Proposed Change: Unlocking Cross-Faction Ship Access with "Aces of Aces" Badge

[windshadow0177]

Draskon, post: 1491, member: 808 wrote:

There's nothing inherently wrong with Shield Adjust vs. Reinforce; they're for different use cases and can be used together.

I disagree on this. Adjusts do waste shield capacity. When you adjust, it should transfer the energy as well as the capacity. Perhaps this is a discussion that we should split off, but I'll try to illustrate my point on this first.

To start, assume 1000 shields front and rear and shields are at full. So they should look like this:

Capacity
1000 Front

1000 Rear

Energy
1000 Front

1000 Rear

You execute a moderate-Adjust Front, moving 30% capacity forward. This is what happens now:

Capacity
1300 Front

700 Rear

Energy
1000 Front

700 Rear

That 300 points of shield energy that was on the Rear shield gets lopped off and lost. Why is this not transferred with the capacity? The loss of this energy renders Adjustment totally ineffective as a tactic, making it purely strategic.

And this is the way it has always worked, but it flies in the face of canon and all the Star Wars flight games that came before and after it. By both standards, we should be able to put full shields to one side or even them out with a keypress. We should be able to put shields full front for the inbound-approach to a target, then full-rear when we've got our backs to it - and it should only be a key press. Tactically speaking the Adjustment chips, as they are, hobble us. Making a change to this to be in line with both canon and pre- and post-SWG game experiences would give our flight gameplay a novel new dimension and make these worthwhile to carry.

Yep, reading back on this, it needs to be its own suggestion...

Edit: punctuation correction, corrected adjustment values, added some clarification, reworked the data to be more clear & easier to read

[Nexacon]

SOE's implementation of space was always lacking, and honestly if you kept the basic concept of ships that shoot at other ships and scrapped the rest to redesign the whole thing you are already moving in the right direction. Keep multiplayer ships obviously. Arguably the best thing SOE ever did. I mean besides the crafting system of course. I think it is the crafting system that makes the space experience so impelling.

I would go a bit further than the original posters idea though; I think it makes sense to be able to retain a license you earn. It works like that in real life for good reason. It's logical and thematical. Do you see a captured rebel get a chance to escape in Tie Fighter and just say well I can't escape in that ship because I don't have that license? Cannon say's you can fly whatever you get your hands on. And it solves the POB problem where you need another Freelance pilot to copilot your ship. Luke flew the Millennium Falcon and I am pretty sure he did not get A Free Lance Pilot License. But that did not stop him. Luke is probably the most Rebel aligned character you are gonna see.

A multi license system also solves the ship balance issue too. You could then just fly what you want.

I would say it would be fine to switch back and forth lvling them all together if you want.

Work out a different ability skill system because the old one was uninspired and most of the time I forget that anything other than overloads exists.

You can make a better system easily. There is a lot of room for improvement in the SOE implementation of space; for example after I lvled to max pilot lvl for the first time I thought to my self, "That was amazing! Now what?" There is a lack of instance progression IMO. They should have built more content. The last mission in the pilot training quests was great. They should have built more experiences like that IMO.

So yeah, it just makes sense to unlock all the faction ships on one character. +1 from me.

How are you going to do it? IDK, but you can easily trip and fall and make it better than it is IMO.

Historical reactions: Like × 1

[Draskon]

Nexacon, post: 1547, member: 1362 wrote:

SOE's implementation of space was always lacking, and honestly if you kept the basic concept of ships that shoot at other ships and scrapped the rest to redesign the whole thing you are already moving in the right direction. Keep multiplayer ships obviously. Arguably the best thing SOE ever did. I mean besides the crafting system of course. I think it is the crafting system that makes the space experience so impelling.

Believe me, space is going to reach some incredible heights (pun unintended) as we go; we're not gonna stop there.

Historical reactions: Like × 2

[Right]

Nexacon, post: 1547, member: 1362 wrote:

...if you kept the basic concept of ships that shoot at other ships and scrapped the rest to redesign the whole thing you are already moving in the right direction.

Aww... thats rough. Well, I like what they made anyways. :LOL:

[windshadow0177]

Nexacon, post: 1547, member: 1362 wrote:

SOE's implementation of space was always lacking, and honestly if you kept the basic concept of ships that shoot at other ships and scrapped the rest to redesign the whole thing you are already moving in the right direction. Keep multiplayer ships obviously. Arguably the best thing SOE ever did. I mean besides the crafting system of course. I think it is the crafting system that makes the space experience so impelling.

I do agree, some of the things they did are lacking (Pirate trap? Only one level of it? Really?). Some of the things they did were over-broad (X-Wings should not be able to be configured to works as interceptors and keep that hefty weapon loadout, for example). That said, I still feel like they landed closer to the bullseye than off the edge of the target.

