+12
posted by William Johnson Engineer , updated 6 months ago , 109
1) I will almost definitely change the default zoom to 105 (which is 3 ticks out from the current default).  This is the widest I can set it without getting visual distortions.  I will go a head and make the FOV commands *official* and add them to the key mapping list.  I will *not* remove the 120 setting, though I encourage all players to try and limit themselves to 105.  At some point I will make the 120 view a customization option (which will compete with other such options) and then remove the option for 120 when not using the perk.  The perk will be balanced against the others and will probably do other things than just increase the max FOV.

2) I will collapse some of the under-used regions so that they match against populated servers.  I will change the default behavior for matchmaking so that players are added to a 'battlegroup' of 8-16 players.  Players in a battlegroup will fight against other battlegroups with as much variation as the player population allows.  Unless you leave your group, the players on you team will not change, though the enemy players will change.  In addition to the normal game modes, there will be a Free for All (deathmatch) mode where all players in 1 or 2 battlegroups fight without teams.

3) I will allow players to play with 1 or 2 friends as part of a 'wing'.  Wings (a group of up to 3 players) will move between battlegroups as needed for matchmaking, however the players in the wing will stay on the same team.  They will *probably* stay out of FFA (Free for All) games.  Groups of 4 to 16 will match against other groups of 4-16 including clans (or squadrons).  I will probably have to decide what to call clans (or squadrons).  Once this is working, I'll add some more maps and game modes for small teams, but until then small groups will play Search and Destroy.  CTF and CA don't really work with 4 player teams.

4) We will stop developing for NaCl (chrome).  We will start supporting mac and maybe linux.  NaCl has lots of problems, and doesn't support many of the things that we need to do.  The chrome version will continue to run, but chrome players will no longer play against steam players.

5) The ship prices are way too high.  Some of the ships are balanced around this fact.  I will balance all ships and magnify the upgrade system so that any ship can be made to perform like a 'prestige' ship.  When I make this change, I will refund all ship and upgrade purchases for Cred.  Players will then be able to change the ships they own or purchase their old ships again.  The upgrade system will make it so that the stats of prestige ships are *basically* unchanged (and fully upgrading a ship will have comparable cost to purchasing a prestige ship).  Refunds will be based on either the Cred price or the He-3 price depending on which is greater.  This change should greatly improve the game, however I understand if players are upset by it.  Players will be able to play using the old system, but only on chrome.  Of course, everything will still be purchasable using Cred.

None of this will happen immediately.  I just wanted to give players time to digest the upcoming changes.  --wj
Vote
+1
#1 - Great as a default, and I have no opinion yet of the 'perks' thing until we hear more about it.

#2 - fantastic. I will point out though that it makes it much easier for a player to troll their team since they can't ditch him and maintain the rest of the group easily. Perhaps more clarification or possibly a votekick, i dont know... too soon to tell. I recon the wings feature will be the answer to this largely (#3)

#3 - yes, yes and YES. The community refers to them as squads more than clans afaik, of course there is always the steam-like generic 'groups'.

#4 - N/A (on steam). If I recall, this is what held back the game from adopting UDP?

#5 - Cant wait to see the new upgrades system. And I approve good sir of making all ships capable of prestige-level stats. Not too thrilled about having to re-upgrade everything but I can't think of a better way around that, so have to live with it I guess.
+1
The new upgrade system will force you to choose which stats to upgrade instead of allowing you to upgrades all stats.  Each upgrade will be important (5-20% effect), but there will be fewer of them.  --wj
Just to clarify this a little more... There will be fewer stats that can be upgraded, and also a limit on how many stats can be upgraded per ship - ok. Will this be a limit on the number of stats upgradable at all, or a limit on total # of upgrades for the ship?

Eg, under the current system  it is 5 lvls * 8 stats = 40 upgrades per ship. It could be limited by stats upgradable, so once you start upgrading 4 stats you cannot begin to upgrade the remaining ones. Or, will there be a limit on the number of upgrades, say 20 for this example? This way one could choose to either max out 4 stats or upgrade all stats half way to suit their tastes. It sounds like the first variation at present... No arguments for/against either, just looking for clarification if you have planned that far yet.
+1
I will slightly increase the number of available stats (turn speed, secondary weapon cooldown, etc), but that is mostly unrelated.

