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

  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
Proposal for campaign changes

#60
There's a shorter TL;DR at the end which says the same in significantly less lines

(2019-12-19, 09:15 PM)CombatWombat Wrote: "Fuel Engine" is a weird term, at least as a native English speaker.  Internal Combustion Engine.  Diesel Engine.  Gas Engine.  Any of these would make it clearer what you are getting...
The "fuel engine" doesn't turn a shaft in FTD.  You can't attach propellers to it.  You can only "attach" the Fuel Engine Generator, and really that is confusing because you don't attach it so much as it "IS" the fuel engine.  Bluh?  
Meanwhile steam engines have "turbines" which produce the "power", but they can also turn a shaft directly via the "piston" component.  Why does the "Base" component of Fuel Engines produce power but the "Base" component of Steam Engines does not?  Why are Steam Engines allowed to turn shafts directly, but Fuel Engines are not?

Now a lot of that explains by looking at how the game develloped and it's the kind of problem that don't realy appear to veteran players in as much of a noticable issue as what we call issues ourself.
The fuel engine used to be the sole/main engine ingame and by FtD definition, an engine is strictly a source of power, nothing more, nothing less, and pretty much everything requires power, therefore it all made perfect sense and there was absolutly no bother at all.
Alltho steam engines were added, to create diversity I guess and give some alternative to fuel engines, it being that it would generate much more power in a bounding box than fuel while fuel could be retardedly efficient; now that's a balance that currently is slowly being fixed to be less extreme.
The fact steam engines can power shafts is an even more recent addition, extremly recent in fact, and it was added, I assume (I left the game for pretty much late 2018 untill late 2019 because unplayable on my old laptop and burnout after years of playing pretty much only FtD so I didn't exactly follow the reasons of the updates) by a desire from the realistic community especialy with the addition of the AC mod in game which was the main realistic mod along with its team being added upon the actual dev team of the game.
And FtD is by default not a realistic game, at least not intended to be one, which is why you can easily spot out like this, what is old in the game from what is a new addition mostly aimed toward realistic builders.



About your huge blabla on engine linguistics and whatnot, as I said above, it is an issue that only happens if you try to think it by realistic logic of engines having to turn shafts or alternators like irl; but that's not how FtD works nor how it's intended to work, think of "engine" as "source of power" and suddently all of your argument looses all point. (I've been a realistic builder for like 9/10th of my playtime so trust me I wish it would be more friendly to realistic building and while some progress was made toward that, it never was the initial intent of the game)
Alltho I can understand that you can be confused by that (I ran my ships for a few month with waterline belts of airpumps because it's how the airmpump definition said they worked, before learning how they actualy worked and fixe my boats.) But tbh, do the tutorials, the tutorial we had when I started playing the game was litteraly a 10 question MCQ that was useless because you learned spaghetti alone by yourself anyway. Now you have actual tutorials to show how to make components and how they work, so you have no more reasons to be confused about why your engines ain't turning spaghetti because, spoilers, they aren't intended to and the tutorials tell you that.


(2019-12-19, 09:15 PM)CombatWombat Wrote: These could be streamlined into a single coherent system:
1) Blocks+Addons that burn fuel to create power.  (IE: Boiler, Fuel Engine Pistons, Jet Engine Combustors, etc)
2) Blocks that absorb that power to make things turn (Shafts) or to make electricity which fills batteries (Generators).
3) Blocks that can use electricity from batteries to turn things (Motors)
There is no reason the "Generators", "Shafts", and "Motors" can't be shared among all the different ways of making Power.

It is already streamlined, in fact the only stuff that isn't is the new stuff that got added; it's streamlined as
1) Sources of power (Fuel Engines, Steam engines, Electric engines)
With the only nuance is generators dedicated to battery charging like turbines and RTG but those are extentions of eletric engines so they fall into that 1 category

2) Power reliant Elements
Everything that uses power, and the fact you feel like some other blocks should consume engine power while they don't atm, well that's something you can suggest through the suggestion tool but there's not realy a need for a separate category, they don't need power so they don't need power, if you feel like they should, well be happy they don't.
Because the devs are gonna make it virtually impossible to have dense and efficient power sources (it be by nerfing fuel efficiency and RTGs because steam is already terribly innefficient to begin with) and therefore having a craft good while wanting random blocks to consume more power than what you already need to keep your boat running in a somewhat competitive manner against the campaign (campaign being weaker than tournements or PvP in general when against proper players because they are intended to be "weak" by default while players try to keep a certain performance level which is generaly higher than that of the campaign) makes the game even harder.


(2019-12-19, 09:15 PM)CombatWombat Wrote: I realize this "simple" example got really drawn out, but the conclusion is that FTD seems like a collection of "hey this would be cool" features that have aggregated over the years and never been integrated into a "whole" unified game.  At some point they need to bite the bullet and polish things even if it means existing campaign designs need a rework or trip to the scrapyard.

It's true that FtD isn't exactly showed up in a streamlined 'unified' manner especialy with the questionable integration of newer addition. That mostly explains with to whom is which addition aimed to and why for; for instance it's not a lot of "hey this would be cool" but more like "a big part of the community desires that" or "that mod is very popular, lets add that to the game", alltho that is not always true, it's more often what Nicks wanted to add was added and nowadays it's same but wth draba and his controversial "fixes" that I myself don't mind but still trigger plenty of players.
So yeah each subsystem is unique and it's the whole point of FtD, if you streamline everything stupidly, it kinda looses the point of things existing because they become the same thing as the other and thus you wouldn't have the 3 missiles variant, CRAM/APS or multiple different engines, and so far each had been different enough to another to justify existing, sure not exactly properly balanced which is the main issue that we older players see more often (because that's realy the main issue of the game when you're used to it)

Also, updating the campaign is a process that is going as the game gets updates, it's long, tedious and far from easy, in fact a lot of the campaign crafts aren't even properly functioning anymore, but for so little players actualy playing it far enough to see those designs, no one realy cares/notices, most players don't play it even as far as WF if they even start a campaign to begin with :')


(2019-12-19, 09:15 PM)CombatWombat Wrote:
Quote:A couple of those issues right now are the campaign and adventure modes. They're going to be the first stop for any new player.
One of the biggest hurdles I have faced in trying to introduce new players to FTD is that there just isn't a GAME anyplace in here.  It's a vehicle designer first and foremost with some tacked on missions as an afterthought.  You design a vehicle and go "great, now what do I do with it?"  I have not seen any details of the campaign overhaul that seem to address the core functionality, only more feature creep.  Sorry, but "Combat Merits" or whatever are not addressing the core weaknesses of the campaign which is that it is directionless and progression-less.  There is no "Game loop" in there.

You don't just launch the campaign and play, like you might start a new game in Factorio or Minecraft, etc.  You first dink around in the vehicle designer for 40 hours and THEN you can launch campaign and play for 20 minutes before you realize it's kind of janky.

Well, spoilers, FtD is indeed a vehicule designer before all, everything else is pretty much only a way to give a purpose to what you design in it, so of course, if you don't realy come up with a desire to actualy start such a campaign, then there's no point playing one. FtD is also a game where you can see the other way around, the designer being a feature of the RTS campaign, however that doesn't work because that then implies that you must know how to use the vehicule designer which is the same as considering it as a vehicule designer game to begin with.
Also, the fact there's only 1 winning time and that the campaign doesn't have much indepth RTS gameplay to it doesn't mean it's progression-less and direction-less like you mention.
It has only 1 victory mode, which is "defeat everyone else" and the progression/direction is that, you must progress in the vehicule designer to make stronger design to take on the stronger ennemy forces, because yeah there's factions and each faction gets gradualy stronger and more difficult to defeat, especialy more so when most players don't actualy finish the campaign once :')
and the progression gets in as DWG->OW->(LH/WF/TG)->SS->GT->SD (the reason I tuck LH, WF and TG together is that they aren't comparable as they are both (and SS to some extend) very specialist factions with easily exploitable weaknesses that make them weak but are still stronger than the ones bellow and weaker than the ones above even in their comfort zone)

And yeah the campaign is wanky and this is why such a thread exist, the campaign is supposed to be half of the game but it ain't worth spaghetti because there's little difficulty for the better players unless they put themselves purposedly at severe disadvanatge and it's too hard for the casual players that can't even go through DWG, let alone those that only play the game for the builder (and comming from MC, I can understand them); it doesn't have any kind of indepth stuff like many other RTS have and what it does have it genuinely old and fairly poorly explained and implemented, let alone the exeptions that the AI has over the player.


