FORUMS


Nytecrow

Statistics



POSTS

I too need info on this...I have installed this game twice. The first time using the automatic quick installations, which had NO FILES ANYWHERE (I did a full system scan, searched directory and everything. It said it was installed but was nowhere to be found on the computer), then went through the trouble of installing it AGAIN, this time in a custom folder I created...And it STILL is not anywhere on the computer.


It has to be the launcher because I've literally installed 2 games yesterday with not one problem, but twice I've installed a ghost program known as Dreadnought to my computer.

Still seems like if you gather your entire team to one side you can push with the majority of your ships and use the remaining ones to cap, thus still Zerging.


nwood#2177 posted (#post-2614)


We wouldn't want to implement the system as a separate game mode. We're afraid that it would split the community a bit too much. What we would wind up doing is implement a damage model for the entire game, However sophisticated it might be. What I'm talking about is essentially spots on a ship that do extra or reduced damage when you shoot them (like getting a headshot). Though I really do like the idea about how shooting certain sections can result in a specific temporary outcome. The trick would be communicating that information to the player receiving the damage/debuff.



Personally I don't think it would split the community more than it is for any MMO. You have your Casual's and your Hardcore Players. With this method you would just be catering to those who might find Normal Play far too easy after a time. As for the warning, I envisioned it as a brief flash on your screen in red with sirens and such while a status is inflicted telling you "Engines hit! Critical Failure immanent! Engine output reduced to 50%!" or similar.

@Darkloser


From the way you described it, it does seem as if a "Zerg" could still be a viable tactic(I use the term Tactic very...very....VERY loosely) to quickly suppress a side then rush to the core base. I personally think that while we are on the subject of other games in comparison(Just for ideas) I would like to recommend looking at World of Warcraft's Isle of Conquest Battleground. In this PVP match you must lay claim to different components such as a Siege Engine factory and Mines to strengthen your own resources. Or another comparison is Star Wars the Old Republic's Alderan Warzone. This set up has multiple nodes in which you must capture to give power to Turbo-Laser's which fire on the enemy flagship.


Personally I would see the Alderan situation being more viable in Dreadnought with the use of things such as Shipyards in which you need to capture distributed Shipyards littered about the area. These Shipyards then, while under a team's control, begin producing Bombers or similar AI-controlled ships which make an Assault Run on the enemy Flagship(Basically an unmoving AI ship/Planet/Station) and deal damage periodically the longer your team holds the Shipyard. This can be formulated with Cooldowns and a specific Damage for each Shipyard for example dealing 500 Damage every 10 seconds that you maintain control. HOWEVER, to prevent "Zerg" you could initiate a system where the Shipyard will not send out units if the Control Zone(a pre-programmed distance from the Shipyard) is Contested. This means your team would have to make sure no enemy is in the Control Zone. If a team "Zergs" in, the Shipyard will not begin assaulting the enemy Flagship/Station/etc until all enemy ships are out of the ordained Control Zone. This would prevent players from being able to Rush a target and cause them to strategically HOLD the position. For example a map could contain 3 separate Shipyards. To win a team must maintain the majority Control over 2 of the 3 Shipyards.


As I described in my hypothetical method of a Capture and Hold scenario you could exchange the "Shipyard" idea for ideas such as Experimental Super Laser Turrets or Solar Powered MegaCannon Satellites, or any number of similar methods. This I believe you could successfully achieve nwood. And as you may have noticed I do try to be thorough and explain my points XD Hope you don't mind the wall of texts I send your way XD


nwood#2177 posted (#post-2506)


It's more than that too. If we implemented strong/weak zones as you suggest you'd see some cool new tactics from players. Imagine Dreadnoughts lining up like old ships of the line, or corvettes taking long attack runs just to get a shot at a Dreadnought's engines, or maybe assaults facing the nose of their ship towards the enemy making them super aggressive.

It's a really cool system and something we feel could work with Dreadnought. I can't promise anything yet but keep asking, you may see it one day :)



Glad to hear nwood!


And yes it would need to be separated into a Hardmode rather than integrated with the normal play for this creates a more advanced means of combat and would be extremely displeasing to newer players. How would you feel jumping into a game, be in the process of learning what your ship can do, and at that time be farmed like mad because everyone knows your weakspots and you are unable to even use your basic skills due to constant debuffs. By organizing this system into a Hardmode rather than a Normal Play you can establish a Goal for players who are growing tired of the lack of challenge in the Normal Play. This gives incentive for players to REMAIN in the game for years to come over those who join a game till they grow bored and understand all the mechanics of the game. For example, World of Warcraft has a constant decline in player-base until the coming of a new Expansion Pack. Players then join en-mass, play until they have pretty much seen all the content, then quit till the next Expansion arrives due to boredom. This is merely one example. This type of Playing is quite regular with games of any type. A new game that is interesting will get tons of "New-Game Hype" but then fade into obscurity after 1-2 years when half the playerbase gets bored. By implementing this system as a Hardmode you prolong this process as players during the "New-Game Hype" will be playing in Normal Mode, grinding down the basics and mastering the simple tactics. Then when they begin to grow bored with how easy it is to kill so-and-so or winning has become routine if your playing a certain way with decent players, or other similar examples, they arrive at the next stage of the game. Hardmode, in which not only do the players need to use the simple tactics they learned previously, but now they HAVE to work with their teammates or risk trapping themselves and feeding their foes, now they HAVE to learn what points of their ship are most vital. How to turn their ship for more defense. How to organize which parts of the ship you can afford to be hit. Where on the enemy ship you need to focus fire on. What elevation or angle you should approach a certain foe from. A Dreadnaught is Warping in and wrecking the place? Nail his engines so he can't warp away to safety and let your crew entrap him and eat away at his critical points! This will grant more advanced play, and as so should be set up in a different mode for more advanced players.


snoopy_jr#8130 posted (#post-2501)


I think there should be critical hit "areas" located on each ship. When those areas receive a hit, that damage would be increased as a critical hit. That would add more aiming and protection of those areas in order to keep yourself from taking increased damage by being struck in those areas. I wouldn't really call for a hard mode as much as integrating the basic idea into the global game mode.



Your suggestion is a watered down version of what I believe Dreadnought can be.(Not meaning that offensively) As I stated before, I believe that this game can break new ground and snare more than the die-hard SciFi buffs to include more. Criticals would be implimented in this system I am asking for. My real goal is for more than "Ha! I knew where to hit you to deal more damage!" but real rewards and punishments for successful tactics and failed defensives.


UnLimiTeD#2482 posted (#post-2484)



Selerox#6711 posted (#post-2478)


Maybe a later inclusion, but I see no reason whatsoever to mess with a perfectly functional system that's easy to learn for new players.



You might call me a madman, but that is part of the reason why I like things more complex.

The learning experience, the regular challenge, having more to think about then when to engage and disengage, is part of the thrill.

Too many games are just easy to learn, and after a few days I feel I have understood everything, and move on.


In short, I like complex systems because they take more effort to learn.

No one's asking to implement it now, or even soon, even less to make it mandatory.

It's so players who have taken in and mastered the gameplay can delve into details others might not want to concern themselves with, like Advanced rules in many board- and tabletop-games.

I think everyone agrees that comes after the basics.



Which is my reasoning behind the potential difficulties compared to the benefits. You not only give a challenge to those who desire the thrill of difficult games, but you also give other players something to strive for. Something to keep their attention when the normal games become a rigorous spam of the same "I'm zerging their spawn!" (Not an example of this game but one to explain the added tactics). This gives players an appeal when they grow tired of regular games and wish for something harder, or more realistic.

I wouldn't mind a joining of forces. Long as my boys get their loot, they won't begrudge me.


UnLimiTeD#2482 posted (#post-2276)


To snip in here as well, I think Mech Warrior Online did that?

I didn't play it for a long while due to the dev team being a bunch of censored, but I think way back when they planned two modes.

What it failed at while I was still interested was players;

Dreadnought would need enough players to reliably get games of both types up without obnoxious wait, though people who are interested in a more complex damage model will probably be willing to wait a little longer.



Which is another reason why this is a futuristic goal not in high demand right now.


nwood#2177 posted (#post-2179)


While we don't have anything at the moment we have talked about this in depth and it's something we really want to do in the future. We've discussed several ideas but I wouldn't expect something as complicated as the Battletech's/Mechwarrior's paper doll system.



I understand what you mean nwood. Might I make the suggestion that you don't create parts that are removed during combat(A bridge being blown off) but instead give it the visual effects of a small implosion along the said area. This could, in turn, drop the total amount of Hull points you can sustain, in the case of the Bridge you could increase Cooldown Time, in the Case of Engines decrease speed, etc. The Paperdoll system is fun for that type of game but this revolves around ship combat, so for that being said I could picture it more like in the old space battles of Star Wars where a sweeping run across the bridge/communications array/etc causes damage and eventually blow it up yet it is still visible destruction after its demise.


Also I want to add I am really glad to hear you have discussed it and hope to do it in the future.