Vice
|
![[*]](./images/iconic/default_icon.gif) posted on 1-13-2008 at 03:38 AM |
|
|
Info on the next update (1.288)...
One of the new requested features for the next update will be AI controlled ships in multiplayer occasionally carrying cargo. There have been
concerns about this in the past (due to potential exploits), so I'll list some of the conditions and details about this new feature below.
- Small ships will generally carry one cargo bay of an item (can range from perhaps 10 units up to 25). Having this limit will help keep PvE team
attack wealth benefits fairly moderate and allow mining to be fairly cost competitive. But if you're willing to spend some time attacking several AI
ships, it can pay off nicely.
- Like contracts, only players within a certain range will receive the dropped cargo link.
- As in single player, if a human player flies beyond a certain distance (about 5000 meters), the cargo will be considered 'abandoned' and will be
given to the AI system. Players who remain in range of the cargo will still be allowed to recover it.
- For additional incentive against capital ships, capital ships may carry more than 5 bays worth of retrievable cargo (they also have large secondary
cargo 'warehouses' used for transporting items in bulk, but these are not armored and any cargo they contain is generally lost in the explosion).
This can provide 2 or more human players with full cargo bays each. Just keep tractoring material in until it's either gone or you can carry any
more.
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 05:48 AM |
|
|
This is an awesome add on, as it gives those who play the game in multiplayer (And who are playing over LAN with only 2-4 people ala co-op type play)
a reason to kill the hoards of AI ships that attack in the less-than-friendly systems (Outside of the obvious, kill or be killed motivator). Now,
hunting the AI can pay some dividends and possibly begin to modestly offset the costs incurred (in the form of missiles, chaff, and possible ship
repairs) when defending ones self against them.
While I can understand the reasons for wanting to maintain a sense of playbalance for those who enroll in the game with large numbers of humans
against other human clans, I personally don't play the game that way, preferring instead to group up with 1 to four other pilots against the AI (And
the 'plot' of the game- the quest for the beacons) in more of a Co-Op fashion. And as players of network games know, there's not enough co-op type
games out there; people clamor for them.
Which of course makes me long for the game to have more or less a split Multiplayer path; one for those who wish to play PVP type games, in which the
Multiplayer as it currently exists would remain in tact, and another in which Multiplayer behaves like single player in all respects, thus creating
more of a co-op experience. This could be limited such that the stand alone, dedicated servers could only serve up the PVP version of the game. while
Co-op would be reserved for LAN play on "Listen" servers, where bandwidth is more plentiful.
This is a great step in the co-op play direction, and I for one greatly appreciate it and all you've done for all of us who enjoy your games, and
respect you as a developer. Kudos!
|
|
|
tha_rami
Captain
Posts: 5424
Registered: 1-25-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 07:09 AM |
|
|
Indeed, perfect addition. The above said it all  .
|
|
|
verbosity
Super Moderator
Posts: 3727
Registered: 9-7-2006
Location: Deep Space 9
Member Is Offline
Mood: now a productive member of society :s
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 07:40 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Melt-o-Grist
one for those who wish to play PVP type games, in which the Multiplayer as it currently exists would remain in tact, and another in which Multiplayer
behaves like single player in all respects, thus creating more of a co-op experience. |
MP is already Very much like SP, we don't alway spend our time in combat, Some of the pilots who appear on my server use it as if it in that respect
(Tucker :2611 minutes online and only 6 PvP combats), Even me and Vice who often fight each other sometimes engage in contracts, exploration races and
more. The game is freeform in both aspects, I don't see a need for MP to be 'split' depending on how you want to play it.....
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 03:47 PM |
|
|
You can PvP in a safe system also, where there is no hostile AI interference, if that's something players want to do.
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 09:47 PM |
|
|
Yes... I understand you can play MP, PVP in a 'safe' system. However, that leaves you in only one system essentially out of an enormous universe;
and removes the concept of 'Co-Op' play that I was referring to.
My point was that true Co-Op play did not exist in mutiplayer. There is no ability to influence clans in unfriendly territory like SP allows for
(therefore, you will ALWAYS be attacked in MP and cannot influence it) Up till the announcement in this thread, no drops from AI ships like single
player. No ability to hire a wingman for your ship as in Single Player. (Though a bug (feature?) in the current release does continue to pay salaries
to your single player wingman even when playing in Multiplayer).
In short, MP is an excellent feature and I'm glad it's incorporated into the game. And I LOVE this new addition to the universe with drops from AI,
since it moves the game closer to a Co-Op experience. But since even the addition of this feature is scaled back some from the SP version of the drops
due to playbalance requirements that wouldn't ostensibly exist in a Co-Op game (since it would not matter if other members of your own co-op group
found a few more drops from the AI or not) it seemed logical to think about having a Co-Op version of the game separate from the existing MP version,
to more fully incorporate the SP feature set, which plays awesome! I just wish I could bring 1-4 of my friends into that SP universe with all it's
awesome trimmings.
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
| Quote: | | Yes... I understand you can play MP, PVP in a 'safe' system. However, that leaves you in only one system essentially out of
an enormous universe; and removes the concept of 'Co-Op' play that I was referring to. |
You can't really be in more than one system at the same time anyway, so yeah, you'd need to be in one of the friendly systems at a time. But
there are dozens/hundreds of those to choose from... or thousands upon thousands if you want to just pick a friendly sector to meet in.
Yes, the other elements are not part of multiplayer, partly for fair gameplay, partly for unified gameplay, partly because of data exchange
limitations required for multiplayer to be possible. But those are not the only coop aspect to gameplay by ANY stretch of
the imagination. They would only amount to a mere subset of cooperative multiplayer, largely focused on individual player actions anyway (reputation
shifting, cargo recovery, fleet control... all of which are individual player actions and effects). Cooperative gameplay focuses far more on actual
cooperative objectives, including, but certainly not limited to, contracts, exploration, transport, trade, racing (yes, you can probably figure out
how , mining, or even player designed cooperative scenarios (of which you
can established numerous possible situations, especially if role play is thrown into the mix). If you're going to claim coop isn't possible because
you can't throw a bribe around to an NPC or bark orders to an NPC fleet then I think you're limiting yourself far too much.
[Edited on 1-17-2008 by Vice]
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 11:23 PM |
|
|
Vice I agree with you about exploring the game and not limiting it in terms of imagination, which we are not doing. And yes, we are meeting in
friendly sectors/systems. And yes, we can get cooperative contracts and carry them out. (which is excellent). However, for most of the 'Gameplay
fairness' reasons you outlined, some of the features of SP that we love (AI to Human trades for example) can't be done. With only 2-4 of us
playing, there's nothing really to be traded in the spirit of cooperative play between your friends, since ostensibly you'd all be working for the
same goal anyway; to move through the games quest (Beacons) and therefore, many of its systems. When other game types play as Co-op, there are no
aspects removed for MP in the name of 'balance' ; enemies are added or increased in strength perhaps, but playing a co-op game such as Diablo II or
Titan Quest (Examples of earthbound exploration/discovery/equpping/quest type games) leaves you with the same items, capabilities, quests, and AI
interaction that the single player version of the game provides.
I'm not saying there isn't tons of stuff to do in MP here, because there is, but there is a spark in the SP version of the game that, if added as a
cooperative MP element rather than balanced out, would give a co-op version of MP an unprecedented depth. Even lifting and shifting the SP version of
the game to MP Co-Op would achieve this, but increasing enemy skill with added players would scale it appropriately for human vs AI interactions.
All in all, the addition you are putting in with the upcoming release will, I feel, add much of that missing element for me, so I'm not here to
complain in any way... I LOVE it!
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-17-2008 at 11:54 PM |
|
|
Except what you've been pointing out doesn't really have much to do with cooperative multiplayer gameplay. Let me explain further. I'm glad you
bring up other game types, because I think it's a big part of this discussion. Perhaps there are just some simple genre gameplay differences
involved creating an apparent disparity between cooperative gameplay in one game type versus another. The reason you may not find such differences in
other games, like the ones you mentioned, can be attributed to a lack of real-time, consistent player control, which, unlike those games, is a
mandatory part of ER's gameplay and design. I explained this further here: http://www.starwraith.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=2802&page=1#pid32132 (in the fourth paragraph starting with 'Bandwidth').
And balance is a critical design element in a game like ER, especially when so many players are concerned with cheating and fair gameplay and
especially when it is related to cooperative gameplay.
The whole idea of cooperative gameplay is to involve human players in the game together for a common cause, right? If you're sending
orders to AI controlled ships, then your participating as one human leading a bunch of computers. That's not coop and that's what I mean when I say
it would merely be a subset, because in reality, it's far less coop and far more individual player gameplay (something that rightly belongs in a
single player game or in a game that focuses on pointing and clicking to make decisions rather than directly controlling something). Instead, true
multiplayer cooperative gameplay would involve replacing those computer controlled ships with human controlled ships, so you'd then be issuing orders
to people rather than computers and together, you work toward a common goal... a cooperative goal. The fleet system is still available to you in
multiplayer, it just involves linking with human players rather than computer controlled ships. Have people join your fleet, not computers, then
you're utilizing cooperative gameplay in the true sense of the concept.
Otherwise, you reduce the gameplay down to one human player ordering his ships to go attack another human (or AI) player's fleet, which results in
converting the game into a space RTS rather than a true player-controlled cooperative multiplayer space-sim. If someone wanted to watch a bunch of
computer controlled ships fight each other after they merely issue commands, something like EVE or Home World might be a better choice.
