Stretch Goals Poll

What are your thoughts and suggestions on the Kickstarter campaign?

What stretch goal would you most like to see?

You may select 1 option

 
 
View results

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Godwin » Sun Dec 09, 2012 10:18 am

Chameleon wrote:... I find it amusing that people are pointing to the Oculus Rift as a reason to have visible cockpits, when it is the exact technology that would be used in spacecraft (in reality) to get rid of limited physical consoles.


Amen :)
Godwin
Ensign
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Miklos » Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:02 am

Cockpits is a waste of time - so many other things can make this game even more amazing - cockpits aren't one.

HUDs are all that is needed - customizable if possible.
procedurally generated comment
User avatar
Miklos
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 10:58 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Ixos » Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:37 am

Godwin wrote:Well I for one don't like cockpits: they get in the way of visibility. I do not understand people who want cockpits in games like this. I mean, I get that it might be nice for immersion and for games like star citizen, but other than that I'm pretty sure I'd turn it off (hope that remains possible!).

I think many look forward more to the RTS part of this game where you build an empire and control a fleet, or the RPG part where you interact with NPCs, then the Action parts of flying around shooting lasers

In the RTS part at least it makes sense that a cockpit doesn't add much but is mostly just in the way.
User avatar
Ixos
Commander
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:28 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Arcticpulse » Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:46 am

I'll do my part and increase my backing from $30 to $75, carriers are a HUGE part of space games to me. The sight of large swarms of fighters being scrambled will always be THE image I think of when it comes to space and space games. I hope fighter procurement won't be handled like X3 though. The pain of having to equip that many fighters just doesn't make it worth it. I always use a script and clone the fighters I need instead. The idea of heavy bomber that could destroy large ships with ease was an interesting one but the lack of carriers that could hold even one or two of them meant that they had to be used on their own most of the time, without carrier support.

I really liked how Spacefarer handled it's carriers. Cargo craft and carriers could both hold fighters/bombers but only carriers had the ability to repair the fighters in combat. The top down interface (maybe LT could adopt such an interface in an 'advanced tactical mode'?) made it easy to recall damaged fighters and repair them, making fighters a credible threat. They didn't need that much attention and could put some pressure on the enemy without completely overpowering them. It also solved the problem of equipping the fighters. In X3, fighter procurement was a slow, painful process. You had to buy them and obtain the proper equipment yourself, it took quite a bit of time, and fighters weren't that smart or durable so the problem is compounded. Spacefarer simply had default types that you could choose from. The bomber variants, the heavy fighter variants ect. It all depends on how fighters/bombers will be handled.

In limit theory, I'm hoping for these two options.
1. Outsourcing work
Essentially, you pay someone to buy the fighters/bombers and equip them to your specifications. Highly expensive but effective and fast. Useful if you like the more combat/exploration aspects without involving the industrial portions like building factories.

2. Just produce everything yourself
Create a huge factory complex that makes and equips the ships. A high cost of course and dependent on constant stream of raw materials to fuel the factories but has the greatest output for the least input.

To go more in-depth with option number 1 here's a post I made a while ago. It's for X3 but the main idea is there.

I've been thinking quite a bit about fighters recently. It's a pain to properly equip them and send them off to battle, only for them to die, so you can go hunting for the parts to equip a new one. It can be a pain to replace any losses for just about any ship and part hunting is an incredible pain. I know you have factories and such but think about it, there are perfectly good ship yards all over the universe with the proper equipment you need somewhere out there. Seems like an awfully good idea for a corporation to cater to those wants. Here's how I think it should work, there will be a price limit for any orders. The corporations aren't going to ship one measly fighter to you for next to nothing. You're going to have to pay top dollar for the luxury. I can see it branching into two possibilities here. I'll state an example and illustrate the two ways of doing it later. Example one- you need a single fighter/a small group of fighters. Example two- you need an entire fleet. I'll also get another thing out of the way here. There will be several kinds of corporations.

