Another Opinion

because you can never have too many of those...

from Sins Forums
First of all i have to point out that for a beta this is a most impressive game and i'm pleased to see new ideas being implemented (which makes you a rare breed of developer, as many give the impression of not listening at all). However since this is a beta, and you need feedback i thought i may be able to provide some.

Firstly, ship combat. It's just not quite 'right'. As a Battlestar Galactica fan i very much like the multiple targeting and the usage of kinetic based weapons (because you know, it generally looks awesome) however right now there's just something very 'flat' about the combat. To me ships should be making strafing runs and not just being stationary as all but the fighters seem to be. It's a minor complaint in reality, but to me it would just add that extra bit more.

In terms of how ships looks, mostly very impressive. Definately very impressed with the Carrier Capital ship; it has those very human qualities that reminds me of the first Human designed stargate ships (the prometheus i think it was called). However both the light and heavy cruiser feel wrong. With regards to the light, looking at it from the top i think, 'yep, nice and fits with the back story'. However the side view makes it feel a bit too high tech in look (and then weak when it fires its pee shooters). So for me that model needs some work. As for the heavy crusier, well it looks deliberately ungainly. Whilst yes, it does have that trader feel, it feels like a ship that shouldn't have been converted to combat. Again, as with the light cruiser, something just isn't right for me.

The ship design is actually opitimised in the Flak frigate. It looks nice and simple, which is the perfect look. Someone has simply stuck flak guns on it and it's taken that role.

With regards to the Kol, well you've already said that it hasn't had the same level of refinement, so i'll merely state that i'm another person that doesn't particuarly like how it looks (although i think every warship should look like the Battlestar Pegasus, but oh well).

An idea i would absolutely love to see implemented is the admiralty idea from Conquest Frontier Wars. The admiral would allow you to group ships into fleets (rather than the ctrl method, which never feels very 'fleety' to me). Plus each admiral would have a prefereed ship, and if aboard that ship give it a bonus to it's performance as well the fleet (such as increased range).

As for the research and economy side of the game, no real complaints from me. Maybe a bit more diverse research tree, but otherwise seems to be working very well.
6,605 views 16 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Hi Rossy,
Thanks for your feedback I'm glad you're enjoying yourself. The combat movement has a been a point of discussion for a while and we have been brainstorming ideas that can add additional life. Our major obstacle is the fact that ships will always find the optimal position for attack. Movement away from this location is suboptimal. We also don't want people getting frustrated with ships moving on their own accord. We may explore an aesthetic rocking motion or something of the sort.

However the side view makes it feel a bit too high tech in look

I can understand this, but I have a feeling you may think otherwise when you see the Vasari and Advent ships roll out. They'll make the light look like a box
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
Perhaps combat will be visually more rewarding if you make ships being hit by weapons 'rock and roll'.

Hehe, the next step after that will be to include a weapon accuracy decrease for those ships being buffeted around by weapons fire.
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
One thing ive thought about in regards to fleet movement especially the cobalt is to increase the number of weapon ports on the cobalt to about 9 turreted guns , rather then 2 frontal weapons.

And then code it that only 3 will fire at any one time. This means that it has an almost 360 deg angle of attack , much like the flak , but because only 3 guns will fire at any one time this eliminates the problem of units finding the optimum firing position or the actual player complaining that they have to micro a certain way to get more guns into the firing line.
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
when will the patch be out??!!
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
Craig Fraser, I've been reading around the forum, and would like to offer a point of view. First, to introduce myself, I'm a veteran at 4x space strategy games. I've been at this from Master of Orion and beyond. I'm also looking forward to test myself against this game. That being said:

When you produce a game in this genre today, you have to be better than your competition to sell well. Its as simple as that. You cant make a game that takes a step back in technology, physics engine, or otherwise. It occurs to me that the way space battles are fought in this game, from what I've read, ships find their optimal shooting range and stay there. I can see that being a viable strategy for capital ships, but smaller ships need speed to evade the fire from bigger ships. Also, inertia is a factor for all physical objects. This is why you shouldn't see ships just rocking back and forth. When speed and agility is your main defense, you'll be moving continually, and along vectors. These factors have been incorporated into the engine in Sword of the stars. Homeworld 2 also did this well, and are both games that will haunt you if you don’t get this right. I know this is a strategy game, but some times you just want to kick back and watch the magnificence of destruction.