In the end, the feedback I get still strongly favors putting people into the roles of the game in multiplayer that computers fill in single
player. In other words, if you want to hire computer controlled ships for your 'clan'/'fleet', stick to single player. If you want to hire
people controlled ships for your 'clan'/'fleet', then multiplayer is the way to do that.
That being said, I don't think there is much harm in adding the ability to bribe hostiles into friendlies, as long as you're willing to accept the
unified server controlled temporary reputation conditions (it would not effect your SP reputation at all). If anyone objects to this, please post
here now, otherwise I will begin looking into adding this option.
[Edited on 1-18-2008 by Vice]
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 04:20 AM |
|
|
I see the distinctions you are calling out, and I agree in large part with what you are saying regarding Co-Op game play.
My references and examples may not translate 1:1 with the situation we have here in Renegades, though it's close. And I also agree, makes for great
discussion.
In any case of any Multiplayer Co-Op game I can think of, (And I tend to purchase primarily this type of game) it was Humans vs. AI. Or in the case
of something like Dungeon Siege, (or even Titan Quest) it was humans, plus summoned characters (read: Computer Controlled Wingmen) ganging up on the
AI. (Not 'controlled per se by their Human casters, but fighting of their own accord) But in all cases, it was effectively moving through the single
player story, with all single player capabilities in tact, while allowing you and your friends to fight side by side with you. The only change being
that the things you'd have to kill would either be more numerous, or more difficult to take down.
| Quote: | In the end, the feedback I get still strongly favors putting people into the roles of the game in multiplayer that computers
fill in single player.
|
Following through on this concept to its logical conclusion; replacing the roles of the computers (AI Ships) with humans ultimately gives you nothing
to co-operate against.
Yes, the Fleet system is available in MP, and perhaps I am unclear as to how the 'linking' aspect works, or makes it different from not linking. Do
all the Human characters on my LAN need to have the same Callsign for them to link? I would think that this wouldn't alter the fact that the AI, in
unfriendly territory, will attack any human character regardless of their clan affiliation, with equal zeal, making the 'linking' be more of a RP
type linking than a literal one.
Now of course, with the proposed add on in the upcoming build of cargo drops, there is a nice incentive for killing the AI that attacks you and your
mates, and I'm looking forward to that!
Your game does not resemble an RTS at all (aka, Homeworld), nor a MMORPG (such as EVE), or really any of the other genre's; it is unique, it is
enormous, it is engrossing. And I'm glad I own a copy.
What you suggested regarding SP reputation capabilities in MP would even further extend it into that Co-Op experience that I am trying to describe.
And I for one totally support the idea of altering the reputations in MP, as well as the idea of AI dropping cargo; I believe both are excellent
additions to the game.
More than that, I appreciate your willingness to listen, and the excellent way in which you work with your community on these issues. A Sincere Thank
you!
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 04:51 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | | And I also agree, makes for great discussion. |
Yup, quite a detailed discussion on game theory
| Quote: | | But in all cases, it was effectively moving through the single player story, with all single player capabilities in tact, while
allowing you and your friends to fight side by side with you. The only change being that the things you'd have to kill would either be more numerous,
or more difficult to take down. |
Precisely and that's exactly what this game provides (in fact, players can toggle between the quest and doing other things at any time). In those
game you mention, could you hire a bunch of AI controlled characters to join your 'fleet' or was it simply as you say, humans joining together to
proceed through the story against the AI characters?
| Quote: | | Following through on this concept to its logical conclusion; replacing the roles of the computers (AI Ships) with humans
ultimately gives you nothing to co-operate against. |
Well, now I'm a little confused. Why would you want to 'coop' against your own fleet? This game has both human-vs-AI options as well as
human-vs-human options. The only difference is that the fleet system is designed to accomodate humans linking together in multiplayer rather than one
human with a bunch of AI ships.
| Quote: | | Yes, the Fleet system is available in MP, and perhaps I am unclear as to how the 'linking' aspect works, or makes it
different from not linking. Do all the Human characters on my LAN need to have the same Callsign for them to link? I would think that this wouldn't
alter the fact that the AI, in unfriendly territory, will attack any human character regardless of their clan affiliation, with equal zeal, making the
'linking' be more of a RP type linking than a literal one. |
Players need to share a common clan ID tag to be linked together as a 'fleet'. Letters placed in brackets will form the links. They are then
treated more as a 'fleet' by the games reputation/threat systems. I guess you could say the fleet system is geared toward role playing, although
there are specific structural differences in gameplay for linked players as well as players with opposing clan/fleet ID's.
| Quote: | | What you suggested regarding SP reputation capabilities in MP would even further extend it into that Co-Op experience that I am
trying to describe. And I for one totally support the idea of altering the reputations in MP, as well as the idea of AI dropping cargo; I believe both
are excellent additions to the game. |
It's mostly there, you can cause friendly ships to become hostile by attacking, I think it will be good to have the same bribing option for the
reputations to shift in the other direction.
| Quote: | | More than that, I appreciate your willingness to listen, and the excellent way in which you work with your community on these
issues. A Sincere Thank you! |
Thanks for your support and participation. Discussions like this are good to help reaffirm existing design elements and/or consider new ones.