Race-aligned corporations - they cannot buy products belonging to other races unless they're allied eg. argon-boron, teladi-split OR the factory is in their area of space. I would argue that the paranid-split alliance isn't that solid and is mostly to intimidate the boron but I digress. Neutrality eg. teladi-everyone, means they can buy some items, but not the higher tier ones. A system based on the player reputation could be used. As a result, they are cheaper to use but limited in function. Additionally, they will have some trouble moving through unallied races' space and if you want your goods moved through it, you will have to pay more.

Multiracial corporations - they can purchase all the items from all racially owned shipyards/factories (pirates not included) but are insanely expensive. They will incur no additional cost for travelling through any sector of space.

Both Race-aligned and multi-racial corporations also have a 'legality' system.

If a corporation is 'legal' it will refuse to bring in illegal goods into sectors (if they have the ability to purchase the goods, they will use a jumpdrive and will deliver in a unknown sector or where all the items you ordered are legal) and will not deal with pirates.

If a corporation is 'illegal' they will deal with pirates/yaki. They can even reserve IBL's for you, so you don't have to keep checking back. They demand more money for services charged though, not exactly crippling. The only difference is pirate trading after all.

This is how the corporation would calculate the price.

-Base price of 5 million, think of it like macdonald's delivery fee

-Going through sectors of non-allied races? Race-aligned corporations demand 100 000 credits per sector, for allied races you only need pay 20 000 credits per sector. Multiracial corporations demand 200 000 credits per sector, regardless of race due to their ability to attain ALL racial item (except for pirates)

-Strength of convoy needed, base price is 10 million. For every two border sector you go through, you pay 1 million more. For every pirate sector you go through, you pay 2 million more. They will NOT go through xenon sectors.

-Items/ships requested- expect to pay 1.5x-2x the price for race aligned and 2.5x-4x the price for multi-racial.

-Illegal companies charge 2x more for every pirate item.

Alright, now on to the two ways it can be implemented. Possibility one is simply a time based system. You book an order through a menu screen, the corporation calculates the price based on the formula above and assigns a time-frame whereby you'll be able to find all you ships in your chosen sector at the promised time.

Possibility two involves ACTUAL convoys with destroyers and such for the player to observe. These convoys can come under attack by pirates but are well-defended enough for such fights to be in their favour. They will also sacrifice their own ships to ensure yours remain unscratched. The customer is always right, remember? In the off chance they fail, they will replace everything, free of charge. They will also only charge for the route they took till they failed, not the whole way. And no, you can't attack them or they keep your money and the deal's off.

If it isn't obvious, the system is geared towards obscenely rich tycoons who want entire fleets. What do you guys think?
Arcticpulse
Recruit
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:32 am

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Blazar » Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:42 am

The oculus Rift will be the next big step in gaming. A revolution, so i can not wait to be fully immersed in the game.
Blazar
Recruit
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Dadalos » Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:56 am

Blazar wrote:The oculus Rift will be the next big step in gaming. A revolution, so i can not wait to be fully immersed in the game.


its the next big step but not the final step I hope XD. I wont be satisfied with games until we plug in matrix style XD
(without all the dangerous parts like injuries or dieing...)
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Dadalos
Commander
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:13 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Nephos » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:13 pm

Looks like we have a good chance of reaching the 133k stretch goal, but I"m not very skeptical about reaching the 167k stretch goal, which is a shame, since it's something I'd like to see.
I didn't steal the cookies. Seriously.
User avatar
Nephos
Recruit
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:44 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby light487 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:29 pm

I'm kinda torn between docking bays/carriers and the internal space station views.. but have to say that from a gameplay standpoint, having "moving" docking bays adds a lot more possibilities, so that's where my vote goes...

Can you imagine getting yourself up to the point where you can become a travelling/mobile trade station? :) Imagine coming into a system that doesn't have many places to land or space stations etc and all the little ships (NPCs) come from the different parts of the system and start to dock with you and trade their wares to get the supplies that are in high demand in that system.. as you "sail" through the stars, the little ships come and go and your wallet gets bigger and bigger :) hehe..

Sure.. there is the military side of things as well with fighters/bombers returning to a hangar that can provide re-arming and repairing services.. but there's also the commercial side of things with refueling/repairing of NPCs and your own fleet, as well as the aforemention mobile trading...

...and that's just the thoughts off the top of my head. Interiors of space stations would be wonderful but can be lived without and doesn't add gameplay elements beyond immersion. It's like having or not having the cockpit graphics. Sure, it would be nice to have them.. but it's not going to change the gameplay mechanics whether you have them or not..
User avatar
light487
Captain
 
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:38 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Dadalos » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:54 pm

+1 to light487 reputation from me hes hit my very ideal play-style XD
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Dadalos
Commander
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:13 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby TMRNetShark » Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:42 am

I actually like that idea of being a mobile trading hub. It does add to the whole "space trader/explorer." Like warp your big mobile base to a remote system, explore with a tiny ship... then return to the mother ship to go on to the next system.
User avatar
TMRNetShark
Ensign
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:16 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Dadalos » Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:04 pm

TMRNetShark wrote:I actually like that idea of being a mobile trading hub. It does add to the whole "space trader/explorer." Like warp your big mobile base to a remote system, explore with a tiny ship... then return to the mother ship to go on to the next system.


my sentiments exactly.
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Dadalos
Commander
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:13 pm

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Gazz » Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:51 pm

I wonder, was there any poll comparing carriers vs. planetary ownership vs. faction creation?
I just can't see how carriers could have lost against the other two and ended up at the 200k mark.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
User avatar
Gazz
Moderator
 
Posts: 3181
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:39 am
Location: In your brains. Thinking your thoughts.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby JoshParnell » Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:54 pm

Gazz wrote:I wonder, was there any poll comparing carriers vs. planetary ownership vs. faction creation?
I just can't see how carriers could have lost against the other two and ended up at the 200k mark.


They were only introduced after the fact, unfortunately. Had I thought of it as an option from day 1, they probably would have beaten both planetary & faction ownership I think. But I introduced several new options after the last goal was announced, and carriers was one of them. Sorry! :/
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
User avatar
JoshParnell
Developer
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:06 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Asmodai » Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:19 pm

Gazz wrote:I wonder, was there any poll comparing carriers vs. planetary ownership vs. faction creation?
I just can't see how carriers could have lost against the other two and ended up at the 200k mark.

Take heart! My understanding is that stretch goals that are reached are guaranteed to be added to the game (though not necessarily at launch) for free.
Those that are not reached however still have a good possibility of being added later (just not guaranteed and not before those that won) and may or may not be free.
So I think we will see carriers added one way or another as an update they will just be after the winning stretch goals and their may be some nominal fee attached to them (or not.)
User avatar
Asmodai
Commander
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:16 am
Location: Fredericksburg, VA (USA)

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

Postby Flendon » Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:58 pm

light487 wrote:I'm kinda torn between docking bays/carriers and the internal space station views.. but have to say that from a gameplay standpoint, having "moving" docking bays adds a lot more possibilities, so that's where my vote goes...

Can you imagine getting yourself up to the point where you can become a travelling/mobile trade station? :) Imagine coming into a system that doesn't have many places to land or space stations etc and all the little ships (NPCs) come from the different parts of the system and start to dock with you and trade their wares to get the supplies that are in high demand in that system.. as you "sail" through the stars, the little ships come and go and your wallet gets bigger and bigger :) hehe..

I hadn't thought of making a mobile trading post! Excellent idea. I hope they can be used for that in game. Well, assuming they make it into the game.
User avatar
Flendon
Ensign
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Kickstarter Campaign



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests