SoSour Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 First off let me say how much I am enjoying star fighter being added to the game. I play on Harbinger and have active characters on both sides building ships. There are a few glaring issues that need to be addressed. The biggest problem I have is map size. There needs to be much more space between spawn point and the battlefield. I would over and double the initial runs to nodes from home base. Also I would spread out A B C much more. A few skilled players can control all three rather easily at the moment. I would also remove the out of bounds and extend the maps. This is space. If someone wants to keep running, let them. At the B node on the one map at the bottom of the area you head right into an out of bounds area. In the heat of battle I cannot use an engine ability in this direction without risking getting stuck out of bounds and blowing up. I also hope you are planning on maps to allow many more players than you currently do. I would like to see 100 vs. 100 epic fleet fights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzina Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 These are more "map suggestions" than design flaws. I can't say I agree with spreading things out either. You would want to clarify more as to what this "flaw" you see is. You mention a few people can dominate... in an 8 v 8? a 12 v 12? Is a few people dominating bad? Perhaps you rather the best pilots can do nothing because they are so far away at a different node fighting that its pointless to call-out when attacked since they can't possibly arrive in time to help anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_sim Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 The biggest problem I have is map size. There needs to be much more space between spawn point and the battlefield. I would over and double the initial runs to nodes from home base. Also I would spread out A B C much more. A few skilled players can control all three rather easily at the moment. I'm sure there is a balance of optimization vs size, are you aware that the current ships are actually the same total size as your ground character so you couldn't actually fit into it the way the game engine renders. In fact there is a new deck being added to the fleet station that is all starfighter themed where you can stand next to models of the various ships but in fact these models are the actual size of the ships you fly. I would also remove the out of bounds and extend the maps. This is space. If someone wants to keep running, let them. At the B node on the one map at the bottom of the area you head right into an out of bounds area. In the heat of battle I cannot use an engine ability in this direction without risking getting stuck out of bounds and blowing up. It's called an endless stern chase and it's just a bad idea. Real space battles(not that we've ever fought in space for real) happen around objectives because otherwise there is no reason to fight in the middle of nowhere and one faction will simply leave if they find they are weaker. take out the boundaries and you know some n00bs that don't know this are going to fly off forever chasing each other. I also hope you are planning on maps to allow many more players than you currently do. I would like to see 100 vs. 100 epic fleet fights. Not going to happen. Bioware announced very early on that 24 was the max per instance in the game engine, do not ever expect more then 12 vs 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvershadows Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I'm sure there is a balance of optimization vs size, are you aware that the current ships are actually the same total size as your ground character so you couldn't actually fit into it the way the game engine renders. In fact there is a new deck being added to the fleet station that is all starfighter themed where you can stand next to models of the various ships but in fact these models are the actual size of the ships you fly. . Some of those models are already on the fleets, you just have to look for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramalina Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) It's called an endless stern chase and it's just a bad idea. Real space battles(not that we've ever fought in space for real) happen around objectives because otherwise there is no reason to fight in the middle of nowhere and one faction will simply leave if they find they are weaker. take out the boundaries and you know some n00bs that don't know this are going to fly off forever chasing each other. Well if you take guidance from historical naval and air battles, fighting far from objectives makes perfect sense, and happens fairly frequently. In general the idea is that you want to engage the enemy and defeat them long before they get close enough to damage any targets that you happen to value. If you're fighting over a target, either one side has already basically lost, or both sides were surprised and/or are suffering from really bad planning on the part of their command staff. The larger combat area is really a question of design philosophy and capability. Should GSF be a space combat game, or should it be a slightly tweaked version of MMORPG ground PvP. If a space combat game is the goal, then the question becomes can the game engine and the design talents of the developers actually make a high quality space combat game in SWTOR. I'm somewhat doubtful on both the desire and capability fronts. That said, if one does go for a space combat game to the extent that the engine can handle it I'd support enlarging the battle space to a sphere with a radius the length of the longest dimension of the current battle space. Of course, there's no point in that unless there's an intention to make real naval/air/space style battles instead of MMORPG PvP battlefield retread numbers 473 through 479 (or something like that). If you can't use tactics that take advantage of a large free flight space, then there's no point to having a large free flight space. The probability of GSF growing into a really good space combat game is extremely small. So just enjoy it for what it is and if you want a good combat flying game, go buy a good combat flying game. There are some already out there and a few under development. If SWTOR can't deliver, just get it from someone else. Edited January 21, 2014 by Ramalina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramalina Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Some of those models are already on the fleets, you just have to look for them. There's also a flashfire in a Republic bunker on Hoth. Outpost Cresh or Senth, can't remember which. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flearos Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) The design flaws are more like... Bypass Shield Pierce 100% armor pen (still hoping someone missed a decimal point and it should be 10% but i know they didn't) Charged platting Distortion field Ion-cannon love taps or Ion-cannon AOE (seriously pick one) Slow strafing (buff this by 300% and just imagine how much more interesting and unique gsf would be) Allowing scouts to kill so quickly latency compensation does not allow people to fight back Edited January 21, 2014 by Flearos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armonddd Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Well if you take guidance from historical naval and air battles, fighting far from objectives makes perfect sense, and happens fairly frequently. In general the idea is that you want to engage the enemy and defeat them long before they get close enough to damage any targets that you happen to value. If you're fighting over a target, either one side has already basically lost, or both sides were surprised and/or are suffering from really bad planning on the part of their command staff. Yeah, but real life has neither respawns nor hyperspace, both of which change combat dramatically. When the enemy can show up on top of your objective with no warning whatsoever, your only counter is to have a trained squadron on base and ready to deploy at any time. With respawns available, it's fairly simple to fearlessly accelerate past the screen of fighters hoping to prevent you from advancing. If you die, well, just try again! That said, it looks like you're looking for what's essentially team deathmatch, which is scheduled for the next major patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramalina Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Yeah, but real life has neither respawns nor hyperspace, both of which change combat dramatically. When the enemy can show up on top of your objective with no warning whatsoever, your only counter is to have a trained squadron on base and ready to deploy at any time. With respawns available, it's fairly simple to fearlessly accelerate past the screen of fighters hoping to prevent you from advancing. If you die, well, just try again! That said, it looks like you're looking for what's essentially team deathmatch, which is scheduled for the next major patch. Actually, if there wasn't so much cooldown based burst damage I might not mind a lack of respawns, or restricting respawns until a set number of people were downed (say 4 for example) and putting a longer timer on respawns. After all, you might be getting reinforcements, right? Also going by lore/past games there are practical limitations on where you can exit hyperspace, so often you can't just jump past defenders unless you're willing to live (or possibly die) with that 43% chance that variation in jump accuracy will slam you into the space station instead of dropping you out right next to it. But deathmatch? No thanks, not without some sort of mission purpose. " Red five and six get those bomber down now damnit! We can NOT loose the embassador's shuttle! Ram them if you have to, but get them down!" ^ What I want. Yes, including collision models and the ability to do shield ramming that blows out half my fighter's systems. Nothing like being out of other options, shifting your X-wing's shields to double front and ramming that bastard in the TIE Interceptor to finish the mission successfully. Ok, nostalgia moment over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramalina Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Well, I should be more clear. I'd rather have battlefield/mission design based on military mission design as opposed to designs based on children's playground games like tag or capture the flag. Yeah, yeah, I know we're not going to get it in GSF, but as long as we're talking wishes instead of probable outcomes. . . Edited January 21, 2014 by Ramalina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armonddd Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Yeah, yeah, I know we're not going to get it in GSF, but as long as we're talking wishes instead of probable outcomes. . . Gives me something to think about for my senior project, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_sim Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Well if you take guidance from historical naval and air battles, fighting far from objectives makes perfect sense, and happens fairly frequently. In general the idea is that you want to engage the enemy and defeat them long before they get close enough to damage any targets that you happen to value. Air/Naval sure. Doesn't work in space, 2 reasons: - Three dimensions, I know air has three dimensions too but when you factor the second reason. - Space is really really really endlessly big. it is impossible to make a long range interception in space if your don't know the route that they are coming on. hell if you control A and C it's really hard to make intercepts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zharik Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Some of those models are already on the fleets, you just have to look for them. And that model is horrible out of scale based on GSF (and the fact that you have 5 people on board!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts