked engineers. Perhaps they were doing something useful, however the sound effect persisted for almost 9 minutes solid and became highly irritating.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2009, 08:02:41 pm by Revenantus »

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #136 on: July 25, 2009, 08:55:42 pm »
Bug Reports

Teleporting engineers ordered into free roaming defender mode at a point outside the gravity well will jump back and forth between the gravity well and that point indefinitely.

When auto-placing harvesters if there is an AI force field covering the resource point the harvester will spawn at the edge of the force field, rather than on top of the resource point.

All good, those are on the list.

Possible error with group move, while holding shift and queuing up moves some ships can become out of sync with the orders, and miss out certain waypoints, leading to multiple paths being created for the single group. Unable to determine the exact circumstances that cause this to happen but seems to be more likely with larger groups of ships.

I've added that to the list to investigate, but I haven't seen it before.

AI Behaviours

The AI will futilely chase teleporting ships around the gravity well, allowing the player to stall the attacking AI ships indefinitely. I'd suggest that non-combat teleporting ships should be very low priority targets for the AI.

AI physical attack ships will not leave the protection of their force field even whilst being destroyed by ships such as infiltrators. I think they'd be better off venturing a short distance outside the field to fight back - it may expose them to fire from other ships but it still seems less wasteful than simply dying without inflicting any damage at all.

Mobile Repair Station

Tugs that are spawned from the mobile repair station should inherit the station's current move orders, to prevent the tugs from being left strewn about the map.

All good, added to the list.

Waypoints

The ability to place attack and move orders in the same queue would be handy.

This is actually fairly unlikely, those systems are incredibly complex and trying to wed them together is going to create hassle in the targeting and waypoint evaluation logic, which I need to squeak all the efficiency I can out of.  I had this on my list at one point, but it's off there now because I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze...

I would like to be able to set spacedock rally points to a specific point in another system, rather than having ships stop at that system's wormhole when they arrive.

That almost definitely won't happen, sorry!  The ability to give those sort of cross-planet orders is something that is just generally against the design of the game.  That's part of the disadvantage of reinforcements, is that they always enter at one certain place and require further action from the player.  That makes it impossible to run full defenses of your entire system with just docks on one safe planet, and it makes it a bit less effective to trickle reinforcements into an enemy system.  The way this currently is has strategic implications that I like, aside from the fact that I would simply have to recode the entire command structure for ships (as with the move/attack comingling) in order for that to work.  It's something of a limitation of the engine at present, but I built the engine the way that I did because I didn't expect to ever want to do that sort of action (and I don't). Sorry.  :)

Interface

When AI ships are group moving I don't think they should be drawn with a blue outline - what the AI is doing is its own business! :).

Before AI science labs and ARSs are captured they still show the current system Knowledge level above them, I'd suggest it should only be shown on ships that the player controls.

Other Issues

I was experiencing the constant teleport 'bamfing' sound effect whilst attacking an AI system. I had no engineers in the system at the time, so it must have been due to the AI's tech III cloaked engineers. Perhaps they were doing something useful, however the sound effect persisted for almost 9 minutes solid and became highly irritating.

All good on these.  Added to my list.  As an added note, I'll basically be making it so that cloaked enemy ships don't make the bamf noise.  Of course, to a certain extent I am wondering about the utility of the bamf sound effect in general.  Maybe it should only play when the ship is actually visible on the screen, not just at the current planet, or maybe it should be cut out entirely.  Thoughts?
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #137 on: July 25, 2009, 09:29:28 pm »
Well... to me this just encourages a bit too much in the way of randomness. :)

Randomness? How do you mean?

I generally like to keep my main fleet fully supplied with all possible ships of all types. It's easier to do (after you get 6 different ships up to Tech III at this point, thank you!) if you just say "build whatever you can." I just set the things to crank out whatever replacements are necessary, and if any of my defensive fleets need reinforcements (happens occasionally) then I slice them manually out of the "head to the front line" piles.

Fortunately, I haven't gotten 6 different ships to Tech III yet - ever. :)

Cheers!

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #138 on: July 25, 2009, 09:35:28 pm »
Teleporting engineers ordered into free roaming defender mode at a point outside the gravity well will jump back and forth between the gravity well and that point indefinitely.

