Return to “Announcements”

Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#16
In many games/flight sims you can see your reticle lagg as the weapons turn to match your nose/point of aim. A good example of how this looks in a turreted combat game would be world of tanks.


It would be cool if it worked the same way in LT, one circle for your actual mouse pointer aim and one for where the turrets currently are aiming (moving towards the first always). I realize you probably haven't implemented limits on turret turning speed yet as more then a stat, but once you do it's important to include some visual clues to guide the player what we will hit :)

And a useful info on missions would be an estimate on how far away the objective is located, once they don't spawn just outside your base ;)
(and extra payment to compensate for your extra travel-time ofcourse).

Players with really light but fast ships could choose an easy mission that's really far away and still get a good deal of cash.
Players with a slow heavy ship would prioritize missions close by but with hard enemies to earn good rewards.

The game could also let you choose between cash and an item when you complete a mission, perhaps this is something for LT?
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#17
Ixos wrote:In many games/flight sims you can see your reticle lagg as the weapons turn to match your nose/point of aim. A good example of how this looks in a turreted combat game would be world of tanks.
Currently, all (automated) turrets track and fire individually.
In the case of "manual" fire like for more-or-less-fixed guns, you would need multiple gun reticles for them... or have them all slaved to the turning speed of the slowest gun in the "set". But that would mean tossing several turrets into a "group", which Josh doesn't like because it's not the most efficient way to hit a target. =)
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#18
For fixed guns a moving reticle shouldn't be needed... Don't they always point straight forward?

And as long as all turrets for the manual fire is of the same model they can share the same reticle since they have identical turning speed.

You also only have to display the slowest moving turret as your reticle since the info you want normally is where will my heavy guns be able to hit (and the heavy one is normally also your slow one). When your slowest gun has traversed to hit your target you can also count on that all the quicker guns are lined up aswell.

This is good enough as a visual clue since even if you want to fire before all turrets have turned to point at your cursor you can get a good idea of where all your different guns will hit (somewhere between your aim and slowest turning gun reticle) depending on their speed.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#19
Wow. All I can say is ... wow. Great update and it is thrilling to see the game coming along so well! I honestly hadn't expected to see the procedural weapons or ship marketplace anywhere past mere design concept at this early a juncture and to see the beginnings of those take shape makes me all kinds of excited. I'm in awe every time I see one of your large-scale fleet battles. It makes my fingers itch to get on the trigger of a fighter myself and get blown out of the stars in spectacular fashion. :mrgreen:
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#21
Great progress video, Josh! :D It's amazing how far you've already come. :D :D

However, there's one thing that bugs me. This is probably going to get me flamed, but I have to get it off my chest:

I don't like the ship icons on the in-flight HUD. And I don't mean their design, I'm talking about their very existence. I mean this: I was looking forward to see combat between you and hostile space ships, but then I watched ten minutes of you fighting against exclamation marks in circles :shock: , which is a pity, considering how beautiful the ships are going to be. :roll:

Are these icons really needed? Elite doesn't have them (it's admittedly the only space game that I've ever played; so they may be the norm in every other game, and I wouldn't know it). For me they make the combat feel like I'd watch an arcade game, not like a space game with state-of-the-art graphics. Could they at least fade out into invisibility when the ship is close enough to be roughly the size of the icon? For me this would enhance the feeling of being surrounded by space ships, not by ASCII graphics. :oops:

Just my tuppence. Feel free to disagree.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#22
Yes I agree. The icons/symbols should probably be scaled back or removed entirely once your close enough to see a ship.

But they still fulfill and important job when the ship is so far away it's only a pixel or two, and when the ship is off-screen.


If the icons are removed in close range there is still the problem of know if it's friend or foe in a big furball.
My favorite friend-foe marker in a game is probably something like the aliens vs predators (alien vision) style "auras" behind the enemy. You can still see your enemy in all it's glory but the aura will quickly identify if it's foe (red), neutral(yellow) or friend (green). Or just a basic colored outline/border when you have your mouse over them.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#23
Commander McLane wrote:Are these icons really needed?
I, too, would prefer the more minimalistic X3-style target brackets, which resize to stay 'outside" of the actual ship.
If additional icons are needed, they should be attached to the outside of the target brackets. Same information value but never obscures your view of the target.

If you want to cut down on icons you could use different styles of brackets to distinguish between mission and non-mission targets. Colour for hostility.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#24
Hey there.

This is my first post here, i'm following your game since a while now. The universe optics a remarkably, i like it.
And i like the monthly dev updates, so i can watch dev progress, very nice. ;) Watching the actual update vid, i had to laugh while you.. (sry, dont know which dev was doing the vid).. fighting the lonely enemy with 20 buddies on your side, each one of you is firing the hell out of it. Why i laughed? Its because i was playing X3 for a long time, and the KI over there is doing the same stupid thing: all ships of one fleet try to hunt down a single little ship, which is'nt be able to do any serious damage to anyone - and noone gets him because he is so damn small and agile.

So, my suggest for a better KI: just let them do a short calculation of the treat coming from the enemy (or enemies), and forget about him. If he wants something, just let him attack. He will see whats happening. ;) Or, if that needs too much CPU power, create a table sheet, that include each ship or shipclass with a specified treat level, so the KI can set her behaviour depending on that sheet.

What do you say?


Edit: typo
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#26
Nomad wrote:sry, dont know which dev was doing the vid
The Developer is Josh Parnell. He is the one man development team that does everything (except for sound FX): coding, thinking, composing, dreaming, blogging, logging, testing, researching, producing, umm.. other stuff? oh! and Development Updates too!

Josh isn't a lone wolf though. First of all, he leans heavily on his trusty little pal, Exponential Falloff. Also, it is obvious too that he humbly welcomes and makes use of input from the LT community. The community to which we happily belong. :)

Btw, glad to hear you invested in some heavy duty shut-eye, Josh; you sounded utterly exhausted in the Update!

To all you folks soon™ to be treated to the combat prototype: congrats! **Swallows back encroaching envy**
"omg such tech many efficiency WOW" ~ Josh Parnell
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#28
Yeah, you and me both! Though I missed the kickstarter entirely. :/

Even if Josh doesn't want to re-open backing, I do hope he creates a fan shop. Some t-shirts, mugs, naked girls and flesh eating plants would go great with the game.
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
Post

Re: Development Update #3: March 2013

#30
hmm I read the dev logs daily on my phone which isn't great for making replies so I'm a bit quiet! but have been poking around the forums on my PC and only just found these threads!

Josh - excellent work - you continue to amaze me. The upcoming prototype is going to be great with the missions etc.. However reading above there is a lot of call for people to update their pledges to get it, why not just let them paypal you directly the difference or something? not sure if this breaks any kickstarter rules but surely there must be someway of dealing with this?

As for my thoughts when watching the video, similar to things expressed above mainly but seen as I am posting ...

I too thought the icons for enemy/friends overlaying the actual ships looked bad, if just placeholder stuff then fair enough, but I like comments above about a colored outline or boundary corners or something more pleasing to suit the graphics.

Also when you returned to the base, it wasn't obvious to me how you knew where it was. That too needs something to help guide us in, unless I missed it. Actually I just watched the vid again and noticed a lot more. I see there are indicators as to the asteroid but what about the entrance?

In combat, the red dot for the targeting system I found hard to see, for me that needs to be bigger with contrasting color to the background.

Minor stuff really, overall its looking fantastic and way way better than I think any of us were expecting it to be at this stage. Good job that man!
LTP Fleet Battles on Youtube

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests

cron