Given the apparent passion and attention space is getting, I'm really looking forward to seeing what the Evo team does with it to make it their own.

Historical reactions: Like × 1

[Nexacon]

windshadow0177, post: 1566, member: 1090 wrote:

I do agree, some of the things they did are lacking (Pirate trap? Only one level of it? Really?). Some of the things they did were over-broad (X-Wings should not be able to be configured to works as interceptors and keep that hefty weapon loadout, for example). That said, I still feel like they landed closer to the bullseye than off the edge of the target.

Given the apparent passion and attention space is getting, I'm really looking forward to seeing what the Evo team does with it to make it their own.

I don't think it will be hard to improve on a game this old it was revolutionary when it came out, especially for the tech of the day. But it absolutely will not be hard to design a better system now. I have no idea how hard it will be to make it compatible with an old game. That said I have faith Evolve will make it better based on how fun the ground game is.

Like I said, the 0-max license experience and customization options are really good (there are things that could be improved). I can't speak to the issue with X Wings and Interceptors because I just never tried to test it. I played Rebel Pilot on Live and I can tell you it was not easy fitting parts in that thing; however it has been many years since then. I usually go Free-Lance because it is so much easier to fit parts in a ship with high mass.

Leaving space in the state that it is in, is a missed opportunity; the space game could easily be so much better IMO. IMO space was not fully explored and flushed likely do to outside issues. From what I understand the people doing the work on the game really tried.

[Nexacon]

Right, post: 1563, member: 909 wrote:

Aww... thats rough. Well, I like what they made anyways. :LOL:

I don't go into details because there is a lot to cover; and yes the space game is fun but I would say everything can easily be improved and at least 1 thing should be because it would be an opportunity missed if nothing was done to it. Everything physics to visuals could be improved; for example the feed back reaction of weather you hit a ships shields could be worked on and seems to indicate a hit sometimes when you did not connect.

Also, the way your ship handles could be adjusted a little bit IMO but it works fine really it's just that it seems a bit slow maybe because hardware was not up speed at that time or is a compensation for how small the sky box is. But if you take a good look at it, all things space could be revamped. Like, why are space stations so small and where am I supposed to be for pvp; it's not that clear and seems to be lacking options for low lvl load outs. Heck why not implement outer rim deep space procedural stuff for exploration a and colonization. Manual docking with ships/stations and/or landing on Planets.

I am not saying you need to change everything. But there is definite opportunities you miss if you do nothing. Like I at least hope for more instance progression options for end game space. But it's like trying to turn a mobile home into a house with a basement. When you look at everything that needs to be changed there is a strong case for scrapping the mobile home and starting with an empty lot. That may not be realistic or even true for a program situation but but as far as know it could be as well. But that's how I think about things because of what I have seen in my body of experience. That's how I think when it comes to the task at hand and making something more goodder/amazinger.

There is always a cost to change something. And sometimes it may well lead to you scrapping some or all things you're trying to change, to try to lower the cost; but it doesn't always work. I think the staff at Evolve can easily come up with something better. I'm not too worried about it.

[Draskon]

Nexacon, post: 1570, member: 1362 wrote:

I don't go into details because there is a lot to cover; ...

Ship shields showing a hit yet not actually registering damage is something that can't really be improved all that easily, because that's a client to server "talkback" issue. When you directly hit a ship, your client will show a shield hit because yes, you hit the ship directly on your screen. However, your target's hitsphere/hitbox is further ahead of the ship server-side, which is why sometimes you have to shoot absurdly far in front of a ship to actually damage it. It depends on many factors, like ping, distance, and relative speeds.

That's why you always have to lead between the lead reticule and the ship's actual position in order to properly register damage.

Space overall is a bit too slow, yes; scaling is all over the place and inconsistent as well. The PvP thing is a bit weird because the only places PvP is enabled are in Dantooine and Lok GCW Space battles (which has shoddy implementation for the moment) and the Deep Space sector which you need special hyperspace chips to get to (and is largely empty because there's no reason to even really go there). You can technically PvP anywhere you want with a command to flag as Space SF/Overt, but for designated PvP zones, the aforementioned are all that're there atm.

Pretty much everything in your post regarding balancing is being addressed. However, there are definitely some limitations to things. I doubt we'll ever be able to make landing on planets possible with the engine's infrastructure, and it wouldn't make sense to dedicate that much time to trying to turn SWG into an extremely archaic version of No Man's Sky; as much as I'd love that.

Historical reactions: Like × 1

[Nexacon]

Draskon, post: 1575, member: 808 wrote:

Ship shields showing a hit yet not actually registering damage is something that can't really be improved all that easily, because that's a client to server "talkback" issue. When you directly hit a ship, your client will show a shield hit because yes, you hit the ship directly on your screen. However, your target's hitsphere/hitbox is further ahead of the ship server-side, which is why sometimes you have to shoot absurdly far in front of a ship to actually damage it. It depends on many factors, like ping, distance, and relative speeds.

That's why you always have to lead between the lead reticule and the ship's actual position in order to properly register damage.

Space overall is a bit too slow, yes; scaling is all over the place and inconsistent as well. The PvP thing is a bit weird because the only places PvP is enabled are in Dantooine and Lok GCW Space battles (which has shoddy implementation for the moment) and the Deep Space sector which you need special hyperspace chips to get to (and is largely empty because there's no reason to even really go there). You can technically PvP anywhere you want with a command to flag as Space SF/Overt, but for designated PvP zones, the aforementioned are all that're there atm.

Pretty much everything in your post regarding balancing is being addressed. However, there are definitely some limitations to things. I doubt we'll ever be able to make landing on planets possible with the engine's infrastructure, and it wouldn't make sense to dedicate that much time to trying to turn SWG into an extremely archaic version of No Man's Sky; as much as I'd love that.

I am glad you are doing something to space because it needs it. Basically there is much opportunity to improve space the way SOE left it. It just warms my heart to see that the good base they left is not going to waste because of the unrealized potential.

I am no programmer so I don't really know what is realistic. I just think that there is so much that could be done with the amazing foundation SOE left in the space game. I think I have like 15ish years of frustration about the state that SOE left space in that I am not articulating it effectively. I am overly excited that you guys are working on it. And because of how much more fun the ground game is on this server, I have no doubt you will do the same for space. TY for all you are doing and have done. You guys are really turning out some on point content here.

Historical reactions: Like × 2

[windshadow0177]

Draskon, post: 1575, member: 808 wrote:

That's why you always have to lead between the lead reticule and the ship's actual position in order to properly register damage.

I'm not 100% certain, but I think there's also a fault in how the leading indicator is calculated as well. I don't have any means to test it to be certain, but what I think is happening is that the lead indicators position is calculated based on throttle position rather than current speed. For example - target ship is moving at 50m/s. They then throttle up to 100m/s. The lead indicator immediately moves to a proper lead position for 100m/s, but the target ship is still accelerating to 100m/s - and thus, shots go wide when shooting at the indicator.

I don't think this is the only thing going on, but I'm as certain as I can be that it is a factor.

[windshadow0177]

Draskon, post: 1575, member: 808 wrote:

and the Deep Space sector which you need special hyperspace chips to get to (and is largely empty because there's no reason to even really go there).

This is incorrect. You can also reach Deep Space via the same station that you use to enter Kessel.

Edited to add:

Deep Space isn't without its uses... Handy place to grind faction for shifts as you're zipping through AOA. Also a handy place to pick up Corvettes for the Slayer collections without getting tapped on the shoulder by Tier 6-9 ships in Ord Mantel - with an extra bonus of getting help on the job from faction-aligned ships where you're on your own in Ord Mantel.

[Draskon]

Yes, I forgot about the stations as I hate going to them to get there or to Kessel. Thank you for the correction.

The lead indicator is never going to be precise either because it's predicting where something is moving. It updates slowly enough that quick movements can be enough to throw you off. If the lead indicator can act more like the joystick emulation reticule (in that it shows different opacity reticules at different distances in relation to where you're aiming/going) or something similar, then that may be helpful, albeit probably a bit distracting.

The way the reticule is designed with the "hooks" up in each diagonal direction is supposed to help you line up a shot in relation to your target during movement. However, it can be a bit tricky to get used to, but if you get a feel for it, eventually you only need to use the lead indicator as a reference point and not a direct target to shoot for. There are plenty of times I've flown directly passed the bow of a Lambda shooting literally nothing and kill it because I know where its hitboxes are.

I know there are different reticules to use with a /ui reticule something command, so the hooks don't apply to every reticule you can use obviously, but I hope that makes sense.

I'll admit that I didn't know if DS was a good place for Vettes compared to Ord. Ord isn't bad once you get passed the initial spawns of T6 and T9's, because they don't spawn out that far, it's just the copious amounts of T5's you have to contend with which isn't exactly much easier sometimes. Not to mention killing 25 Vettes each for the gunship schematics is about as boring as it gets after a while.

Historical reactions: Like × 1

[windshadow0177]

Draskon, post: 1583, member: 808 wrote:

Not to mention killing 25 Vettes each for the gunship schematics is about as boring as it gets after a while.