You are a sick, sick person, and need to seek professional help. And, good check of the corner case. :)

The AI will futilely chase teleporting ships around the gravity well, allowing the player to stall the attacking AI ships indefinitely. I'd suggest that non-combat teleporting ships should be very low priority targets for the AI.

Sssh!!! I regularly use this tactic by using a single Engineer II to lure all the wandering AI ships away from my fleet and send them on a merry chase that they never can win...

AI physical attack ships will not leave the protection of their force field even whilst being destroyed by ships such as infiltrators. I think they'd be better off venturing a short distance outside the field to fight back - it may expose them to fire from other ships but it still seems less wasteful than simply dying without inflicting any damage at all.

Can't they shoot out of a force field? I could swear my turrets do it all the time...


The ability to place attack and move orders in the same queue would be handy.

Alas, the current architecture makes that difficult, although it might be done in an expansion, if I recall what Sir X said in other threads.

I would like to be able to set spacedock rally points to a specific point in another system, rather than having ships stop at that system's wormhole when they arrive.

Asked for when I originally asked for cross-planet rally points, but apparently another thing that is architecturally difficult.

When AI ships are group moving I don't think they should be drawn with a blue outline - what the AI is doing is its own business! :).

Good catch!

I was experiencing the constant teleport 'bamfing' sound effect whilst attacking an AI system. I had no engineers in the system at the time, so it must have been due to the AI's tech III cloaked engineers. Perhaps they were doing something useful, however the sound effect persisted for almost 9 minutes solid and became highly irritating.

I have experienced this before as well, and commented upon it in another thread. Don't recall where now, sorry.

As always, thorough and clear, my cross-puddle brother.

Cheers!

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Member list
« Reply #139 on: July 25, 2009, 10:03:32 pm »
Since this isn't worth its own thread...

I'm pleased to see we broke into the third page of registered forum members!!!

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #140 on: July 26, 2009, 12:03:36 am »
Well... to me this just encourages a bit too much in the way of randomness. :)

Randomness? How do you mean?

I generally like to keep my main fleet fully supplied with all possible ships of all types. It's easier to do (after you get 6 different ships up to Tech III at this point, thank you!) if you just say "build whatever you can." I just set the things to crank out whatever replacements are necessary, and if any of my defensive fleets need reinforcements (happens occasionally) then I slice them manually out of the "head to the front line" piles.

Fortunately, I haven't gotten 6 different ships to Tech III yet - ever. :)

I see.  Well, I mainly mean that it encourages randomness in the sense that you don't know what is being built, or in what mix.  I prefer the current approach where you have 16 slots in each dock, and so if you build a couple of docks you can build a mix of everything in the ratios that you want.  When you have docks in multiple locations building stuff simultaneously, this sort of ship-mix setting can be crucial.  With an "easy button" for randomization, I'm concerned that a) this is a pretty redundant feature, in the first place, but also b) it encourages people to just hit that button and forget it, and then play with whatever random unit mix the dock happens to then produce.  That just doesn't say "strategy game" to me, somehow. ;)

And yes, getting 6 ships of Mark III unlocked is pretty rare, since you often spend knowledge on starships, turrets, or other techs.  I think I tend to max out at around 4 Mark III ships, too -- maybe 5 on occasion.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Member list
« Reply #141 on: July 26, 2009, 12:03:55 am »
Since this isn't worth its own thread...

I'm pleased to see we broke into the third page of registered forum members!!!

Definitely cool, yeah. :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #142 on: July 26, 2009, 12:08:56 am »
On another note, this thread is getting ridiculous.  It's hard to carry on a conversation about any given feature, and it's also hard for new members to see if someone has already suggested what they want to suggest.  So, I've created a new Suggestions forum so that people can make suggestions -- in separate like I have for the future DLC items -- and then we can keep the discussions on any given feature all together.  It results in more total posts, but I think it will also make for a more coherent forum in general.

If people post elsewhere I won't bite their heads off, but I'll have to make separate topics for each suggestion that is accepted to one of the lists, anyway, so having these as separate items from the start will not only help me out, it will make things easier to read and keep it all together.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Revenantus

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,063
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #143 on: July 26, 2009, 05:33:00 am »
Waypoints

The ability to place attack and move orders in the same queue would be handy.

This is actually fairly unlikely, those systems are incredibly complex and trying to wed them together is going to create hassle in the targeting and waypoint evaluation logic, which I need to squeak all the efficiency I can out of.  I had this on my list at one point, but it's off there now because I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze...

Ah, I appreciate that this may not be an efficient use of development time then. It's a small limitation not being able to queue up an attack on a target from a particular approach, or steer a gate raiding squadron of bombers around the AI's command posts before ordering them to attack the Warp Gate, but this really is only minor.

I would like to be able to set spacedock rally points to a specific point in another system, rather than having ships stop at that system's wormhole when they arrive.

That almost definitely won't happen, sorry!  The ability to give those sort of cross-planet orders is something that is just generally against the design of the game.  That's part of the disadvantage of reinforcements, is that they always enter at one certain place and require further action from the player.  That makes it impossible to run full defenses of your entire system with just docks on one safe planet, and it makes it a bit less effective to trickle reinforcements into an enemy system.  The way this currently is has strategic implications that I like, aside from the fact that I would simply have to recode the entire command structure for ships (as with the move/attack comingling) in order for that to work.  It's something of a limitation of the engine at present, but I built the engine the way that I did because I didn't expect to ever want to do that sort of action (and I don't). Sorry.  :)

There's actually only one situation that comes up regularly where I'd like to do this - I'll explain it because I believe there might be a way of solving it.

Before I launch an attack on an AI planet I obviously queue up all my ships at the wormhole leading to the system in question. Now, my spacedocks may be one or two systems behind, so I set the waypoint on those to the system I am going to launch the attack from.

This leads to all those produced ships arriving in the system and remaining at the wormhole they entered from, and I have to manually order them to move to the wormhole I am going to launch the attack through.

My suggestion is thus;

I would like to be able to set a special move order/waypoint to another system that results in the ships stopping at the wormhole that will lead into the system.

This would allow me to order my ships to queue up at the wormhole I want to launch the attack from, rather than constantly ordering batches of them across the system.

Teleporting engineers ordered into free roaming defender mode at a point outside the gravity well will jump back and forth between the gravity well and that point indefinitely.

You are a sick, sick person, and need to seek professional help. And, good check of the corner case. :)

Indeed, my estranged doppelganger, I took great pleasure in watching my poor engineers trapped in a state of technological limbo.

The AI will futilely chase teleporting ships around the gravity well, allowing the player to stall the attacking AI ships indefinitely. I'd suggest that non-combat teleporting ships should be very low priority targets for the AI.

Sssh!!! I regularly use this tactic by using a single Engineer II to lure all the wandering AI ships away from my fleet and send them on a merry chase that they never can win...

By the Realms of Xdom! Such an underhanded tactic sullies a commander's honour. Which I why I too must stop using it so regularly, I don't think I have the strength of will to prevent myself exploiting this particular behaviour, so I am forced to call upon X The Great to put appropriate measures in place.

AI physical attack ships will not leave the protection of their force field even whilst being destroyed by ships such as infiltrators. I think they'd be better off venturing a short distance outside the field to fight back - it may expose them to fire from other ships but it still seems less wasteful than simply dying without inflicting any damage at all.

Can't they shoot out of a force field? I could swear my turrets do it all the time...

Ships can fire out of forcefields, but Cutlasses and Vampire Claws have no ranged weapons and will not leave their forcefield when under attack.

I'm moving away from the idea of a button to add all ship types to the build queue. While in certain end game situations this would save a small amount of time, I think X is right that the temptation for new players to use it rather than experimenting with different ship mixes would be too great.

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #144 on: July 26, 2009, 09:37:49 pm »
Indeed, my estranged doppelganger, I took great pleasure in watching my poor engineers trapped in a state of technological limbo.

*laughs* I suppose that beats homunculus, thank you very much!  :D

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #145 on: July 26, 2009, 09:59:52 pm »
Waypoints

The ability to place attack and move orders in the same queue would be handy.

This is actually fairly unlikely, those systems are incredibly complex and trying to wed them together is going to create hassle in the targeting and waypoint evaluation logic, which I need to squeak all the efficiency I can out of.  I had this on my list at one point, but it's off there now because I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze...

Ah, I appreciate that this may not be an efficient use of development time then. It's a small limitation not being able to queue up an attack on a target from a particular approach, or steer a gate raiding squadron of bombers around the AI's command posts before ordering them to attack the Warp Gate, but this really is only minor.

Cool, glad that's not a big issue.  Queuing movements/attacks in addition to wormhole commands was another request along these same lines, if you recall, and I did add that -- and I am glad -- but it caused a lot of headaches with related bugs for a while after that.  Now those systems are nailed down pretty well, and I'm reticent to go after them again any time soon, haha. :)

My suggestion is thus;

I would like to be able to set a special move order/waypoint to another system that results in the ships stopping at the wormhole that will lead into the system.

This would allow me to order my ships to queue up at the wormhole I want to launch the attack from, rather than constantly ordering batches of them across the system.

Awesome -- I've added an entry for this to the future DLC list, where we can discuss the finer points more if you don't like my ideas in this regard:  http://arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,283.0.html

The AI will futilely chase teleporting ships around the gravity well, allowing the player to stall the attacking AI ships indefinitely. I'd suggest that non-combat teleporting ships should be very low priority targets for the AI.

Sssh!!! I regularly use this tactic by using a single Engineer II to lure all the wandering AI ships away from my fleet and send them on a merry chase that they never can win...

This will also take effect for human player ships, so that the free roaming defenders re-evaluate their targets when their current target teleports out of range.  That should make defenders more effective against teleporting raids, too.  Added to the short-term list. :)

By the Realms of Xdom! Such an underhanded tactic sullies a commander's honour. Which I why I too must stop using it so regularly, I don't think I have the strength of will to prevent myself exploiting this particular behaviour, so I am forced to call upon X The Great to put appropriate measures in place.

I am always happy to quell the exploits.  I think that players should use whatever techniques, no matter how underhanded, that work.  It's my job to make sure that any holes that are abusive are patched, same as it would be for a developer in a pvp multiplayer game.

AI physical attack ships will not leave the protection of their force field even whilst being destroyed by ships such as infiltrators. I think they'd be better off venturing a short distance outside the field to fight back - it may expose them to fire from other ships but it still seems less wasteful than simply dying without inflicting any damage at all.

Can't they shoot out of a force field? I could swear my turrets do it all the time...

Ships can fire out of forcefields, but Cutlasses and Vampire Claws have no ranged weapons and will not leave their forcefield when under attack.

Precisely.

I'm moving away from the idea of a button to add all ship types to the build queue. While in certain end game situations this would save a small amount of time, I think X is right that the temptation for new players to use it rather than experimenting with different ship mixes would be too great.

Awesome, glad you're coming around. :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Pandemic

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
  • Location: Miniluv ftw!
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #146 on: July 26, 2009, 10:38:34 pm »
Suggestions:

You can access the settings menu at the main menu, and in the game, but not the lobby... Maybe add in a button that allows access to it in the lobby?

You should probably disable the Easier AI Train Master type when the box for Astro Trains is unchecked :P.


-Pandemic
« Last Edit: July 26, 2009, 10:41:11 pm by Pandemic »
http://www.di.fm/wma/trance.asx
"Freedom is the ability to say 2 plus 2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follows."  -George Orwell, 1984

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #147 on: July 26, 2009, 11:20:30 pm »
You can access the settings menu at the main menu, and in the game, but not the lobby... Maybe add in a button that allows access to it in the lobby?

There are a few complications with the windowing that make this hard to do gracefully, sorry!  I'd explain them, but I just finished with that crazy overlong Normal vs. Fast & Dangerous thread and I'm exhausted and need sleep.  If it's a big issue let me know, but I think that this causes more complications than it is worth at the moment.

You should probably disable the Easier AI Train Master type when the box for Astro Trains is unchecked :P.

Actually, I built it so that no matter what you turn off (teleportation and then playing with a Teleporter Turtle, for instance), the AI will still act sensibly and play correctly.  You can get some interesting quasi-new AI types by dong stuff like that. :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Pandemic

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
  • Location: Miniluv ftw!
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #148 on: July 26, 2009, 11:24:28 pm »
Damn.

And interesting... I might try that :P.


-Pandemic
http://www.di.fm/wma/trance.asx
"Freedom is the ability to say 2 plus 2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follows."  -George Orwell, 1984

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Suggestions
« Reply #149 on: July 26, 2009, 11:29:40 pm »
:D
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!