[Edited on 1-18-2008 by Vice]
|
|
|
verbosity
Super Moderator
Posts: 3727
Registered: 9-7-2006
Location: Deep Space 9
Member Is Offline
Mood: now a productive member of society :s
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 08:01 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Vice
as long as you're willing to accept the unified server controlled temporary reputation conditions (it would not effect your SP reputation at all).
If anyone objects to this, please post here now, otherwise I will begin looking into adding this option. |
Not objecting just querying unified server controlled temporary reputation conditions ????
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 08:08 AM |
|
|
Human players share a common reputation system controlled by the server. Those reputations are temporary while the player is online connected to the
server to unify settings between connected clients, they return to their earned single player reputations when they return to single player.
|
|
|
verbosity
Super Moderator
Posts: 3727
Registered: 9-7-2006
Location: Deep Space 9
Member Is Offline
Mood: now a productive member of society :s
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 08:17 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Vice
Human players share a common reputation system controlled by the server. Those reputations are temporary while the player is online connected to the
server to unify settings between connected clients, they return to their earned single player reputations when they return to single player.
|
rather than static reputations? thats cool I've got sick of wiping out sapphire and it still being friendly to me, even if it will reset after I
leave the game. Will this mean that it will now be possible to do combat missions in sapphire ( after the right actions), or that a friendly system
will suddenly turn 'red' once you attack a capital ship ?
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-18-2008 at 04:57 PM |
|
|
If you stick around in Sapphire, attack some ships, and remain there until the contract pool updates, you can get some combat contract there while in
multiplayer. Individual ship reputation shifting works like it does in single player.
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-19-2008 at 05:42 AM |
|
|
| Quote: |
Precisely and that's exactly what this game provides (in fact, players can toggle between the quest and doing other things at any time). In those
games you mention, could you hire a bunch of AI controlled characters to join your 'fleet' or was it simply as you say, humans joining together to
proceed through the story against the AI characters? |
It was effectively 'hired' AI characters (Summoned characters that fought with you, though were AI controlled)... The 'cost' to 'hire' them was
spell points, and they would stick around with you until they were killed by enemy fire.
The equivalent in ER would be to be able to hire a single wingman per human player in MP (possibly per system, or, you get one, you pick which system
you want them to fly for you in, making the decision more strategic)
Any idea when the 1.288 release will be... well... released?
|
|
|
Vice
|
| posted on 1-19-2008 at 06:35 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | | The equivalent in ER would be to be able to hire a single wingman per human player in MP (possibly per system, or, you get one,
you pick which system you want them to fly for you in, making the decision more strategic) |
The bandwidth needs for Arvoch are light enough to accomodate up to 4 AI controlled ships per human player in a battle. But ER can't really manage
all of the AI ships, plus human ships, plus environment data, plus more AI fleet ships all at the same time. Plus, the fleet system is shifted to
accomodate human players in multiplayer (clan linking that I mentioned earlier). Click-n-wait games can often include player controlled 'groups'
since their need for rapid packet exchange is generally pretty light.
| Quote: | | Any idea when the 1.288 release will be... well... released? |
It's available now for 'preview', just grab it from the game's website.
[Edited on 1-19-2008 by Vice]
|
|
|
tha_rami
Captain
Posts: 5424
Registered: 1-25-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-19-2008 at 09:28 AM |
|
|
I think we should just implement a pet system, where you can summon a turtle or rooster to run along with you.
What dya mean, wrong forum?
|
|
|
verbosity
Super Moderator
Posts: 3727
Registered: 9-7-2006
Location: Deep Space 9
Member Is Offline
Mood: now a productive member of society :s
|
| posted on 1-19-2008 at 09:39 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by tha_rami
What dya mean, wrong forum? |
As punishment for your sillyness I cast 'Avatar of Southpark(LvL225)
|
|
|
Melt-o-Grist
Ensign
Posts: 10
Registered: 1-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
| posted on 1-19-2008 at 08:18 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
I think we should just implement a pet system, where you can summon a turtle or rooster to run along with you. |
Yes... I think a giant space rooster, or perhaps, giant badger, would be perfect. Then we could all simply leap out of it and attack the unsuspecting AI.
Thank you... I'll grab the preview of the release!! (sans badger)
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Member List
Today's Posts
Stats
Board Rules
