New Frames & Inventory Console Features

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:57 am

From post: 120830, Topic: tid=7616, author=Rubber Chicken wrote:
From post: 120823, Topic: tid=7616, author=Maarschalk wrote: The only time you can browse or search for anything is when you have the game running in one of the Windows Mode and you acces windows Desktop while you are in the game and the game freezes while you check your desktop or search for anything else on your computer!........

Bummer I suppose... I just wanted to find Map Log entries faster instead of scrolling and hunting through the entire list. I don't want to search the Internet whilst taking the scenic route.

Actually it does not freeze, it only freezes if you are in exit mode!

See my edited post. So you could take the scenic route and browse the internet but can be dangerous if you run into objects or hidden dangers....

:P

Post by **Marvin** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:20 pm

One way around it would be to have a full set of maplog.sw files put aside for each pilot profile ... divided into star systems or whatever. Then install only the one you plan to use ... the one with the log entries you'll be using at the time.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:15 am

I did that for the last man standing Astroid Cave competition, made a Maplog entry file just for the competition, It just had the gates to jump through from Atlas to Saphire and the jump points to get into the Cave and some cave navigation points so I did not get lost in the Cave or crevices!....

:P

Star King · Post by **Star King** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:46 pm

I agree in Legends that Excalibers regenerated too fast but in Mercenary the regeneration time is way to slow. This needs to be retweaked just by 50 seconds.

Rubber Chicken · Post by **Rubber Chicken** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:57 am

I agree. A 3 minute reload time is a bit much. Most engagements (SP) I've encountered don't even last that long.

Just gonna put this Idea out there. - Make the Excal a pack that regenerates 2 missiles every 30-40 seconds after firing the first salvo. The weapon would remain rapid fire and you could choose to wait for 2,4,6 or 8 missile salvos.

Probly not gonna happen I know, But I still think it's cool.

;)

Post by **DaveK** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:18 am

From post: 120921, Topic: tid=7616, author=Rubber Chicken wrote:I agree. A 3 minute reload time is a bit much. Most engagements (SP) I've encountered don't even last that long.

Just gonna put this Idea out there. - Make the Excal a pack that regenerates 2 missiles every 30-40 seconds after firing the first salvo. The weapon would remain rapid fire and you could choose to wait for 2,4,6 or 8 missile salvos.

Probly not gonna happen I know, But I still think it's cool. ;)

Rubber Chicken - I love you!!

:P:P:P

My (unpopular it seems) biggest wish is to have the ability to fire Excals as 2's, 4's or an 8!

The change from "too quick" to the "3 min rule" happened just as I'd saved up enough to buy one so I never experienced the pleasure of a "never-run-out" missile system

, but it is veeerrrry slow - doing combat missions in TC leads to still not having a missile pack during the next mission or sitting around in the station!

non-Excal users can just reload their missiles when they dock by paying money. Could the repair ship option also recharge the Excal pack for a payment?

Could we have a recharge booster available (on the lines of cannon and shield enhancers) to speed recharge up - C1 @160s, C2 @140s, C3@120s?

Pilots would have to pay for the priviledge and balance the loss of another piece of equipment for a missile system that could be used more than once in every two fights!

:D

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:33 pm

I kind of have mixed feelings about the whole excalibur thing, I barely use it anymore now that I know and have experienced for 3 yrs its limitations of speed and reload time! Sacrifice speed for yield? Yes. Sacrifice regenerative time for unlimited missiles? Yes. But the question is how much time to sacrifice. In some instances I would say 3 minutes is OK in other I would say 1 minute is to long/short. So DaveK suggestion of a Regenerative time Booster for the Excalibur is an excelent Idea or have different classes of Excaliburs with faster regenerative time....

:P

[Edited on 12-11-2011 by Maarschalk]

Post by **Marvin** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:16 pm

I dropped using the Excals for awhile, opting for the "dock and reload" kind ... until the trade station ran out ... and refused to re-stock for a very long time.

sundalo · Post by **sundalo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:16 am

Instead of excal missiles how about more missile slots beyond the max 8? Doesn't hurt to have more missiles in combat.

[Edited on 12-12-2011 by sundalo]

Dingo · Post by **Dingo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:38 pm

Regarding the xcal debate, I will say that I like them as they now are. They are effective on 5 wp contracts, and for pilots pursuing non-combat activities that may need to ditch a red or two while say, constructing a station.

For more "real" combat, PvP or warzone, I like that a player needs to strategize missiles. Xcals are a bit thoughtless. But as a caviat to that I'm also one of those that doesn't like that shield rechargers and auto-cm's are in the game, so chalk me up as more of a traditional flight-sim purist.

Rubber Chicken · Post by **Rubber Chicken** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:59 pm

How about a single-fire or rapid-fire option? Excal won't begin reloading until you use all 8.

Dingo · Post by **Dingo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:03 pm

From post: 120970, Topic: tid=7616, author=Rubber Chicken wrote:How about a single-fire or rapid-fire option? Excal won't begin reloading until you use all 8.

That has promise. I like it.

Post by **Marvin** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:23 pm

From post: 120966, Topic: tid=7616, author=Dingo wrote:I'm also one of those that doesn't like that ... auto-cm's are in the game ....

Must be two Dingos around here. The one I flew with in AA complained about how, in early missions, the thing wasn't available.

Dingo · Post by **Dingo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:02 pm

From post: 120978, Topic: tid=7616, author=Marvin wrote:
From post: 120966, Topic: tid=7616, author=Dingo wrote:I'm also one of those that doesn't like that ... auto-cm's are in the game ....
Must be two Dingos around here. The one I flew with in AA complained about how, in early missions, the thing wasn't available.

that sums it up nicely!

AnFiach · Post by **AnFiach** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:42 pm

Hi guys. It is my opinion that people are approaching the cap ship issue from the wrong perspective. It needn't be a super ship and in fact, cap ships have fighter escorts because they are vulnerable to attack by smaller ships.

A better approach would be to: a)Look at it as an extension of the military career; b)Add them as wealthy merchant/miner class ships; c)All of the above.

Capital ships can be new and exciting if we simply include them as a new style of play. The player' job is to command the escorts and to deal with the various ship's systems and inventories.

Imagine having to choose which systems the engineer should focus on repairing, needing those navigators and science ops officers for making jumps and avoiding ships/obstacles in space.

Imagine how helpless you'll feel relying on your escorts to defend you against enemy fighters.

Cap ships can be a new and exciting addition to game play without being a super death ship that other players need to e concerned with. Design it to be a force multiplier and not a stand alone fortress.

I don't know if any of you have ever played Darkspace but their approach to larger ships is something along those lines (though not vulnerable enough imho). They are powerful, but easily picked apart by smaller ships and several mostly offer things like repairs, sensor range and drone fighters to support the smaller combat ships. They can be further balanced with ammunition limitations. We just wouldn't want them to have the super powerful main weapons like in that game.

It opens up new possibilities for missions vs the Vonari and for trade missions as well. I'm all for more variety. Naturally those who fancy themselves fighter pilots will not have an interest but I think it is possible to include cap ships and not break the game or deviate from its original vision. We just have to remember to add the cons along with the pros of having those larger ships.

I think the only real obstacle here is Vice and his vision for the game, and by that I mean would he have the time to develop such a thing and would it exceed his desires for a low resource requirement. That is a question for him to answer and none of us wants him to deviate from what he has been able to provide for us in exchange for arbitrary enhancements.

If only the big companies would embrace the adherence to vision and integrity that Vice has, we would have a market flooded with great games in all genres.

Rubber Chicken · Post by **Rubber Chicken** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 3:42 pm

Um I'm not sure why people want Cap ships to control. The game is Evochron Mercenary, not Evochron Navy, or Evochron Merchant Marine.

I say keep it the way it is.

AnFiach · Post by **AnFiach** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:27 pm

Because the game is described as 'free form'. We don't have to be mercenaries, we don't have to be anything we don't want to be. I think the idea here is to add more options, not force anyone to do something they don't want to.

Traders and miners want to move more stuff and thus need bigger ships; Navy pilots may want that Admiral rank to come with more responsibilities (hence larger ships). Those ships should come with additional challenges that enhance the game. Mercenaries will not want larger ships because they are less versatile and therefore not beneficial to them (unless they own a fleet of various ships).

I think the game needs money sinks also. Once you reach a certain level of wealth it means nothing to you. Combat is not that expensive, even less so if you die because you respawn with all of your ammo again and merchant classes have no place to spend their wealth (why not a luxury liner to show off in mp?).

Aside from those that don't want them at all, if the downsides to owning such a craft are also programmed in, we won't see everyone flying them. We will see expanded possibilities for RP as well. Big merchant ships are big targets and in MP, there are no AI fleets to hire. A great opportunity for fledgeling fighters to get paid to escort a freighter or an 'ambassador' in a luxury liner.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:44 pm

I think AnFiach is making a good point here. And the only thing in its way is the resources and Vice vission for the games. To make a freeform game like that will take a lot of resources specialy if it is to be run on a Server in a multiplay environment and not many simple computer systems which most people use will be able to handle a freeform game like that. There are not that many Freeform Space Game simulators out there actually none that measures up to EM for a reason! and only a small percentage of the population are hardcore gamers and of those hardcore gamers only a small percentage uses PCs and push their systems to the limits! So Vice has a hard balancing act to do as a one man developer of these great games!......

Post by **Marvin** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:44 am

From post: 121073, Topic: tid=7616, author=Maarschalk wrote:To make a freeform game like that will take a lot of resources specialy if it is to be run on a Server in a multiplay environment ....

That's one of the biggest drawbacks ... nothing kills an MP game like a bad case of lag.

Post by **DaveK** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:46 pm

From post: 120970, Topic: tid=7616, author=Rubber Chicken wrote:How about a single-fire or rapid-fire option? Excal won't begin reloading until you use all 8.

works for me!

Post by **DaveK** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:52 pm

From post: 121073, Topic: tid=7616, author=Maarschalk wrote:I think AnFiach is making a good point here. And the only thing in its way is the resources and Vice vission for the games. To make a freeform game like that will take a lot of resources specialy if it is to be run on a Server in a multiplay environment and not many simple computer systems which most people use will be able to handle a freeform game like that. There are not that many Freeform Space Game simulators out there actually none that measures up to EM for a reason! and only a small percentage of the population are hardcore gamers and of those hardcore gamers only a small percentage uses PCs and push their systems to the limits! So Vice has a hard balancing act to do as a one man developer of these great games!......

Some of us love free sandbox play - Vice created EM
Some of us love combat - Vice was persuaded to created AA
some of us really think that bigger is better - persuade Vice to create "Evochron Capital Ship" or "Evochron Hyper Merchant"

AnFiach · Post by **AnFiach** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:54 pm

From post: 121168, Topic: tid=7616, author=DaveK wrote:
From post: 121073, Topic: tid=7616, author=Maarschalk wrote:I think AnFiach is making a good point here. And the only thing in its way is the resources and Vice vission for the games. To make a freeform game like that will take a lot of resources specialy if it is to be run on a Server in a multiplay environment and not many simple computer systems which most people use will be able to handle a freeform game like that. There are not that many Freeform Space Game simulators out there actually none that measures up to EM for a reason! and only a small percentage of the population are hardcore gamers and of those hardcore gamers only a small percentage uses PCs and push their systems to the limits! So Vice has a hard balancing act to do as a one man developer of these great games!......
Some of us love free sandbox play - Vice created EM
Some of us love combat - Vice was persuaded to created AA
some of us really think that bigger is better - persuade Vice to create "Evochron Capital Ship" or "Evochron Hyper Merchant"

Nobody wants a game about cap ships.

Post by **DaveK** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 4:21 pm

sorry, but I think the game is about cap ships or it's not - cap ships are big and (despite or because of) the escort uber powerful. If you want to move things abour "en mass" then find a national/imnternational removal company simulation - EvoMercs don't need large scale removals - the Evo Navies have their own ships - who are your clientel?

AnFiach · Post by **AnFiach** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:49 pm

Bah, lost my reply.

Basically, you are forcing Cap Ships to be a certain way because it fits your argument rather than acknowledging that larger ships can be added without making them super ships. You are not alone in your hostility toward the idea which I believe is founded in fear of how they can be poorly implemented (and we all agree it would be a game breaker of done improperly). I am compelled (forgive me

) by my own nature to point out the logical flaws in your argument. AA was not necessary because there is combat in EM under those rules, as is the desire to change Excals a moot point when you can play Legends to have faster reload times. Follow my logic? Don't tell someone to go play something else because they say they want to see X feature in X game.

Cap ships need escorts, in MP they need player escorts, or military frames could only be available in SP. Heck, the Navy doesn't need to offer contracts, they have their own ships..... We don't need to move product en mass? Why not? Merchants want to do whatever is cost effective and profitable and that means moving lots of product, especially for miners. Don't place restrictions on other players.

I have faith that Vice will come to the right conclusion (right for the game). Which ever position that will be, we'll have to wait and see.

Merc74 · Post by **Merc74** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:11 pm

I would like to see more valuable cargo aboard transport ships, cruisers, battleships etc. Not sure if this has been mentioned but 22pages is alot to read when i wanna play...lol

just wanted to get my 2 cents in b4 the next update:D