I know most hardcore strategy enthusiast will state that balance and strategy is more important than graphics. Although this might be true for some, you still wont be able to sell to the great majority out there without great graphics and a better GUI. Being able to watch a space battle with believable physics is a major part of this. For those of you who remembers Star Wars: Rebellion, you might also remember why. Maybe it wasn’t great by today’s standards, but it was great then. At the risk of repeating myself, point being, you cant step back when others have made this work. It will simply fall short of being a classic and a popular product. As a reference to how bad it can turn out: Do you remember Master of Orion 3? A huge fanbase just waiting to buy the game, then someone went and blew it... big time...
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
Being able to watch a space battle with believable physics is a major part of this.


Too bad no one I've ever heard of has managed this Orbital mechanics just does not interest game makers...

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

It interested us Ron and the engine supports it but we unanimously decided it wasn't very fun but it sure made a cool simulation to watch. I've made many posts over the last year explaining the evolution of the Sins physics model and why it is the way it is. I don't have time to find them but I know I've written pages on the subject. It started out as full-blown physics simulation with orbiting planets, accurate gravity, accurate ship movement in space (for all classes of ships) and we gradually migrated to something that was more accessible, less frustrating and ultimately more fun. We have played basically every space game ever made (including all those listed above), read every review and read every forum commentaryon those games, read countless science fiction books, watched countless sci-fi movies and television series, conducted our experiments with various systems and came a to conclusion on what type of physics system we liked the best and how we could improve it. That being said we like the way space combat was presented in Star Wars (the movies) the best and we like the Homeworld2 movement system the best. With just a few minor changes here and there that is pretty much what you have in Sins. The small ships (fighters and bombers) duck, weave and strafe like wwI aces and the large, multi crewed ships (frigates/cruisers/caps) behave roughly like large boats. I think one of the biggest misconceptions is that frigates in Sins are akin to corvettes in the Homeworld series so people are expecting them to move about and dodge during combat. Sins' frigates are large - compare them to a fighter right beside them to get idea of how big they actually are. Finally, in the Sins universe weapons technology has progressed to the point where hitting a large, relatively slow moving target with any weapon type is virtually guaranteed (this is pretty much already the case with our 21 century technology). Our model is that basically only strike craft can effectively dodge so there is no reason for the larger ships to move about (except for visual appeal).

Regardless, this isn't to say we aren't thinking about adding some more variance to the combat movement of the large vessels as it has been a popular request, but it will be for aesthetic reasons, not simulation.

Finally,

I know this is a strategy game, but some times you just want to kick back and watch the magnificence of destruction.

Don't worry, Battletoad, I recieve more emails, posts and reports about how well Sins does this than almost any other feature (except maybe the zooming). Zooming in to watch the carnage in a massive battle with hundreds of ships in Sins is unlike anything you've ever seen in a game - especially when you consider that it is just one view of a full, real-time galaxy that is evolving as you watch

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
in sword of stars the rail guns can knock your ships around.
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
It interested us Ron and the engine supports it but we unanimously decided it wasn't very fun but it sure made a cool simulation to watch.


LOL, I didn't mean it that way. I meant it didn't interest them as a game mechanic in the same way that causing the player to die every time he plays on tuesday has no interest as a game mechanic -- it just doesn't work out
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Hahahahahaha, now that would be a cool mechanic.

if(day == tuesday)
{
    KillPlayer();
}

 

Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

Hahahahahaha, now that would be a cool mechanic.


if(day == tuesday)
{
    KillPlayer();
}


 




LOL -- please don't include it

That said, I will admit that I really do wish that some developer -- somewhere -- would find a way to incorporate those ideas in a "fun" manner.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
May I make a small suggestion?

Make ships take greater damage at the aft, and lesser damage from the front. This will automatically create dynamic battles, as ships will try to find the optimal angle of attack (IE: hitting the other guy in the engines) while minimizing it's own vunerabilities.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
Well, weaker aft ship armor would certainly add movement to ship combat. But it would also make the game increasingly about tactics.

I am fine with however Ironclad wants to deal with this issue.
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
I am fine with however Ironclad wants to deal with this issue.

  Don't hear this everyday!

Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
I aim to please
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
Actually, hes sad since IC doesnt know how to do anything but what the people ask, so they are inherently unable to think for themselves.