Forums » Suggestions

Suggestions for various Ideas both new and old.

12»
Apr 07, 2008 anubislord1 link
Ideas that I post here have been developed with the help of people within my guild as well as thoughts ideas and suggestions made by various other people both ingame and in IRC.
You all know who you are.

Before you start flaming and getting upset about backstory and the possible lack of related connections, I would like to make it known that these are suggestions and a fair few have sprung up from relating posts that I wanted to expand upon without bogging each respective thread down. Also as a side note I spoke directly with Incarnate and he did request that my thoughts be posted so if you must direct all issues with this to him. *Sorry Incarnate but had to be said*

Ship types.

I have been unable to read far into the backstory or get a hardcopy so I was looking at physical characteristics within the data and visual representation of the ships in game and have come up with some new ship types as well as some varients of current in production ships. This list will compromise of mainly capital ships considering the apparent approach of player created and controlled capital ships.

Carrier Class.

This class compromises the elite and most powerful platforms of destruction that would be possible within the game. They would be able to accomedate large numbers of ship hulls as per the suggestion made about carrying ships, as well as a large amount of materials and ordinance to support the deployment of the ships being carried. I envisage that there would be a limit to the number of these created by the sheer amount of resources that would be involved in creating such an impressive machine.

The Carrier would be the core of any guilds attempt at territorial domination and as such would require immense material manufacture. Although this leviathan would be an integral part of any guilds attempts to control the territories it would not be the only requirment.

After some discussion with a couple of people I would agree and think that the carrier class ship would be beneficial to assign to the Serco with relation to the storyline and comments made considering the fact that due to the Serco military mindset as well as the fact the Itani are more advanced in ship-building it would be countered with the following ship design.

Dreadnaught

This would be the Itani comparison to the Carrier class.
Due to the Itani's more advanced tech regarding ships as well as weaponry these ships would for balance be more expensive therefore meaning less being built BUT they would also be much more powerful.

I could see these ships with new ingame armaments similar to the ones described in the 7 minute war section of the back story. *NOTE* I am in no way suggesting that these ships are the goliath cannon but just comparing their possible damage potential.

Destroyer Class.

This capital class ship would be used in the defense of stations under each factions control and would be similar to a Carrier in the sense that it could hold the components to create ships as needed but at a very reduced rate. An example would be Serco carrier holds 20 skyproms while the Serco destroyer holds 3-5. The Itani would hold valks or a comparable complement to the skyproms.

The destroyer would be deployed in situations where a Carrier was coming under fire and the resources of the sector be it ships or ordinance was in need of a boost.

Destroyers would be beneficial in groups of 2-3 and considering the fact this game has potential for a massive influx of players once our devs would be released I could see fleets of these in the future.

Interceptor Class

This class would be a class of mobile HAC that would be able to approach a sector at speed and begin to assert control as the destroyers and the carrier are enroute. I am unsure if this would be considered a frigate or what but it would be a very potent weapons delivery system and would enable suppression of enemies in territorial situations.

If this class were designated as a frigate I think a variant with cloaking would be interesting in the sense that there would be a way to infiltrate ships to certain points while allowing the delivery of a potent weapons loadout at the same time.

All the above ships would have to be very balanced and have a way of easy destruction in certain situations and I realise once our game grows it would be imperative to have control over such possible large fleets I would suggest this.

Once the number of registered accounts reaches a certain threshold to be decided by the devlopers there would be a limit as to the number of capital ships created per guild. I understand that this would be unfair to the people who have been around since the start but it would prevent a situation arising where there is 2-3 guilds that have large imposing fleets while all new guilds would have to struggle due to possible resource and creation issues.
Apr 07, 2008 anubislord1 link
Weapon and utility systems.

No Velocity Weapon delivery systems.

I have been tinkering with the idea and was wondering if others would agree with the idea behind a part of Iry's Avalon thread and that is weapons that have no propulsion systems of their own but rely on the velocity of the launching ship.

These could come in many forms and would in my opinion open the way for new and more interesting tactics that once faction and other things in the works are implemented could bring this game to an ever better level.

I envisage the use of a bomb that i throw at an asteroid as i am boosting past while running from 2 HS bots, the bomb impacts the asteroid and does splash damage to the bots and I turn around and finish them off with energy or other weapons.

Also these weapons would have a set minimum release speed that would prevent them being used as mines. This would mean that you could have for instance a mark 3 ragnarok with energy weapons a mine launcher or other lport weapon and a bomb canister. These canisters would have a significant effect on maneouverability BUT would have a more significant punch then say swarms or even possibly mines.

Weapon potency and possible changeability.

There are 1 or 2 weapons like the charged plasma gun *unsure of the name* currently ingame and I was wondering if there was a way with the crafting to implement a scale that would allow weapons to be crafted that could be weaker and say lighter or require less energy. I feel that this could open up new trade options BUT could also be exploitable so I am still thinking about it.

Standoff Weapons.

This was a thought that might be able to counter ships or be used in the initial attack of stations. It would entail either a targeting self propelled ordinance or no velocity ordinance similar to the weapon types suggested before. This type of weapon I guess would include such things as the Avalon Torpedo but could if the suggestion relating to subsystem targeting were implemented open up oppurtunities to cripple both large capital ships as well as cripple player stations. These weapons could also take the form of the original avalon for wide area destruction.

