More advanced weapons not needed

nschafer · Post by **nschafer** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:18 am

There's been a number of threads lately discussing the possibility of adding new weapons, tying powerful weapons to rank, or other similar suggestions.

I for one just wanted to say that in my opinion we don't need stronger, longer range or other more powerful weapons. I think Vice has done an excellent job of providing parity between the mercenary and the reds. In fact if anything things are made a little too easy for the mercenary. I recently did a contract with 60 enemies and when I got back to base had zero damage. Even figuring that a mercenary is likely to be more skilled than your average pilot, 12 vs 1 five times in a row you would not expect the 1 to come out unharmed.

I truely belive that any change would have to be offset by a similar change to the enemy ships. If we had guns with a range of 1000 and the enemy had gus with a range of only 500 then where is the challenge?

Also, tying more advanced weapons to rank sounds like it makes sense at first, but my feeling is that as you get higher in rank you are less likely to need more powerful weapons. The Evochron series is not level based. The enemy doesn't get stronger as you do, so as your skills improve the game becomes easier. We offset this by going into areas with more enemies which is similar to having a stronger enemy, but you rarely face more than 12 enemies at one time so the difficulty kind of peaks out.

Again, my thought is that the weapons systems are about right as they are, but feel free to disagree with me. I'm interested in what other think.

Draakjacht · Post by **Draakjacht** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:50 am

Well, the thought that I last heard, and don't disagree with, is the idea of varying weapons. One person said something about a weapon with greater range, but this weapon would also be offset by low to medium damage. Where another weapon would have short range and provide high damage. Of course, you could throw in other fun factors. We have a beam weapon with 500 (whatever the units are) range that only does shield damage. What if you had a weapon that did hull damage, but maybe was short range and an energy sapper (you would want to conserve energy initially by toggling weapons) or was very long range (more the idea of having one last chance to tag a fleeing enemy if you scrapped his shields). I'm not saying any of these are finalized thoughts or anything, but other games (such as Wing Commander) have provided micro-management challenges using this method.

As for earning the weapons, that is another debate entirely. The idea of rank moves it closer and closer to an RPG. Money doesn't have a great impact, since it is so easy to earn. Another possibility is that particular weapons could only be found on particular planets or stations. As it is, most guns are freely available, but I have a hard time finding just the right one because of the randomized nature of availability. Of course, I feel that ship components (not trying to make an issue of it, just saying) should also perhaps be limited in availability much like chassis.

Not really an agreement or otherwise, huh?

nschafer · Post by **nschafer** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:57 am

Originally posted by Draakjacht
Not really an agreement or otherwise, huh?

Honestly, I'm not really looking for agreement, just other's ideas. Obviously Vice's decisions in these matters are the final ones that matter, but also obviously he reads these threads and takes user comments into account when he decides features to add or not add.

You do make a good point though that longer range with less damage offsets the usefulness of the weapon to keep the balance similar. As tha_Rami stated in one of these threads what would be bad would be the perfect weapon. I think every weapon strength needs an offsetting weakness to keep the balance.

TGS · Post by **TGS** » Tue May 12, 2009 8:40 am

Honestly if anything I would like to see more added to the game not oriented around weapons. More perhaps ships, scanners and equipment that expands the games options. Not just gives you bigger and better of what you already have.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue May 12, 2009 12:21 pm

I agree with more options of equipment added, more choices of strategies and the role you want to play!;)

Ravenfeeder · Post by **Ravenfeeder** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:14 pm

I tend to agree with Nschafer, the guns are fine as they are. The problem that I find is that I'm not able to use the guns enough. Try taking on a horde of Reds with just guns, and, their missiles will get you, well, me anyway.

What I'd like to see is missions where missiles are nulled, and only guns, on both sides can be used. It'd make it a darn sight more fun, and increase our pilots dogfighting skills, well, mine anyway - again!

Remember: such missions would be voluntary, just as they are at the moment, you can go hunt a box, or take on a multi waypoint mission - just the same you could take on a non-missile use mission - that's non-missile use on both sides!

Glock36 · Post by **Glock36** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:49 pm

OH MAN...Balancing Weapon Strength is the worst nightmare there is. I think Vice has it right and if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This is the most dangerous area you can fool around with.

49rTbird · Post by **49rTbird** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:26 pm

Originally posted by Maarschalk
I agree with more options of equipment added, more choices of strategies and the role you want to play!;)

I agree and more hidden things to find that require new or existing equipment.

Ian2454 · Post by **Ian2454** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:34 pm

Anyone remember that thread talking about types of nebulae that disrupt missile locks? Yeah.

Glock, however, makes an interesting point. Hands down this is a shooting game. The weapons make or break the game.

Remember we can always ditch the .exe build should we decide "No no no... This doesn't work!" and then we'll know even better what not to ask for. Keep in mind Vice keeps the last build until we all decide it's okay, and even then I don't think he deletes them.

No harm in trying. If anything, the only thing that changes is Vice is a better programmer.

Post by **Marvin** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:34 pm

What I'd like to see is missions where missiles are nulled, and only guns, on both sides can be used. It'd make it a darn sight more fun, and increase our pilots dogfighting skills, well, mine anyway - again!

Anyone remember that thread talking about types of nebulae that disrupt missile locks? Yeah.

Put the two together and you have your mission.

tha_rami · Post by **tha_rami** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:43 pm

I disagree with Neil here. Variety spices things up, and we honestly miss variety in this game.

Neil also profesionally only noted one side of the story, it would ADD challenge to the game to have the enemies have longer ranges, more powerful guns and faster reloads.

nschafer · Post by **nschafer** » Tue May 12, 2009 7:16 pm

Originally posted by tha_rami
Neil also profesionally only noted one side of the story, it would ADD challenge to the game to have the enemies have longer ranges, more powerful guns and faster reloads.

That is a valid point. I posted this topic as a response to a number of threads I've seen where people are suggesting stronger weapons for the player. I don't recall every seeing a suggestion for giving the AI stronger weapons, although someone may have suggested it.

My initial statement was that we simply do not need stronger weapons. Draakjacht pointed out that not all of the discussions were about stronger weapons, but more varied weapons, which I agreed, so long as there is balance to the weapon to prevent them getting too powerful.

I like your suggestion of giving the AI stronger weapons, that could indeed be interesting. Perhaps not in the areas immediately surrounding Sapphire as we don't want to discourage new users, but in more advanced areas it could be quite interesting to have the enemies start shooting at you before you can shoot back. I think this would inevitably lead to the issue of people wanting those same guns and put us right back where we are though.

TGS and Maarschalk, I agree it might be nice to see some new non-combat related toys to play with, but those might be the subject of another thread.

Ravenfeeder, I find that I use my guns most of the time in the current setup. My usual stategy is to jump into the combat area with inertial turned on and fly past the enemy ships. I fly away for a couple of K then turn around and head back at about 50% speed. This give the enemies plenty of time to string out as the faster weaker ships move to the front. I shoot down the incoming missles and pick off the enemies as they come into range. Using only particle cannon and shields at minimum I can usually kill 4 reds before I start having energy issues.

Draakjacht · Post by **Draakjacht** » Tue May 12, 2009 10:16 pm

Good kill strategy.

Assuming other missions/equipment/ideas are another topic, I have nothing more to add.

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Wed May 13, 2009 11:38 am

For a space sim player, different weapons always welcome, different approaches for fight are cool.

EL has enough weapons already, but we don't say no to new and cool weapons.

All about balance.

[Edited on 5-13-2009 by warsign]

matthewfarmery · Post by **matthewfarmery** » Wed May 13, 2009 11:54 am

I agree with balance, a mistake that the X series made, the weapons on that game were too samely, but weren't that balanced at all, IMO

in EL, the weapons are or seem to be very balanced, so Vice has done a very good good of keeping the balance, more weapons wouldn't go amiss, but different styles, like some of the suggestions, longer range and less power per shot, sounds ok, if the shots were faster, but the damage done was decreased, but if the weapons were secret, then it would add to the explorer aspect of the game too, to keep things interesting:) but if the weapons turn out to break balance, then they should be removed from ther game

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Wed May 13, 2009 12:12 pm

Yes, I agree with balance, that is why this is a great Game, more weapons and equipment is great as long as
the balance is maintained!;)

Ravenfeeder · Post by **Ravenfeeder** » Wed May 13, 2009 3:50 pm

Nschafer - sounds a good strategy, I'll have to give it a go, sound more fun too.

Afraid that I take the safety factor, most times. I come at them from about 5k out, zero speed, and inertia on. I get a lock on the first one, at 4.8k, and fire off the Excabs. When I get to 3k from them, I go into reverse thrust, with inertia still on, up to -12.4k - that keeps me at the 3k mark, and, then it's ducks in a barrel with the excabs, until there's just two, or three, of them left, then I go in with both guns. Never thought of just going in with the cannon - thanks for the tip.

Polymorph · Post by **Polymorph** » Wed May 13, 2009 9:02 pm

What I'd like to see is more and/or specialized mining equipment. At the very least, being able to equip more than one at a time, which takes up a spot that could be used for other things.

tha_rami · Post by **tha_rami** » Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Balance? The game uses a simple scale in which you can choose for either fast speed/low yield (C11-12), medium (C13) or high yield/slow (C14-C15). I'd love to see more variation in that last tier.

MMaggio · Post by **MMaggio** » Wed May 13, 2009 11:30 pm

I like your idea Polymorph!
If we could have two mining beams we could mine twice as fast and then still have one gunmount left. That would allow a player to be more "trade" orinted and just carry minor weapons for defence.
In fact, I would like to see greater differences in the options for certain occupations.

Glock36 · Post by **Glock36** » Thu May 14, 2009 7:36 am

It would be nice to mount two mining beams and make mining twice as fast.

tha_rami · Post by **tha_rami** » Thu May 14, 2009 10:07 am

Yes, occupation diversity would definitely aid in variety - which, at this point, is pretty much the only thing the game lacks I can think of.

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Thu May 14, 2009 11:25 am

I agree.

Polymorph · Post by **Polymorph** » Thu May 14, 2009 8:50 pm

Wow, I didn't think my mining idea would be THAT well received! Thanks!

Edit: Although when I said takes up space that could be used by other things, I wasn't thinking about the gun mounts. I was thinking about the jump drive and repair and shields and such.

[Edited on 5-14-2009 by Polymorph]

BENERICK · Post by **BENERICK** » Sat May 16, 2009 2:57 am

I'd like to see a missile that u can fire and forget when we make an attack run we have to keep our "victim" targeted untill missiles hit and damage or destroy em then the system autotargets next in line (not always closest enemy). My ideas to have a missile with built in guidence u target fire and move on to next "victim" while ur fired missile autotracks and follows till it hits or runs out of fuel. Im on a mission and have 7-12 fighters. I target the cap ship with 2 missiles fire and switch targets and they stay on 1st target selected giving me time to focus on the red peewees. Im not saying anything like a FT torp thats overkill but maybe a Lynx with internal trackin.
Thats my 2 cents