T R U T H

I find taking them in Deep Space is much more similar to taking them in Kessel once you've dealt with the nearby hostiles... Better, in the sense that you get help from the faction NPCs... The only catch is that you can't get credit for one that the NPCs have already parked, but they do cycle decently in Deep Space.

At the end of the day, the thing that really makes using DS for Vettes (and Gunboats) worthwhile is how disused it is here. If it gets a rework like what Legends did, it'll be more trouble than it's worth.

[windshadow0177]

Draskon, post: 1583, member: 808 wrote:

The lead indicator is never going to be precise either because it's predicting where something is moving. It updates slowly enough that quick movements can be enough to throw you off. If the lead indicator can act more like the joystick emulation reticule (in that it shows different opacity reticules at different distances in relation to where you're aiming/going) or something similar, then that may be helpful, albeit probably a bit distracting.

No, I do agree, it shouldn't be a "Shoot Here" button, but I think you can also agree that it's comically inaccurate in many ways. How often is the indicator anywhere but square on the target on a 0/0 head-to-head pass? 50%+ in my experience. In many circumstances, aligning a single axis of a triangulation is all the indicator is worth. All it reliably tells you is where the target's nose is going. It's only minimally-to-moderately useful for ranging, and abysmal for indicating the target's speed.

I've spent many hours training to shoot without even targeting my... LOL... target for this reason; and the only time I consistently target now is when I need to shoot at components. The only ships that really give me fits are the standard TIEs. Because of their symmetry it's hard to read their orientation.

[Right]

windshadow0177, post: 1580, member: 1090 wrote:

I'm not 100% certain, but I think there's also a fault in how the leading indicator is calculated as well. I don't have any means to test it to be certain, but what I think is happening is that the lead indicators position is calculated based on throttle position rather than current speed. For example - target ship is moving at 50m/s. They then throttle up to 100m/s. The lead indicator immediately moves to a proper lead position for 100m/s, but the target ship is still accelerating to 100m/s - and thus, shots go wide when shooting at the indicator.

I don't think this is the only thing going on, but I'm as certain as I can be that it is a factor.

Interesting! I think its also calculated based on heading, not actual momentum (which can be very different when ships like interceptors with high slide, or players with EO4 are moving and turning fast).

Historical reactions: Like × 1

[Right]

Draskon, post: 1575, member: 808 wrote:

That's why you always have to lead between the lead reticule and the ship's actual position in order to properly register damage.

Sometimes, I lead, sometimes I track, and sometimes I trail the reticle. Its very intuitive and unsystematic for me at the moment, haven't figured out why anything works when it does so far.

[windshadow0177]

Right, post: 1587, member: 909 wrote:

Interesting! I think its also calculated based on heading, not actual momentum (which can be very different when ships like interceptors with high slide, or players with EO4 are moving and turning fast).

Very. That would further explain more of the behavior I've seen out of the indicator that I can't get any metrics for to look over... That's why I was reluctant to mention it to start with... Everything I can offer about it is anecdotal/observation based.

[orton]

PuddinPantz, post: 1424, member: 87 wrote:

Proposed Change: Unlocking Cross-Faction Ship Access with "Aces of Aces" Badge

In Star Wars Galaxies, the current system restricts players to flying faction-specific ships based on their allegiance and factional achievements. However, I propose a change that enhances player freedom and rewards high achievement within the game.

Change Details:

• Upon achieving the prestigious "Aces of Aces" badge, earned by attaining Ace pilot status in all factions and squadrons, players should gain access to fly any ship in the game, regardless of faction.
• This change would provide an additional layer of reward for dedicated pilots who have demonstrated mastery across all factions and squadrons.
• Allowing players to fly any ship they desire after reaching this pinnacle achievement would enhance gameplay diversity and encourage continued engagement and progression.

Benefits:

• Increased Player Freedom: Players would have the freedom to pilot any ship they choose, opening up new strategic possibilities and enhancing the overall gameplay experience.
• Rewarding High Achievement: The "Aces of Aces" badge becomes even more meaningful, serving as a symbol of mastery and granting tangible in-game benefits.
• Encouraging Exploration: With access to a wider array of ships, players may be incentivized to explore different playstyles and strategies, further enriching the game world.

Overall, implementing this change would align with the game's focus on player progression and customization, while providing a significant reward for dedicated pilots who have reached the pinnacle of achievement.

Hey PuddinPantz,

I just wanted to let you know some of what you are asking for here has finally been implemented. The system is not exactly how you wrote it up in your proposal, but the basics are there once you reach Ace you can utilize cross factional ships.

Thank You,
Orton
Evolve Community Manager