Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
Three changes I still dislike/don't see the point of them since they were released

#1
I've played this game from the beginning and have experienced quite a lot of changes. Every change took either a little bit of adapting (I.E. from custom to CRAM cannons) or a lot (I.E. the rework of engines). And although I disliked most of these changes at first, I started to see why the changes were made and learned to enjoy them. However, there are three changes made in this game that I still don't use or edit the campaign settings to either help me with them or completely avoid them.

The first change is not necessarily a change that I dislike, but simply don't see the point of it. The detection systems. From what I've read, these changes were supposed to add more variability between crafts. You could make a tiny, long-range artillery craft that is undetectable but precise using different types of detection. This seemed very interesting so I started to test some stuff out without results. When I watched video's explaining how to "hide" small crafts from detection systems, they really did not seem to work at all. I spent a week trying to figure out what I did wrong, testing different designs or not having any detection systems at all, but there was no difference. I just plop the Radar and some gimbal trackers and set the accuracy modifier option to roughly 70% so it has some, but minor impact to the game.

The second change is to the different type of resources. I get why most people prefer it this way, but I REALLY miss the split resources and I wish there was an option to toggle the two mechanics (like generalized and local resources). It just was an interesting, (for me) non-tedious mechanic that you had to take into a count, especially when starting the campaign. Although it was sometimes annoying having like 7m natural and no oil whatsoever (and this was a real issue with this system), I just loved them.

The third change is something that I truly just dislike: the rework of fuel production, especially with generalized resources. I just dislike having to build a flagship/mothership for almost every fleet you make JUST so you can refuel the smaller crafts since the fuel production setup is humongous (for small crafts). I find it so tedious to constantly having to replenish the fuel after/during every fight or having to give the craft 70k fuel. A while back I got a save of the old starting fortress since there was a lot more you could do with it. That fortress came with a little block that was removed from the game; the old Fuel processor block. Some functionality is gone (like usage of recourses or being able to turn them off) but they still produce fuel. Now that this is online, it will probably get patched... But hey, mods exist for a reason Smile

I just wanted to post this to bring some attention to mechanics that I find either tedious or questionable and maybe get some more info or whatever regarding these changes.


EDIT: Apparently, you can't actually place the fuel processors anymore. RIP that. Gotta learn how to mod FTD if I want to keep using them now. Sad
Reply

#2
I don't understand really what you mean with 1.?

2. some don't like it, but the main reason behind it was that you had an overabundance of every recourse except metal late game. there were some plans to add some extra recourse complexity but its not the focus now.

3. is it really that hard? just have either more fuel or have more efficient designs, so you only have to return every now and again to base to refuel or just make a tanker resupply ship that just carries resources and fuel.
The reason to remove that to stop Tiny boats and planes be self sufficient int everything and make it harder to just have unlimited fuel.
There is always a weak-spot if you search Hard enough.

If you fire enough AP at that shield, at some point you're going to come through.

There is no "best" I wouldn't even say there is anything universally good, Good is subjective, I find everything bad even if it's in theory good against this or that.

Reply

#3
Agree with resources. Proper way of solving that issue would be let player decide, what exact resource they harvesting. Something like general "resource" deposits and different extractors to mine that same deposit for different resources... probably at different rates. But they decided to nuke all that system.
Iconic FTD logic.
Makes things.
The fastest thing in the universe is sluggish... Years, decades, centuries from star to star.
Reply

#4
Separate resources with a choice of what to produce is all the complexity of the old system plus a management burden with none of the purported advantage (encouraging players into different building styles as the campaign progresses)--that has my hard no.

And the threshold for toggleable game mechanics should be pretty high--extra options tend to mean exponentially slower development velocity and more bugs as development/testing is split over the different systems.
Allr andask.
Reply

#5
So to sum up you want the tedium of refineries removed but the tedium of separate resources added back in????

I agree on the detection systems, I don't really see an benefits it added to the game , just another system you have to pack into your craft...........you can turn them off so it;s like the old way where everything can see everything(but will still crash into them) but the new system didn't add anything new, no stealth, no jamming, no spoofing, no long range weapon system only use these detectors and that weapon use these.........it's just one giant pool of detection..............only thing that does is make new players muddy up their detection pool by adding too many detectors..............muddying up the pool is bad, but so is not having the right or enough detectors, leads to getting all your detection equipment removed on the first hit ( you know those lucky shots that make the player feel the game is unfair) so your craft which may have other design issues just sits there fully functional oblivious to the things constantly pounding it with ordnance.............the player is like WTF????? it's right there shoot it........why have you stopped shooting??????

i think a tweek to the way it works could help..........first add the 2 systems together...........craft always have a general idea where the enemy is (kinda like it has a crew on board NOT comprised of blind, deaf , simpletons) so craft don't just sit there like a toaster...........................a detector should add to increasing accuracy on low update intervals and increase with diminishing returns based on how much processing power you have. A slow fire rate CRAM could easily get by with a global radar and a single 90 camera on top with little processing power.............while fast firing APS cannons would need more processing power for quicker updates to track fast moving enemies.....................

The current system has this hidden in vague sliders that don't seem to do all that much...........or nobody understands ( if i had a PHD in angular bearing mathematics, I sure wouldn't be here , playing a video game)

most people just plop down sensors hit auto adjust (some don't) and just deal with whatever problem occurs.........because very little can be gained from messing with this system for hours on end.........thats not really a good system

adding simple weighting , azimuth trims, elevation trims, and an overclocking sliders with weapon groups on each sensor (maybe to turrets also) would make it easier to fix problems like AA turrets leading or lagging targets too much while all other weapon systems are fine ...............balancing globe detection to all the crafts weapon systems is very simplistic and uninteresting...........lacks depth

There needs to be more varied rolls for different sensors...........with pros and cons to using them.........none of them seem to do anything different from eachother, just a few % in accuracy here and there...........the most notable is the coincidence detectors have the greatest visual range accuracy but come at the cost of a huge hit box, but the advantage is so slight compared to the disadvantage a simple 90 deg camera is always preferred...............and this difference between the two is so tiny most people don't notice and just use either one interchangeably without much thought.......... if the detection system is going to serve as the fine tune, that separates the out the best of the best it needs more depth for the pros while maintaining a simple reliable easy to understand entry level for non pros............

The separate resources adds tedium with little gameplay advantages .............I mean having to spawn in your resource gatherer, warp to it, and switch the gatherer to a different materiel, or swap it out for another type, because your low on a certain resource..............isn't gameplay............it's a micro managing job! If that was added back resource gathering switching would have to be added to the the ACBs and people would just automate the process..........which isn't gameplay, it's just alot more code complexity in the game fore something nobody will use......... City builders would be a better choice for people who enjoy micro managing.

I agree the refineries parts are to big and uninteresting........ A few minutes figuring out how they work, make a prefab and never touch the system again...........I would love to see the old fuel processor make a comeback and be repurposed into a oil/water separator....................many real ships have them.........they take water from the bilge and extract the oil from it before it is sent overboard.............they do this for environmental reasons and the oil is stored for later disposal............but it could be used as a slow low volume refinery for those who choose the efficiency gameplay route ..............it also could be a collection modifier for salvage.............. kill a ship get resources , if you have oil/water separators, you get a small bit of fuel released over time................
The animal will not sacrifice the part for the whole.
Reply

#6
Well it's assuming that players like resource management, as some of them do. Some balancing can be done by adding different conversion multipliers for different resources, so you basically still have different points, but can swap production of resources you don't need for somewhat faster production of those you need.
But "encouraging players into different building styles as the campaign progresses" - is done by factions, not resources. Resources could be valuable in proper global strategy style campaign - make territory control worthy, introduce fights for particular spots, and so on.


Detection is good addition, i think, eventually the auto-magic-detect should be removed instead. Though I agree with BKCXb7 on stupidity of completely blind craft. Default state of the system should have autodetect enabled with a setting, that allows AI to shoot in general direction of the enemy and be decently effective in meelee range. Otherwise it works well and these sliders are not so much of a problem. And another thing to add to your ships that isn't a gun is always welcomed.
For QoL reasons it'd be good to polish and simplify them, as example, find optimal proportions for different roles (AA, anti-ship, andi-dodgy-crap...?) and build them in, leaving for players a checkbox for selecting a role and single slider for adjusting the timing - correct settings for all other variables will be done automatically by selected proportion.

What IS a problem, is absolutely insane dodging of absolutely everything and stupidity of aiming algorithm, that ALWAYS lags behind.
Makes things.
The fastest thing in the universe is sluggish... Years, decades, centuries from star to star.
Reply

#7
I wish automatic detection was at 0%.
Reply

#8
You can turn that off, but then you face the problem of possibly having neverending battles because everyone has lost their detection.
Reply

#9
(2018-11-13, 07:56 AM)gxy Wrote: You can turn that off, but then you face the problem of possibly having neverending battles because everyone has lost their detection.

Well that would mainly apply only for the AI only and not for the player since he can and will use repair bots. Only some Twin Guard vehicles are capable of repair, rest of the vehicles are doomed to being paper cut to death.
Reply

#10
I mostly like detection, but I think it could be better. Some of the stuff I'd argue is sub-ideal include:
- There actually is a best setup (a couple detectors set to low emphasis, then stack up on trackers. replace laser trackers with radar ones if you're using smoke rounds)
- The auto-adjust thing for detection parts sucks. It really overvalues trash detection like rangefinders. It should take into account frequency of data but it does not. Don't use rangefinders, they're spaghetti.
- The settings for each mainframe take a lot of testing and fiddling around that is somewhat difficult to optimize..
- The processing power costs are really strange from a gameplay perspective. Why is one of the best range trackers (laser) only a 0.1 processing power cost?
- Stealth seems totally superfluous.

I think the single resource unit is generally best. Like Blothorn said, having 5 different resources merely added a management burden for no real gain gameplay-wise.

I have no real opinion on fuel because I don't use it very much. Any major vehicle of mine is steam-based precisely to avoid all the management and so on that fuel demands. I'll happily pay the extra running costs to avoid the management issues. Some of my early-game units use fuel engines but they always get replaced before they run out of fuel.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)