(2019-12-19, 09:15 PM)CombatWombat Wrote:
Quote:Another major issue is one of identity. The game seems to trying to be both a real-time strategy and an action simulator at the same time, in addition to being a voxel building game.
Definitely.  The Avatar is very confusing at first, what with having "first person" and "detached camera" modes.  Compare this to Minecraft where you "are" the avatar all the time.  FTD feels very disjointed and the Avatar ends up feeling like a hinderance.  As I said above, you can't just jump in and "play" the game.  The campaign has no functionality or guidance for designing vehicles.  You will get overrun by DWG if you try to just "hop in" and wing it on the starting fortress, but this is the "obvious" thing for a new player to do.

As explained above, it's first a voxel vehicule building game (as opposition to a  regular voxel building game like MC) which desire to have a RTS part in which you can also have FPS abilities (and I'm saying it like that because all FPS features of the gameplay that existed in the past were pretty much removed, so now it's just so that you can manualy board boats to save ressource in the campaign by capturing ennemy boats and scrapping them, which is especialy important at higher difficulty when ennemy salvages gives you nothing.)
Also, while having the avatar existing is arguable, it does allow what I said above without being necesserly a bother for anything else once you're used to it; in fact, having returned to MC recently to help a friend work out some redstone railways, Lamb in my fucking life I WISH I could have all the FtD features in MC, breaking the camera into free mode is so superior to F5 in MC, ability to have infinite range is huge yes, mirroring is huge yes, the fact you can build without having to care that you can move your avatar around is a huge yes.
As a build game, FtD beats litteraly everything single other building game I know and it's why after 8 years of MC I moved to FtD and still stay on FtD because despite how much I hate it, as long as it runs on my PC, it's the better game (I mean when it doesn't run, I just have to play other games); the only game that beats FtD for flying stuff and space stuff is KSP which is yet another story.

"The campaign has no guidance" wtf, the tutorials m8, that's the guidance :') yeah sure the campaign doesn't tell you that you have to actualy play the game before which is indeed not obvious for those that though they could jump in the campaign without touching the designer (because even if you download spaghetti from the workshop, you can't do well in the campaign, primarly because you don't know how spaghetti works)

Also, while that was a true point a few months ago, since the GUI updates, the main menu directly gets you to go into the designer or tutorials and not the campaign, you do have to navigate to get in the campaign, so actualy the game realy is trying to tell you what to do there, the fact the newbie is stubborn enough to avoid it and go in the campaign itself is kinda his own fault.

I did try to bring a couple of my friends in the game too and got them in the designer right from the get go and was like, "you see that cool spaghetti they post on the workshop or in the discord of in the forum, well you could do as much if not better yourself if you get good at designing boats in the designer, but for now, just make a boat that floats with a gun on it and we'll spawn some small DWG rafts to test it out" and after a few days of messing around with them in MP designer, the gave up because it was simply too complex of a game for them to get into, they were too casual with too little time to invest and that proves a clear point : FtD is a game you must have time to invest into, because if you don't, then you ain't gonna go anywhere.


TL;DR

¤ The recent additions to the game aren't properly integrated which is indeed an issue but not realy that big of a deal compared to how they are balanced
¤ The whole engine/linguistic problem realy doesn't make any sense when you run by FtD logic and not realistic logic because FtD isn't intended as a realistic game
¤ If you consider "engine" as "power source" the only confusion is with turbines and RTGs which are technicaly sub content of the electric engine; alltho a newbie doesn't have to look much further than fuel engines so that shouldn't be bothering them;
¤ And the thing about wording not being accurate, fuel engines burns fuel, steam engine runs on steam and electric engines run on electricity, I don't see any problem there :')

¤ FtD is the best vehicule designer game around at the only exeption of KSP with regards to aerial and spacial vehicules.
¤ FtD isn't a newbie friendly game because it's complex by essence and streamlining it would remove half of its content which is meh imho.
¤ FtD is a vehicule designer before anything, and every other gameplay part relies on that so you need to "master" the designer before trying the campaign/whatever
¤ Tutorials are fucking amazing, more people should do them, I wish I had those when I started instead of the crappy 10 question quiz (wtf was even the point of it man).


¤ The Campaign actualy has a progression, it's meant to test your building skill by showing you stronger and stronger opponents as you progress, for you to see "how far you can go" as "how well you can build"
¤ The main issues of the Campaign are :
- Old campaign features are meh and the AI has exeptions to most of those
- Many of the campaign designs are outdated (especialy on the mid to end-game campaign part) if not even functioning anymore
- It lacks of indepth RTS or strategy elements that many other games have
- DWG is too strong to casual players that aren't playing the game to begin with while the late game is too low difficulty to be worth for better players (quite a minority of players tbh) which have to put themselves at a disadvantage to actualy encounter some resistance from the campaign.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Proposal for campaign changes - by Nick Smart - 2019-08-19, 04:29 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by MarijusLTU - 2019-08-19, 05:23 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Skyer - 2019-08-19, 05:19 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Domanating - 2019-08-19, 05:54 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2019-08-19, 06:11 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pendaelose - 2019-08-19, 06:50 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Shrugger - 2019-08-19, 07:26 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Nick Smart - 2019-08-20, 01:55 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Eagle - 2019-08-19, 07:58 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by ABYAY - 2019-08-19, 09:46 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by IronFudge - 2019-08-20, 01:54 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by DelsGaming - 2019-08-20, 07:35 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Nomadicus - 2019-08-20, 08:42 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by temeter - 2019-08-20, 09:29 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Otharious - 2019-08-20, 02:58 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by elijos - 2019-08-20, 04:28 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by vyrus - 2019-08-20, 06:06 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Eagle - 2019-08-22, 09:10 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2019-08-22, 05:39 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by SynthTwo - 2019-08-26, 05:37 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by joey101937 - 2019-08-26, 08:26 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2019-08-26, 10:29 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Lincrono - 2019-08-27, 02:46 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Iserion - 2019-08-27, 10:12 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pendaelose - 2019-08-27, 07:26 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Mr.YaR - 2019-08-28, 12:43 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pwnicus - 2019-08-28, 01:06 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Normal69 - 2019-08-28, 08:37 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Normal69 - 2019-10-10, 10:25 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by riganthor - 2019-10-10, 11:42 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Normal69 - 2019-10-10, 02:50 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by TheOnly8Z - 2019-11-07, 08:10 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by bricox01 - 2019-12-04, 08:51 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by LoSboccacc - 2019-12-04, 06:53 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pyrotech51 - 2019-12-04, 08:02 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by bricox01 - 2019-12-08, 02:09 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pyrotech51 - 2019-12-11, 02:58 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pyrotech51 - 2019-12-11, 02:28 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by bricox01 - 2019-12-14, 09:25 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by bricox01 - 2019-12-16, 10:49 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by UnderTrack - 2019-12-19, 11:17 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by UnderTrack - 2019-12-19, 11:53 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by UnderTrack - 2019-12-20, 12:28 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by bricox01 - 2019-12-21, 12:22 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Normal69 - 2019-12-26, 12:01 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by LoSboccacc - 2019-12-26, 02:32 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pyrotech51 - 2019-12-26, 05:11 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by LoSboccacc - 2019-12-27, 01:07 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Pyrotech51 - 2019-12-27, 03:02 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by UnderTrack - 2019-12-27, 03:13 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by LoSboccacc - 2019-12-27, 11:49 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2019-12-27, 11:59 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by riganthor - 2020-01-29, 11:39 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2020-01-30, 11:41 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by riganthor - 2020-01-30, 11:42 AM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by mrvecz - 2020-01-30, 03:29 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by DelsGaming - 2020-02-03, 07:47 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by DelsGaming - 2020-02-08, 10:41 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Skyer - 2020-02-12, 03:49 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Gamer as - 2020-02-12, 04:09 PM
RE: Proposal for campaign changes - by Mr.YaR - 2020-02-21, 03:03 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)