Return to “Suggestions”

Post

LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#1
As I'm spending a lot of time in the Buy window, some nice-to-haves and questions have come to mind:

1. A filter for object type (weapons, armor, shields) would make it a little easier not to miss a new item when there's something in particular you're looking/waiting for.

2. I'd still like to see more beam and rail weapons at the higher end of the price spectrum.

3. Should big stacks of the same thing all go away at once? I saw a stack of 8 Gamma Hadron Accelerators all blink out at once.

4. Currently it appears that the best lootable items are no better or worse than the best purchasable items. Should that be different -- should the best lootable items be better than the best item you can buy? Or the other way around?

The standard caveat -- this is just the prototype -- applies to all of these, naturally. Might not hurt to be thinking about them for LT v1.0, though, so I thought I'd throw them out there for comment.
Post

Re: LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#2
I agree with much that you have said and only wish to add a few items to that list. Along with more beam and rail weapons it would be nice to see more missile weapons even though they haven't been fully implemented, in terms of lock on fire at least. And the one big thing I would add is a repair all button, if you deem it fit for the prototype. :D
The only limit is the one you set.
Post

Re: LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#3
Flatfingers wrote:3. Should big stacks of the same thing all go away at once? I saw a stack of 8 Gamma Hadron Accelerators all blink out at once.
That is something I don't mind. If the seller goes elsewhere, there goes the offer.

What I would like is advanced warning about an offer being taken down.
For instance, a thin line at the "base" of every offered item.

The line starts out filled when the item offer is put on the list, then it shrinks down to zero.
Only then the offer is taken out - or reduced in number.

That way the display doesn't seem jerky and random. (which is probably is =)

Also, simply clicking an item could extend the timer because it signals interest to the seller.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#4
The way I see it when you are having an offer selected it shouldn't close down.

Further examining an offer means you are interested in buying and could be equal to inspecting it physically/visually or talking to the merchant (In a real example).

In reality no merchant would go away under these conditions, and it would make the game mechanic much less frustrating.

You could also add some effect like a pulsating opacity / fade out when other offers have less then 10 seconds left.



I don't think it will actually be a problem in the full game though, because as I understand it each offer/item will probably be tied to an actual NPC, and even if the NPC goes away you could just follow to the next station or perhaps even catch up and buy it in mid space.
Post

Re: LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#5
Agreed that we need filters and general improvements to the usability of the interface.

As for the rest, keep in mind that the actual simulation code driving the appearance / disappearance of items (both at the market as well as on enemy ships) is total bogus and will be completely scrapped in favor of a real dynamic economy simulation!

So don't worry about oddities like 8 Hadrons disappearing at once. Most likely you would not see 8 of those at once in one location anyway, if the economy were truly being driven by a simulation. But right now the game logic doesn't even consider item value when removing it...it's very stupid :)

But there really wasn't any use in spending a long time making a really good "hack" for this code, when I know that in the end I am going to scrap it for a simulation. Apologies for the weirdness in the mean time :)
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
Post

Re: LTP v1.1: Buy Window Enhancements

#6
JoshParnell wrote:But there really wasn't any use in spending a long time making a really good "hack" for this code, when I know that in the end I am going to scrap it for a simulation. Apologies for the weirdness in the mean time :)
Well, now I know Josh have the option of either slapping a bunch of fake hacks to "simulate" the economy or actually try to simulate it completely so I'm glad Josh is opting for the full simulation. :thumbup:
In Josh we trust.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests