Reply to this message with new WC ideas

[Chip]

Well, maybe Origins might make another

Not to mention that bearly any companies actually listen to sugestions their customers have, because everyone will always want something different, and you can never satisfy them all...

CB: Not necessarily, I'm sure we could all agree on some things. Some of us agree on capturing capships, some of us don't because we believe they'd be too difficult because a boarding party could not take a ship occupied by a force. Perhaps we could compromise -- like if the craft has a few amount of crew (like a fighter), and 50 people/drones go at it, then the small crew surrenders. Most people won't destroy their own equipment (and themselves) unless they're real desparate. Most people prefer to stay alive. Many of the Kilrathi don't truly believe in "honorable deaths", but would rather stay alive.

 

[Quarto]

CB: With a narrow-minded attitude like that, customer's opinions aren't going to be read so no WC game designer is going to know ways to improve WC to make better games to satisfy customers. If customers' opinions aren't heard, they'll get disappointed. When they get disappointed, they'll probably disappoint WC game designers by not purchasing new WC games and so the game designers won't get any money.

Oh, I'm anything but narrow-minded. Yet, I pray that no Origin employee will ever listen to your ideas. I mean... missiles that gum-up turrets? Missiles that make enemy fighters change their IFF signals (thus rendering your IFF missiles useless, and not giving any positive results whatsoever)? Gigantic screens? Cloaks for all?
What's next? Cannons that launch jars of strawberry jam at enemy radar arrays in order to... jamm... them?
If Origin one day decides to make a new WC game, and decides to listen to ideas like yours, it'll be the last WC game ever, because it won't sell more than five copies... unless, of course, it'll be marketed as the parody of a WC game.

 

[Chip]

RE: to Quarto's message

Quarto Oh, I'm anything but narrow-minded. Yet, I pray that no Origin employee will ever listen to your ideas. I mean... missiles that gum-up turrets? Missiles that make enemy fighters change their IFF signals (thus rendering your IFF missiles useless, and not giving any positive results whatsoever)? Gigantic screens? Cloaks for all?
What's next? Cannons that launch jars of strawberry jam at enemy radar arrays in order to... jamm... them?
If Origin one day decides to make a new WC game, and decides to listen to ideas like yours, it'll be the last WC game ever, because it won't sell more than five copies... unless, of course, it'll be marketed as the parody of a WC game.

CB: Strawberry jam cannons to do some radar jamming (pun intended), another good idea. First of all, no player HAS to use these ideas, they should all be optional thus the players who want to blow up as much as they want can. Second, many players like capturing ships as intact as they can so they can build up their fleets. That was one of the more promising aspects of WCIV -- you could capture fighters and weapons use them against the enemy.

 

[Earthworm]

Originally posted by Chip
You don't want lesser trained pilots in Strankas, else they could crash into each other. That's why Gold Squadron was the only squadron qualified to fly the Excaliburs. That's also why Blair preferred good ConFed vets in the Dragon Black Lance fighters than BW greens.

They're caled Strakhas, damn it...

Gold squadron was the only one that could fly Excals, because at that time there were only ten Excaliburs in the fleet. Gold squadron traded it's T-bolts for the Excaliburst, because Blair was in the Gold squadron.

And the ten Lances were distributed between all of the Intrepids squadrons, not the three Confed vets on board Intrepid. Second, most of the pilots on the Intrepid were Vets....

If you were up against an ace pilot, I'm sure you'd want to be firing that many missiles and perhaps more. I know a single dumbfire can't destroy a Dragon Fighter (or any other fighter for that matter) when it hits and that's the most powerful missile except for the mace. And from what I've seen, the mace has even less control than the dumb fire. Both of them are unguided so that leaves us w/ the other missiles. Firing just one of any of those missiles at any fighter, in the WC games I've played, never had taken down that fighter.

Again, bullshit. IR, FF's and especially DF and Maces are powerfull enough to destroy a fighter single handedly. I often use Maces to take out two Dragons with one shot on the mission where you try to get to the Axius base.


Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about so I'll take Q's advice and not respond in this thread anymore.

It's too dangerous because it required more carefull attacks that will leave you vulrneable on other fronts.

I won't be vulnerable. And when I get a capship (like a Ralari), I can use it to reinforce my position to defend those other fronts.

You won't be vulnerable, you won't be this, you won't be that.

Excuse my ignorance, but have you ever commanded a fleet of space ships in a battle?

That's only if I'm detected and the guns have locked on to me.

If a lucky shot finds you, you're dead...

The Stranka in WCA series had stealth and shields and guns and engines all simultaneously operative.

That's because that Strakha didn't have a cloak.

Well, not literally liberated, but as a figure of speech. In Fleet Action, there was that Kilrathi that got captured, then befriended Bondarevsky, and went with him to a bar.

Eh, no. Thou art mistaken.

Yeah, like remote controlled missiles that expand into fighters. Those missile drone fighters shouldn't cost much at all.

What the hell are you talking about. You have to build a fighter. Sure it wouldn't need tracking systems, missiles, guns, but it would still need one of the most expensive parts, engines..........



[Edited by Earthworm on 12-23-2000 at 16:05]

 

[Earthworm]

Re: RE: to Quarto's message

Originally posted by Chip
Second, many players like capturing ships as intact as they can so they can build up their fleets.

Maybe in a strategy game not a fighter sim...

That was one of the more promising aspects of WCIV -- you could capture fighters and weapons use them against the enemy.

There were three or four missions where you could capture some ships or weaps, that's all.

 

[Chip]

RE: To Earthworm's messages below

Re: RE: to Quarto's message

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Chip
Second, many players like capturing ships as intact as they can so they can build up their fleets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe in a strategy game not a fighter sim...

CB: so you define a fighter sim that just has fighters go from one mission to the next. I see now. I define a fighter sim if the majority of the action is done using fighters.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That was one of the more promising aspects of WCIV -- you could capture fighters and weapons use them against the enemy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were three or four missions where you could capture some ships or weaps, that's all.

CB: And I think we need more than just 4 missions -- like ALL missions and additional BONUS missions -- like capturing the Vesuvius or the BattleShips from WCIII



Again, bullshit. IR, FF's and especially DF and Maces are powerfull enough to destroy a fighter single handedly. I often use Maces to take out two Dragons with one shot on the mission where you try to get to the Axius base.

Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about so I'll take Q's advice and not respond in this thread anymore.

CB: Obviously your game does not have the same programming as mine does because I know in each of my games, one missile is not enough to penetrate the shields and destroy a fighter.

It's too dangerous because it required more carefull attacks that will leave you vulrneable on other fronts.


You won't be vulnerable, you won't be this, you won't be that.

Excuse my ignorance, but have you ever commanded a fleet of space ships in a battle?

CB: I have the PC game Homeworld if that means anything to you. I've captured all capturable capships/supercapships in that game one can capture without losing any units in the process. And no, I did not use any invincibility or personal reprogramming tweaks to the game.


If a lucky shot finds you, you're dead...

CB: It won't find me period.


That's because that Strakha didn't have a cloak.

CB: If a ship can move and be cloaked, it should be able to stop and divert power to weapons while its cloaked so it can fire.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, not literally liberated, but as a figure of speech. In Fleet Action, there was that Kilrathi that got captured, then befriended Bondarevsky, and went with him to a bar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eh, no. Thou art mistaken.

CB: I'm not mistaken unless my novel was misprinted.

What the hell are you talking about. You have to build a fighter. Sure it wouldn't need tracking systems, missiles, guns, but it would still need one of the most expensive parts, engines..........

CB: Those engines could be the same used on missiles. Just replace the warhead with lightweight parts necessary to expand the parts to assume the shape of a fighter.

 

[Earthworm]

Quarto, before you say anything, I promise this is definetly my last post in this thread.

Originally posted by Chip
so you define a fighter sim that just has fighters go from one mission to the next. I see now. I define a fighter sim if the majority of the action is done using fighters.

What the hell are you talking about?

And I think we need more than just 4 missions -- like ALL missions and additional BONUS missions -- like capturing the Vesuvius or the BattleShips from WCIII

That would be extremly stupid and would make any game, even WC, suck.

Obviously your game does not have the same programming as mine does because I know in each of my games, one missile is not enough to penetrate the shields and destroy a fighter.

Oh, shut up. Ask anyone who played WC4, and they'll tell you that one missile is enough to destroy a fighter in that game.

I have the PC game Homeworld if that means anything to you. I've captured all capturable capships/supercapships in that game one can capture without losing any units in the process

No, I'm talking about you commanding a battle fleet in REAL life, and trying to surive by capture every single ship you see. I'm not talking about other games that are in no way conected to WC.

It won't find me period.

So basicly, you can't prove your point, so you make a stupid comment?

It won't find me period, is just as stupid as a captain of a navy destroyer saying, even a nuke can't destroy my ship, period.

Those engines could be the same used on missiles. Just replace the warhead with lightweight parts necessary to expand the parts to assume the shape of a fighter.

I'll agree with Quarto here. If a WC game was made using your ideas, it wouldn't sell more than 5 copies. Even if it had a striptease scene performed by Stiletto....

 

[Chip]

What the hell are you talking about?

CB: First of all, rather than using profanity at me, why don't you try re-asking your question in reference to specific words that I posted.


That would be extremly stupid and would make any game, even WC, suck.

CB: Then don't play to capture units. Just blow them up if you want. I prefer to have a dozen or so captured Ralaris providing a screen for the Tiger's Claw rather than letting the Claw take damage.

Oh, shut up. Ask anyone who played WC4, and they'll tell you that one missile is enough to destroy a fighter in that game.

CB: First of all don't tell me to shut-up. I didn't deserve that imperative sentence. Second, in my Sony PlayStation version of WCIV, one missile has never been enough.



No, I'm talking about you commanding a battle fleet in REAL life, and trying to surive by capture every single ship you see. I'm not talking about other games that are in no way conected to WC.

CB: No, I haven't commanded a battle fleet in REAL life. Have you?


So basicly, you can't prove your point, so you make a stupid comment?
It won't find me period, is just as stupid as a captain of a navy destroyer saying, even a nuke can't destroy my ship, period.

CB: If they design a WC game where you and I can go at each other, I'll prove my point. Trust me, you won't win.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those engines could be the same used on missiles. Just replace the warhead with lightweight parts necessary to expand the parts to assume the shape of a fighter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll agree with Quarto here. If a WC game was made using your ideas, it wouldn't sell more than 5 copies. Even if it had a striptease scene performed by Stiletto....

CB: Funny, looks like w/ the current decoys, the game is selling. I couldn't imagine anyone not wanting fake fighters to divert foe fighters away from real friendly fighters. And if you don't want to use fake fighters, then don't. Besides, what makes you so certain that Origins won't make a game that has fake fighters going around just to irritate YOU?

 

[steampunk]

Originally posted by Chip
Besides, what makes you so certain that Origins won't make a game that has fake fighters going around just to irritate YOU?

They have better things to do.

 

[Earthworm]

***Originally posted by Chip:
First of all, rather than using profanity at me, why don't you try re-asking your question in reference to specific words that I posted.***

The day the word "hell" becomes a profanity that you should be concerned about, hell will freeze over...

Second, I didn't understand the whole damn thing that I placed in quotes..

***No, I haven't commanded a battle fleet in REAL life. Have you?***

No, and I don't need to. No navy in history, has ever attempted to capture ships on regular basis just to build up their fleet. Because it would be imposible.

***If they design a WC game where you and I can go at each other, I'll prove my point. Trust me, you won't win.***

And another stupid coment. Do you think you're like a freaking Rambo or something? Do you think that in real life you could get 20 to 30 kills in one mission like you can in Prophecy?

***Funny, looks like w/ the current decoys, the game is selling. I couldn't imagine anyone not wanting fake fighters to divert foe fighters away from real friendly fighters. And if you don't want to use fake fighters, then don't.***

It's not about not wanting it, it's about it being not realistic. No government, ever, would spend money on building fighters, puting power plants inside them, and then get them destroyed. Especially not the Confed government that even at the Prophecy time hasn't recovered it's economy from the Kilrathi war.



[Edited by Earthworm on 12-23-2000 at 20:50]

 

[Earthworm]

And now, just so no one can say that this whole thread is pointless...

I would like to see more misions like the one where you destroy the Nephilim dreadnought in Prophecy. Meaning, it would take two, or even more missions to destroy a huge space station or a capship, where each part would be dedicated only to destroying a single component (Except that you wouldn't have to replay the previous parts of the mission if you died, like you have to in Prophecy).

I'd like to see capship battles. Huge ships like the Plunketts and Hydras, exchanging turret fire and torpedoes.

And I'd like the Prophecy and WC2 way of destroying capships to be meshed together. Meaning, the capships could still be only damaged by torps, plasma guns, and maybe some new missiles, but you could target the ship enywhere you want, while you can still target individual components to disable them (something like... ugh, Freespace). So if you don't want a capship to escape while you deal with fighters, you can just destroy it's engines at the start of the mission. Or there could be missions where you have to destroy a ships comunication systems so that it can't call for reinforcments, while at the same time you have to protect ships that put out jamming fields.

Also, some new missions types that I haven't seen in any space sim. Like flying fighters like the Zorthak from FC, to distract an enemy fleet, while your own fleet escapes.

And finally I want some missions to be longer, between 15 and 30 minutes, although you should be allowed to save the game during missions that long.



[Edited by Earthworm on 12-23-2000 at 20:52]

 

[Quarto]

Pah, this is worse than I thought. Chip didn't even notice the Space Balls reference I threw at him. What's the use of sarcasm, then, if people don't understand it when they see it?

Well, in order to put all this silliness behind us, I think I will now reply to EW's ideas, because they even make sense .

1. Multi-mission strikes - yes. 'Twas nice, though I was rather annoyed when I suddenly found out that when you die in the second mission, you have to do the first one again . Still, 'tis a neat idea.
2. Capship battles - well, that one I've heard far too many times before, but yeah, it would be nice.
3. WCP/WC2 targetting methods together - how about this? We use WCP-like torps for taking out specific components, and we use more powerful, but slower, more cumbersome torps which target the entire ship rather than specific components, and cause damage to the ship as a whole. And, of course, when they kill a ship, there's a big explosion, which I'm sure we all want ;-).
4. Zorthak-like missions - perhaps, but I'm not sure. Somehow, I get the feeling that most players don't want to fly an unarmed ship.
5. 15-30 minute missions - I want to do something like this in the last mission for UE... but we'll see how that goes, and if it is done, we'll see if people actually enjoy it. Without the possibility of saving in the middle, it might be... difficult.

 

[steampunk]

15-30min mission could be damned near impossible. And we'd probably run out of afterburner fuel. Not fun. But that might make for a nice save game system. Save during refuels.

Don't like he idea of having bigger torps to take down whole capships. Doesn't seem realistic to me. Besides, you shouldn't have to take out the whole ship to destroy it. It should go down if you take out a few critical parts ...

And no capship battles till they improve the AI. Can you imagine getting hit by friendly fire all the time?

 

[Quarto]

15-30min mission could be damned near impossible. And we'd probably run out of afterburner fuel. Not fun. But that might make for a nice save game system. Save during refuels.

Yes, AB fuel will be a problem for the player, but that's what refuelling is for. Save during refuels, though? I dunno... I think, personally, that no matter how frustrating it gets, the player shouldn't get to save half-way through the mission (provided it's not _too_ long; 30 minutes should be the absolute limit).

Don't like he idea of having bigger torps to take down whole capships. Doesn't seem realistic to me. Besides, you shouldn't have to take out the whole ship to destroy it. It should go down if you take out a few critical parts ...

Yes, well, the WCP-style torps would still be there. The other ones would serve a different purpose - they would inflict damage not on specific ship sections, but on larger parts of the hull. But of course, that would be a waste of money. I mean, why build bigger torps when smaller ones do the job?

 

[Vondoom]

Flight games should let you save during them, or at least long missions. IW's biggest flaws were tough and very long missions with no way to save. Long Missions can be great but you should be able to save at each Nav point at least for longer missions.

 

[Penguin]

When it comes to torps this is what I'd like to see:
A big missile with a bigger warhead.
Can be targeted onto specific parts of the capship in order to do more damage per hit.
Can be targeted onto any part of the capship, that is, you don't have to surgically remove key components to destroy the capship. You can just blow a hole through the hull and forget the bridge and engines.
Has the ability to lock onto any stationary or slow moving target (yes this includes fighters).
Can be fired like a DF - eg enemies tearing up your 6, you can launch the moment you're in range. Or you can toast fighters with it if you're a good shot. Also useful if your targeting computer gets fried - this used to happen to me alot in WC1 & 2.

What the lock is for is not to allow it to penetrate shields but to lock onto a specific target so that the torp can maneuver to it inflight. If necessary the torp can fly around the ship to hit a component on the other side. All weapons should be able to damage shields. The thing is the shields are so strong only torps or some similarly powerful weapon have a chance of penetrating.

 

[Earthworm]

Originally posted by Quarto
I think I will now reply to EW's ideas, because they even make sense .

Thank you, I feal honored.

***1. Multi-mission strikes - yes. 'Twas nice, though I was rather annoyed when I suddenly found out that when you die in the second mission, you have to do the first one again . Still, 'tis a neat idea.***

Yeah, that's why OSI would have to make it so you don't have to replay previous parts. And missions like that woud emphasize how hard some capships can actually be to destroy.

***We use WCP-like torps for taking out specific components, and we use more powerful, but slower, more cumbersome torps which target the entire ship rather than specific components, and cause damage to the ship as a whole.***

I like my idea better.

***And, of course, when they kill a ship, there's a big explosion, which I'm sure we all want ;-).***

Oui, we'd all like that. Though I'd rather that there was a huge wreck left after the ship blows up. Like in WC3, or the movie.


***4. Zorthak-like missions - perhaps, but I'm not sure. Somehow, I get the feeling that most players don't want to fly an unarmed ship.***

The Confed equivelant that you'd fly could have some light guns though, so the mission could still require you take out some light fighters and such. But I'd like a few missions like that rather than constant patrols.<G>
And one of youre objectives could be to lay mines at a jump point your fleet used, to even further slow down the enemy. IIRC, there were only two missions in all WC games that require you to drop mines (one in WC3, and one in Prophecy if you loose some missions earlier).

***5. 15-30 minute missions - I want to do something like this in the last mission for UE... but we'll see how that goes, and if it is done, we'll see if people actually enjoy it.***

If it's done right, it could work out. Just don't make it a long patrol route through 20 nav points.<G>

***Without the possibility of saving in the middle, it might be... difficult.***

Yeah, that's my point. Starlancer has tons of missions that can drag between 20 and 30 minutes (and even more if you run out of AB fuel) and they could be a pain sometimes.

Originally posted by steampunk
15-30min mission could be damned near impossible. And we'd probably run out of afterburner fuel. Not fun. But that might make for a nice save game system. Save during refuels.

Exactly, you cold always refuel. Prophecy already introduced us to refuling mid-mission, so running out of fuel wouldn't be a huge problem.

***Don't like he idea of having bigger torps to take down whole capships. Doesn't seem realistic to me. ***

Why not? There are many different torps in the WCU, that do different amounts of damage. So if instead of firing 3-4 torps at all components, you could fire off a 15m long torp and take out the ship with just this one. Of course it would travel slower, be less nible, and possible take more time to lock on. Or, more powerfull torps like this one could be saved for those super strong capships.

***Besides, you shouldn't have to take out the whole ship to destroy it. It should go down if you take out a few critical parts ...***

You don't have too, but sometimes it would be much easier to take down a capship in Prophecy if you didn't have to target individual components. You have to run from one end of the ship to the other, and if you're close to the hull you might accidentaly fire a torp at the ship, while the component is on the other side.

***And no capship battles till they improve the AI. Can you imagine getting hit by friendly fire all the time?***

Well, it wouldn't be fun to be hit by those triple particles of the Plunkett all the time, but in a middle of a battle two huge capships can't afford to watch out for friendly fighters that get lost between the two. If you get lost in the firefight and get hit by a friendly capship, tough luck, it sucks to be you.

You'd just have to do your best at staying our of their way.



[Edited by Earthworm on 12-24-2000 at 16:54]

 

[steampunk]

Well, I guess we could have a huge torp to take out capships. But take a battleship for example. You don't have to obliterate it to sink it. It probably doesn't take much to blow it up either provided you hit a critical part. Yes WC isn't a naval battle. But you get the idea. If we manage to hit a critical part of the capship, then it blows up, or disables it etc ... I don't mean targeting components like the bridge or engines. More like targeting weaknesses ... if you catch my drift.

 

[Earthworm]

Yeah, that's true, but it can be hard to find a weak spot at times. Take the Hakaga for example. Even it's engines were placed deep inside the ship, and durasteel dors could be closed, locking the engines inside, while a torp detonated on those doors.

 

[Penguin]

Its ships like the Hakaga that a 15m long torp comes in handy

As for the multiple missions to waste a capship (a la WCP's Nephilim dreadnought) there could be a problem. WCP's handling of it was a little unrealistic IMHO. I mean first you fly in to waste its turrets. Then you have to fly back to the Midway, switch to the Devastators and come back. That gives the bugs lots of time to escape, repair, etc. What should be done is have multiple wings attacking at the same time, or at least timed to occur at predetermined times (eg torp bombers don't attack until SEAD patrols have eliminated a predetermined percentage of the enemy turrets). Then make the defences capable enough so that we have to launch several such sorties to get the job done. As a last measure make it the player can choose which wing to be in to add to the replayability.

Finally the long missions. A long mission definitely shouldn't be some long patrol. What it should be is some long range strike mission, where you have to jump, maybe navigate a mine field to reach the target. Having completed the objective you then have to go back the way you came. Alternatively a long mission could be escorting a capship out of enemy territory and being forced to stay in space until you're fighter's so shot up you're of no further use, you make it out or you're dead.