The limits on upgrades will be 
a) no more than 5 upgrades per stat.  Each upgrade on a stat will apply a change of the same magnitude.
b) no more than 20 upgrades per ship.  the allocation changable, so you won't be locked into a misclick.  The number 20 is my best guess.  The actually number may change by implementation, but it should be about 20. 
--wj 

As far as I can tell, I am one of the longest standing Mac Chromers.  I have a full garage of maxed out ships and around 700K in the bank. Was really frustrated when Steam launched and I was not able to play for a couple of weeks or take advantage of premium ship trials. Will be very frustrated if I cannot max out my ships again. Have invested in the game and been a long time player. Have tolerated "out of focus" and dragging my browser window around my screen for a long time... looking forward to moving past that with this upgrade. 


Can you get me the scoop on how to get migrated properly and how Mac will function on Steam. I will be happy to provide plenty of feedback on how the Mac port is working. 

thanks for what you do. 


Looking forward to destroyers, wings, battle groups,  and other new stuff... say hi to Ed and tell him we miss him on the forums. 


Best regards,


Johnny Chaos (especially excited to get my full name AND clan tag out there).



As another Mac Chromer, I am also equally excited about the MB coming to Steam for us. I would love to know if you guys are close to having it complete, and if you need beta testers.  :D


Also, I want to say that as soon as it becomes public, I will be going to all of the news articles that I frequent and make sure that this gets some media coverage.  More coverage can only be a good ting, right?

No, media coverage is not a good thing.
Have you seen previous media coverage of Moonbreakers? It's not good.
We have to wait until the game is REALLY good before we try any media coverage..

 
Case and point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBR3uQaOmNs
At the worst bit is most of what this guy says is true, the game is better now, and it will be better after this update... but we should wait before we get any more critics in.

Wow... ouch..  Just checked to see what the game looks like through the Steam website... features and purchase options. Didn't even realize that the pricing scheme has been so re-vamped. I've been maxed out for months.... and simply accumulating credits now. Even have a little He3 in the bank... all of which has been more or less useless. Really hoping that my investment of time and $ into the game is recognized on the transition. Would hate to be thrown back into the basement with the nuke spammers, haters, and guppies.

wj told already about recognirions of credits and pay , and told he will move at best chance in favors of players :-)


+1

Basically, I'll award cred for items based on the purchasing price.  Also, I think I can make it work where the transition is optional.  


I just want to ensure that players have meaningful choices in terms of ships, I don't intend to reduce the accumulated wealth and power of existing players.  --wj

So when is this all going down? I have downloaded Steam. When will there be a Mac compatible version available?


And how can the transition be optional? I thought that you said that the Chrome side was shutting down (or being shut out of Steam) and no longer supported. Just wondering?

+1

The chrome -> mac transition will probably take a few more weeks.  


I am *probably* going to allow players the option to use ships with new stats and more powerful upgrades, or keep using the old ships.  This is the potentially optional part.  


Stopping development on chrome won't be optional, but I don't want to do that until the mac (and possibly linux) support is ready.  The engine porting is done by someone else, and they are currently on vacation. --wj

It should have been a beta... WHY was this game not designated beta?

+1
There are some opinions floating around that it was a 'test' game to develop the graphics engine on, which we know was scheduled to be re-used in another project by the parent company (if im not mistaken).

It's all speculation until (if) we hear from them again, but if true, very underhanded to 1. call a beta game not beta (it clearly is if the full gameplay was actively being developed) and 2. ask people to put money into a beta to develop the engine with plans to use it elsewhere taking priority over this game. 

+1 for science.

Yup, got an email from em just today to pre-order their new game, Planetary Annihilation. Ohh look, a bonus pre-order-only shiny something! That will surely restore my faith in you... surely...

Its following along the TA model - same big voice John Patrick Lowrie for Narrator  - I feel somewhere that they got hold of TA rights from Cavedog(R).


I feel aggrieved that they do not feel the need to put some effort into finishing Moon Breakers along a similar 1st person game.  "Where teams battle for dominance of the planets"?  Whoa sound familiar !  I had best look back in the UserEcho posts.   I am sure I have only seen that comment a few dozen times  (Sarcasm)  LOL! 

+1  ! ! !  Anger

... whelp this wasn't on this list but the new game promo definately made me angry.

+3
Would it be possible instead to have a wider range of stats to upgrade than currently available but have a limit to the number of upgrades that a ship may receive at once? It would be nice to have the option of upgrading roll rate, cooling rate, max temperature, acceleration, and shield recovery time.

Another thing would be the ability to downgrade a limited number of systems, as if to strip them down a bit to save on space and resources which would then allow more room for other upgrades to be put into place.

Weapon mount points and alignment might be nice to be able to adjust, within the limits of the chassis that they're mounted on of course.
I defiantly like the idea of more stat options. Gotta be careful to keep them balanced though, hate for people to work out some optimal builds. And that's no good for variation in gameplay.

I mean sure some builds are going to be better no matter what, just gotta make sure there isn't one or two builds you'd be stupid not to pick.

(By build I mean a combination of upgrades that hits the upgrade cap.)
-7
Awesome.
A few of us where exploring the idea of more radical "upgrades" I say "upgrades" because they all had a huge trade off.
Things like making the Nighthawk stealth (doesn't show up on hud at long range) at the cost of losing 30% of it's shield or more or giving the Stingray a rail gun which is the same as it's cannon except it's shots move faster but overheats faster and uses a small amount of shield when it shoots (high energy use).
Of course due to the fact these upgrades have a trade off they can be totally separate from the system you describe and would effectively make the it a different ship in a way.
There are some really interesting and cool idea's but a lot of them would be a nightmare to impliment.
-2
HAHA. As predictable as a clock. I think you missed one, I have another small comment on this page, you should downvote that as well... oh and this one, better downvote this... I'm gonna reply to Jiel's coment as well, be a perfect thing for you to downvote.
+3
I get a mix of down & up votes, but frankly I don't care as I say what I think - and often I'm proved wrong when other people come up with superior arguments or suggestions.

It could be that people down-vote simply because they honestly disagree with much of what you say, and its not productive to try & second-guess their reasoning or try to paint them (whoever they are) as evil vets trying to hold the game back.  I've agreed with you on some points, and disagreed on others & always said why, but I admit to getting frustrated when you sometimes seem to take no notice of what I & others have said & post your view again somewhere else.  It starts to look like pushing an agenda rather than having an open & friendly debate where we all try to understand what others are saying & are willing to admit where we're wrong.

And that's as personal as I'm going to get.  Back to discussing the game, not each other, lets play the ball and not the man :)
-2
Yes I do have a agenda... I went back and boiled down some of our discussions and basicly it came down to you saying: "Premium ships should be better" and me saying rather aggressively: "Balance all the things"

So yeah... really just separate views and agendas. Of course the other side is going to seem stubborn if they believe the game should be different to what you believe it should be.

As you said: back to the game.
(for the refrence, someone is downvoting me on princaple, "Wait till you see our suggestions for the upgrade system when your looking to implement it." doesn't seem like something anyone could disagree with unless they had a grudge)
+1
I also want those things.  But they will go in a different 'slot'.  Upgrades = things that make your ship better without real disadvantages, Modifiers = things that make you ship play differently with some advantages and disadvantages.  --wj
Cool, I'll post our ideas when we get them.

I'm pretty sure our most radical idea was putting a grappling hook on a hammerhead so it can slow down bombers and fling light fighters into rocks.
That would be intresting.
+3
I'm happy with all of your plans there wj.  The most dangerous as far as annoying people is point 5, and its mostly because the majority of players don't read the forums & won't know the reset's coming, so when it happens you'll get a storm of protests.

I'd suggest adding a link to this thread onto the splash screen of the game so that people will visit & see what's in the works.
As alway, he is right.
Write the forum-link were you write the updates! (in blinking yellow)

very happy for all those main changes.

+2
Will there be a Non-Match Lobby for setting up your wings or whatever prior to play? That could take a while in the Match Lobby.

I am not sure I understand #5. Can you Explain it like I'm 5 as they say? Maybe with examples? (Preferably in Crayon, so I can Relate ;)
Yeah, a non-match lobby is definatly important for what he is planning.
+3
There will be a new screen that shows all the people currently online and global chat to talk to them.  Setting up wings and squadrons will be done from there.  I'll also try and add a command parser so things can be done via chat, similar to wow (/invite X /joinguild etc...)
+1
I approve of all of those things.
-2
See what I mean.
+1

i not understood what there is to downvote here?

Will their be an option to reset the upgrades of a ship in case I choosed the wrong? Maybe for some creds or HE3?
+2
I am Primarily Positive on all of those things and curious to see implementation of them.

I am reserving final judgement until I see their impact on the game.

Looking forward to see your plans implemented WJ!  Keep up the good work.
+4
Two things: YEA!!  For Mac Client!! Woot Woot!! ;) (Couldn't help myself).

Secondly, there are many of us older veterans who purchased ships during the older, higher-priced pricing structure   Are we going to get that refund price (in creds, obviously), or are we going to get it with the current pricing structure?
Quick question for you William, can you tell us what your order of importance is with your list?  Are these things that are going to be rolled during the course of months, or is this something that is going to be "plopped" onto us all in one whack?
+1
I too have wondered about the cred price changes, as all but my 4 most recent ships are from the old pricing scheme.  The extra ~3-4 million would be useful.
You get the creds so that you basically can buy the same things as before. Don't think we will get more creds. And seriously...does it matter? :) I earned more than 2.3 Mio creds in the last weeks without any boosts, so I really don't give a f*** if I'll get some more creds or not :)
+2
Listen, when a ship cost nearly 1M in creds compared to the now 300 - 400k, that is a huge difference.  I only have one under that format, but I know many who have many more.
+1
This is something I'm curious about as well.  As I too have bought ships at the Mil plus mark in credits.

Manuel let me break down some math for you here to illustrate why I am concerned about getting some return if there is a reset.  Without boosts this the break down of earning a million credits:
If you average 3500 credits a match (this is I feel a generous but achievable number for a skilled pilot) It will take you 285 matches to earn 1 million credits.

Since the set length of a game is 15min. and 1/3 of these (95) are thoeretically S&D which now goes a full 15, you have 1425 minutes just to get to 333,333(ish).  the S&D and CTF both have the capacity to go the distance but can be ended sooner (though the ones I've been in tend to run long if not out of time as often as they are short) I'm averages about 10 minutes for teh remaining 190 matches, coming to 1900 minutes for those.

That equates to 3325 minutes of game play or 55.4 Hours.

Now with my admittedly loose number (a high average credits per game and perhaps a high average game time for S&D and CTf, though these may balance out each other) It would take a full 2.3 days of game play under the current mission setup to earn 1 Mil in credits without boosts.

Your 2.3 million equals 127.4 hours (or 5 full days) of game play in two weeks under teh current mission setup (using my numbers)

The greater point is I have logged 230 hours of game play in this game since steam, I have bought boosts a couple times (prior to the first price drop), I bought almost all the ships and one premium before the first price drop and the rest of the ships afterwards.  If there is a drastic change in the economy and the ships and upgrade people in my position, people who have put in a ridiculous amount of time and in many cases an investment of money, are right to want to know that they will be  getting a fair chance to utilize the new features with out needing to regrind their already significant previous efforts.   We don't all have the time to spend a full 56% of our waking hours playing moon breakers to re grind our already significant investment in the game.  (336 hours in 2 full weeks, assuming 8 hours of sleep, there are 223 waking hours in two weeks time of which 127 hours is 56%)

In short it does matter to some of us.  

WJ we know you'll do right by us we'd just like some inkling of how that will be when it gets closer to the actual implementation of the new upgrade system.
Than I probably made more points per match, because I remember being working several hours every day :) But still, what's the matter? Yes, you spent more creds and maybe you don't get them all back, but in relation to the prices of the ships and upgrades you still have the same. For example if you bought the Swordfish for 2,1 Mio and now you only get 800k creds back you still can buy it again. So I really don't get it? Did you complain when the prices of the ships dropped, too? At that point it was a little unfair, because you had to spend more time palying and had to pay much more creds than those who bought their ships after the drop.
+8
Proposed steps in rebalance.
1) All purchased items will be refunded in cred, at the price they purchased at.  If the item was purchased using He-3 I will give either a) the cred price of the ship or b) I will convert the he-3 price to cred at the the most favorable rate.  Players will get whichever option give the most cred.  After this step players will all have lots of cred.

2) The ships will be balanced in base stats.  The upgrade system will be changed so that players can only choose 20 upgrades per ship, but each upgrade will significantly affect the targeted stat.  This will give players meaningful choices to make about there ships, and will allow greater variation in gameplay.  The upgrades will scale based on the the ships base stats, so ship selection will still be important.  Each upgrade (1-20) will cost more than the previous, though the first 10 or so will be pretty cheap, but the latter ones will be very expensive (in cred).  The cost for purchasing a ship and fully upgraded will be close to what players paid for the most expensive ships currently.  Players will just buy generic upgrades for a ship, and will be able to tune how those upgrades are applied whenever they want.

3) The idea is, instead of nerfing ships, I will make it so all ships can be made to play like premium ships do now (or a little better...).  However, instead of saving up for a long time and then getting a ships, players will unlock ships quickly and then choose how much cred to spend making it better.  So that should be good for the game.  Players who lots of stuff and therefore lots of cred, will be able to immediately buy and upgrade ships, and their accumulated wealth and power will be unchanged, however since all ships can become premium when fully upgraded, players will have a lot more choices in what to buy.   With upgrades being more expensive (and more powerful) the total cost of the catalog will have increased, so players who have nothing left to buy will have some more options.

The most important idea is that I have no intention of punishing the most invested players.  I will figure out a fair way to make the change.  I will make sure everybody understands what is going on.  And if enough ppl want to keep playing without the changes, I will make sure a server is available to do so. 

Players will *not* have to regrind to reach the same power level.  They will have the option to just re-buy their stuff or buy different items.  --wj


Thanks for clearing that up :)
Thanks, I expected as much.

good plan and I can;t wait to see what you come up with.
Very fair. And I agree this could really add a good mix of ships. I'm excited to see this happen.
+3
Since upgrade paths are being made much more important to a ship's performance and build variation is being emphasized, would it be possible to have some sort of system that allows us to buy multiple ships of a single model? This could also be a reasonable alternative to having an upgrade reset system. Instead of resetting, players would just buy new ships and upgrade those. Further, it would be useful to have a constantly available cred sink built into the game. In a system where generic upgrades are purchased that can be changed at any time, eventually there will be nothing left to spend cred on, just like the current situation that many of the veteran pilots find themselves in. Creating and exploring all the different builds of a ship would still be possible, but with greater cred requirements and thus a need for more gameplay.

Some sort of garage(hangar?) system that would store the different ships we've purchased would be required. Instead of the current ship selection screen, we'd be prompted to select a craft from our hangar before launching. The current ship selection screen would then be used only to purchase more ships.

It might also help with revenues to have a hangar that can initially accommodate only a certain quantity of ships, but allow it to be upgraded for an He-3 cost. If the player wishes to buy more ships after accumulating a certain number of them, they'd either have to delete one of their existing craft or pony up to expand their hangar. Milk this one as much as you can. Have tiered hangar upgrades only available by He-3 that increase storage space by 3 or so with each purchase. A starting size of 9 would be generous, but even 6 wouldn't be unreasonable.
 
Also, if such a system where we could purchase more than one of a certain ship model were implemented, a helpful feature would be the ability to give names to individual ships. That would help with distinguishing between those of a similar model along with adding a bit of personal touch to it. Charge a very minor He-3 fee for the ability to re-name a ship after the initial (free) naming at purchase time.
You will be able to reallocate upgrade points at will.
(At least I think that's what johnson is saying)
+2
I addressed that in the first paragraph.
In a system where generic upgrades are purchased that can be changed at any time, eventually there will be nothing left to spend cred on, just like the current situation that many of the veteran pilots find themselves in.
To clarify, when I said:
Creating and exploring all the different builds of a ship would still be possible, but with greater cred requirements and thus a need for more gameplay.
I meant that the system I had proposed would be a better cred sink.

I think the best point though, was that It would also afford them another source of revenue from He-3 purchases.
-1
Ah now I tilt my head a bit and read it in a different light, I see what you mean, a cred sink so that players who have maxed out can keep spending to get extra loadouts.

What about current players that already have more ships than the proposed hanger system can accommodate? Can we not be grandfathered in? I currently have 9 ships. And if it were initially set at a level such as 6, what would happen to the others? 
+1
Hanger system?  I don't intend to have a ship limit, only a limit on the upgrades per ships.  --wj
Perfect, but may I ask if you will be able to have more than one of the same kind of ship? For example, A G5 for CTF, and a G5 upgraded differently for Turret Busting?

The reason I ask, because if you allow for only 20 of the current 40 options, then the power levels of the current ships will never be matched. An option to buy 10 more upgrades for HE3 slots would help ;) 
Yes extra loadouts for a ship, thats a good idea for a cred/He3 sink.
Good question, I wondered about that, too. Will there be 20 upgrades over all and I can attach, let's say, 10 of them depending on game type, or will there be more than 20, and I will only be able to buy 20? I would prefer first, so I can change upgrades depending on game mode, because I use the same ship often in a very different way. Also, this will prevent "wrong" upgrading
From what I gather you upgrade your ship 20 times, each upgrade gives you a point which you can allocate to different stats and then reallocate at will.
Valid point.
Mine was just a suggestion, it's not what's actually being implemented.

As for your current 9 ships, WJ has stated that all cred purchases would be refunded at the time of rebalancing, so your concerns don't really apply. In either case you would lose all 9 of your ships and would have to repurchase them. No grandfathering in of existing shipholders would be necessary.
I was responding to the Hangar Idea.But WJ's response makes this a Mute point. Please downvote as required ;)
No need to downvote. Still a valid point.
My point was that you wouldn't need to grandfather in currently owned ships with a hangar system as you'd lose them anyway. If you have 9 ships now and the hangar could only hold 6, what would happen to the rest? The same thing that happened to the first 6, they'd all be refunded.

The whole thing is moot of course, judging by WJ's response, but it's still fun to dream up suggestions for the game. :v
Thanks WJ. All Cleared up :D

+2
What about an option to quickly switch between user-defined sets of upgrade configurations? As I understand it, a fully upgraded ship will have 20 generic upgrade slots that may be changed at will. Different upgrade paths would be useful depending on the game scenario and switching them around manually before each match would become tedious fairly quickly.

Some system where we could save certain upgrade configurations for immediate use at a later time would be nice.
+2
I am also interested in your second point.  
All Looks promising and looking forward to the changes. My only concern is related to people who bought the DLC bundles to get free ships. Are we going to keep those or are we going to get refunded credits for those ships? Or are we going to keep them  but just have them but with no upgrades?
As a newer player, After Steam Release, I must disagree with #5. As a casual player I was able to fully upgrade my Mamba and my Rhino and earn enough credit to purchase and fully upgrade my Hammerhead. All with no boost. I have since purchased some He3 because I felt I should support the game. For a very small and fair amount of money I was able to purchase boost and have gained enough cred in 2 days to purchase and fully upgrade an FH-200 and probably 1/2 way to a Merlin. Really. The ship prices look high, but they are not. There are only 3 ships that I fear in my  Mamba and that is only if they are in the hands of the right people.
I do see however while typing this that the ship upgrade price increases will probably account for this as long as it doesn't get so cheap that everyone can upgrade too easily. They need to work for something.
As always, I'm sure I'll keep playing and having fun.
+3
Thanks for your feedback on the matter.  However, the game has been panned for the economic model, and while I agree that the prices are fine if you understood the system.  However, lots of ppl make judgements about the game based on first impressions, and the high prices don't help.  However, more importantly, I want to make the ships more balanced so that there is more variety in gameplay. --wj
+1
I'm glad your making a effort to balance the ships. Can't tell you how thankful I am for that.
Most ships are pretty close at this point.
+1

the high cost of ships is in effective money. the way it takes to "buy" those by playing and earning credits is different , that way i think could even be longer , but if one have to pay with real money to get that faster is insane to make pay the cost as still is , and i think there will be never many that will do this , if the cost not decrease to a max of 30 to 40 for all ships unlock at least.

+1

As a relative new comer to the game I have no pre steam experience.  I have to say I appreciate the game play and the efforts of William Johnson in the  creation of moonbreakers.  


I look forward to the updates and what they bring. 


My only comments really are about cost of ships.


Although I would like to have every ship there is I think each one has its own characteristics and abilities that should be learned how to best use them.  Making the ships cheaper  with the new ability to make make them preform like prestige ship  is awesome. I get to permanently get all the ships quicker. Instead of the taster you give like the free week use. (I should note I could probably have all the ships if I do not work on upgrading the recent ship I purchased..) For me I am used to the long haul of getting something in a game rather than rapidly acquiring it.  


And


Collapsing the under used regions is for me a shame as I use them to practice with new ships in relative peace.   Would it be possible as some point in the future to have a stand alone practice instance that you can use to get used to a new ship? On the menu where you choose from Hanger/Options/Region/Language. Have a practice zone with some simple stationary targets in an asteroid field randomly generated?   Not connected to game but just opens a random map with some randomly place boxes for targets to shoot. So when you purchase a new ship you can take it out for a spin to see how it handles before fighting?  The only reason I ask is because on the Unofficial Forums for the game  it is recommended that you do this to get the feel of your ships performance.. And finding a feel for your ship under battle conditions is not ideal.. 


Regards

James

+1
I'm not one for practicing outside of a actual match but I still agree, there really does need to be some training stuff.

how will be working the balance sistem befor enter the game , is there a plan about this ?

.

p.s. this will be around my last post , in wait of real changes.

regards.

Would you like to try rewording that comment, I'm having a hard time understanding it.
Are you talking about ship balancing or the upgrade system?
+1

i was talking about how the game put the players in the teams.

Ahh yeah. I hope he works on that.

I honestly think it could be largely fixed by not assigning teams until the round starts.


Right now what I see happen a lot is that it looks like the teams are roughly balanced to start with, then someone leaves. Now the teams are no longer balanced, which causes even more people to leave the disadvantaged team.


Another possibility would be to have a "scramble teams" vote, much like the vote to veto map and/or game type.

+1

the game should check balance one second before launching and decide if it has enough to go in-game.  If it doesn't it should re-balance and then start a 15 second countdown to give everyone time to figure out who got moved and who's where.  

+1
I agree. Wj will hopefully keep that in mind as he overhauls the team system. That update must be coming pretty soon.

Hey WJ, is it a matter of days, weeks or months untill the matchmaking and clans is in?
+4

Inside of 2 weeks at most.  I have the back-end ready, but I don't have the UI ready.  There was no UI system in place (everything was hard coded in C++), so I have had to create one from scratch.  The old UI caused me intense pain... so I am re-doing all of it so it actually looks good. --wj

Thanks for the update :)

Sounds great!   Thanks WJ!

So you had some trouble and couldn't reach that deadline? can we get a new ETA or is it too hard to tell now.

 

Is this just for those things, or is this also the Mac Steam version as well?

i not understood what you are proposing. but sure quitting during game can change much also cause the new join as the droppers would still be in game , and they aren't.

also need a longer (much longer) time befor respawn of flag after a game crash , also cause sometimes not possible to log in back fast.

beside i hope the crashing will end soon , it ruin to often , and i'm bit tyred of play this way , sometimes i even think someone can cause them by pourpose (.
many parts need more fairyness for good gameplay and fun. i keep see unbabalanced situation , that should not be , in teory. i meen something that go not as intended.

+1

What I meant was that it should see if the teams are balanced just prior to launching the match.  As it is now it tries to balance as people join but once it gets a decent grouping I've seen half a team leave.  The game starts with one side vastly outnumbered.  Usually it evens up quickly as people join, just suggesting maybe a last check right before it launches the match that would stop the launch and wait another few seconds and rebalance.  


Probably more complicated than it needs to be anyway.  haha

Hey this sounds good for me, it will help me heaps

Can you please explain something I am not clear on.. I thought ships where equal in respects to preformance. I.E a fully up graded G5 is equal to another G5 but since reading this post I wonder if this is another game where its Pay to Win and those people who have bought ships with H3 or real money get a prestige ship which out preforms its credit counter part?   I still still been caught up and out turned  in a like for like ship with some player. And since I all my ships i own are fully upgraded I often wonder how it is possible.  Either that or sped hacks are involved,  Another example is I was flying an F-3X supposedly the fastest ship in the game yet I was caught up by a FH-90 after boosting out of range of its first missile attack. I out ran the missile in a straight line checked his distance and he was only 1300 away from me.  Imagine my surprise at that!!! Not only was he firing missiles (FH-90 has one of the fasted reload  lock-on missile launches in the game) as I have both fully upgraded and know the speeds they fly at and boost. Is this an example of a prestige ship???  A money ship out-preforming a credit bought ship?   Needless to say I died because the F-3X although fast is also the weakest ship in the game with only 392 shields. And can not out run close range missiles.  Even mis timing a turn under normal flight speed and touching a asteroid results in death.. 


Could you clarify what is a prestige ship please..  Is this a pay to win game? 




+3
The same ships are unlocked with cred as He-3.  There is no difference between the ships received.  However, ships power was designed to vary slightly with the ship cost (Cred or He-3 doesn't matter), so the highest cost ships have slightly better stats than the less expensive ships.  The 'prestige ships' is the term Ed used for the Viper, Merlin, Swordfish, and Panther.  

Both ships in your example are just normal ships, and have been targeted for buffs lately, since I thought they were under-powered.  LR missiles are very effective against sidewinders (if they can get a lock).  I suggest using asteroids to dodge missiles and remember you can shoot down missiles with machine guns or rocket explosions.  Also the F-3X is probably one of the most difficult ships to use in the game.  I don't recommend it for newer pilots.  If you want speed, try the G5.

But to your question, I don't think this game is Pay to Win.  Everything can be bought with cred and the differences between ships are largely dwarfed by skill.  I spent most of my time playing in a Mamba with no difficulties.  The rest of the time I fly whatever ships is considered underpowered at the time.  For instance, the Stingray has been considered worthless for sometime, so I have been flying it a lot lately.  If you play in US West I might have shot you down.  

But I don't like any power differences between ships, not because I think it breaks the game, but because it reduces the variety of ships in play, since players will eventually get whichever ship has the best stats.  I also don't like expensive ships, so I want to make all ships cost a small / uniform amount.  --wj
+3
+1 to that last paragraph.
Hi James,
As WJ says, there is no difference between buying a ship through He3 or credits, but there is a big difference in performance depending on who is flying the ship.  Some of us have been around for quite a while and have figured out some techniques that are not particularly obvious at first.

Here's a few tips on getting the most out of the performance of your ships, regardless of type.

Drift turning (strafing) is an effective technique for faster turning.  Turn left or right instead of up or down and push your mouse to the edge of the screen.  While turning left, hold down the right roll key (default D), and while turning right, hold down the left roll key (A).  You should see your ship turn sideways on your screen.  You will still be moving in the direction of your missile lock circle, so be careful of asteroids or other ships.

Afterburner Tapping can extend your afterburner for long periods.  Instead of holding down the button to boost, try tapping it a couple times per second.  Keep an eye on your speedometer and try to keep your speed in the red zone.  You'll find that some ships can boost indefinitely if you get the timing right, particularly the Sidewinder, Kingfisher, Timberwolf, and Mamba.

Some ships are better at both turning and boosting, but the above tips apply to all ships, even bombers.

For more tips and advice, check out our player forum under the gameplay section.
-1
Alternatively if you feel that anti rolling and turning is unnatural like I do then don't play the game maximized, instead resize your window to a square, this will allow you to turn at the side-turn speed upwards or downwards and you won't have to worry about the anti roll at all.


I really hope WJ fixes the turn circles before he forces fullscreen otherwise I'll be in the shit.
Having been playing with a square window for about a month now, it is still more efficient to turn sideways than up/down. Always. The best advantage to it seems to be additional vertical FOV which at times has been quite useful.

The reason for this is that turning angles on the ship per control are not all orthogonal (I'm looking at you, Mouse X axis) - some rotations can be added or subtracted with others for slower turns, faster turns and everything in between.

WJ, 

Have you changed it so Chrome can't play with Steam yet?  For some reason I still cannot get the Steam version to work for me... It's supper choppy, laggy, etc... Whereas on Chrome it works fine.  My work computer (an archaic device) works fine on Steam.  

Any thoughts people?

Hey guys, I am getting a bit concerned.  I haven't heard about any new enhancements, or were the progress is on the major overhaul is or anything.  Is that still on track?  How close are you guys to releasing the Mac version of this on Steam?

hey corrupt, long time no see.  (you should swing by the new site every once in a while)


Also there has been no movement at all from on high for moon breakers in I don't know how long.  No content, no active communication, no patches.


Apparently the trial ships haven't even been rotating.

Yeah, I have noticed the same thing as well.  No new trial ships or anything.  This is very disconcerting.

+1

This thing is going south isn't it... Bummer. Such a cool game. 

+1
It's practical Antarctic.

 

Oh, and I have the site open all the time, I just lurk.  ;-)

+4

"Things that will probably happen that you will want to complain about" is quite apt!

One thing WJ didn't put on his list was no one will be keeping in contact LOL, LOL!

Has anyone been in contact with these guys? in other words, does anyone have their PM address or email address?  Anyone have any additional information?

Spammers using the site and no one to stop them !!!