In the capacity of crippling a station or ship it would have a low yield warhead that could strike at these subsystems while allowing a structure to remain relatively untouched elsewhere. These weapons could also take the form of the Avalon with a large destructive radius.

You know what I want? Counter-Missile systems. Flares, Electronic Counter Measures, Point-Defense weapons, the whole bag of tricks. *Posted by Visitor in this thread*

Ok first after speaking with momerath and being pointed to various articles regarding developement of online games I am slowly beginning to understand how hard it is to implement certain things within games. Most of what I read if I understood it correctly pertains to latency issues and regarding ECM and CM systems I could forsee that being a possible issue this aside here are my thoughts on those comments.

Electronic Counter Measures

These would make this game interesting in several situations such as a swarmer is making a run at you unloading his clip of swarms and you toggle a device that creates shadows of you and they go all over the place. The only issue I could see regarding this would be the possible server and clientside issues regarding the amount of data that would be sent to and from the client. I remember reading somewhere that this game was developed with low bandwidth users in mind and since I am not Incarnate or the other esteemed devs I could not say for sure if that is still the case.

Counter Missile Systems

These would be of major benefit in situations like the use of Torpedos such as the Avalon and other possible variants or torpedoes implemented by the devs. I would possibly think that these would be more used on capital ships considering their inherent lack of maneouverability and speed compared to fighters. This suggestion alone would be brilliant considering you could reintroduce swarmconnies and have a relatively effective way of countering their potential damage

I imagine seeing a fleet of 10 large capital ships composing a Carrier Destroyers and Interceptors as well as a couple ships that would have these systems installed.

Flares

Since I do not know the intention behind Visitors posts regarding Counter Missile systems versus flares I can only speculate but in my personal view flares would be used on the fighters and bombers instead of Counter Missile systems. *clarification on that would be helpful v1sitor please heh*

Point Defense Systems

I think that these systems would be employed again on capital ships or player or even AI controlled stations. These systems if implemented would be a great addition not only in the sense of player controlled stations but if it was possible it would be awesome fun with the current AI stations and would enable us to have some more fun when nuking SF's in station sectors.

Station attacking weapons.

This would tie in with the suggestion made about critical systems within a ship but related to those and other systems on a station. These weapons would have little to no use ship to ship or ship to capital ship, but would be used in destruction of segements be it docking bays or critical systems in a station such as life support and trading sections.

I would see these in place along with a UI element that would enable you to target a specific part of the station and then the missiles would lock on and damage or destroy that section of station. When it comes to player built stations this would be countered by thicker armour *making the station more armoured* or by point defense that would engage the incoming ordinance allowing it to be destroyed while having a chance that it could still hit.

I realise that in the thread that inspired this there was debate over how this sort of thing could be frustrating in the sense that people what to be doing something and instead of making the station destroyed you could make it so trade has to cost more or repairs made whilst the station was damage would cost more to support the repair efforts.

This is only just a rough idea but I would think this could be interesting, althoug I do understand that simple might be better.
Apr 07, 2008 anubislord1 link
Territorial Gain/Loss related suggestions

The Itani Goliath Cannons

As I am sure most people who have read the backstory would know these cannon were used in the defense of Itan during the 7 minute war. Since there is no actual sector named in the backstory and from discussion with others we think that it would have been the GR-Deneb wh sector *which is currently the active BS/BB sector* was where these behemoth weapon platforms were located.

What I am suggesting is that these would be implemented when the Territorial Loss/Gain or whatever permutation of that arises is put into the game. These guns would serve not only as a great visual ingame but also as a great link to the backstory that has been constructed by Incarnate.

In terms of actual gameplay with regards to the territorial loss/gain, these weapons could play a vital role as either a major site or minor outpost that could in some way influence the course of the territorial disputes *NOTE* I am still as most of us are unsure how this territorial conquest thing will work so only guess's till then :(
Apr 07, 2008 anubislord1 link
reserved
Apr 07, 2008 genka link
I also have suggestions for various ideas: don't post them.
Apr 08, 2008 anubislord1 link
dear genka troll talk to incarnate
Apr 08, 2008 toshiro link
I suggest using bold and italic fonts in your posts in order to make them more readable, to make the individual items stand out more clearly, and use an uniform layout for your posts (so that readers know what is a new item and what belongs to another one quickly and at a glance).

That will make people read them more thoroughly and icnrease the number of comments based on actual thoughts on the subject and not just the usual Agree/Disagree posts.

Your ideas, as far as I am concerned, are interesting and merit discussion, but it is in your power to facilitate that.

On a sidenote, a few of those ideas have been mentioned before, but that is almost a given in these forums. Still, linking to older, similar posts is nice.
Apr 08, 2008 ryan reign link
and a Dev WANTED you to post this? here i was thinking that the idea of tangible change sent them scurrying away. this gives me hope, but im not holding my breath either...I'll just see where it leads.
Apr 08, 2008 moldyman link
As an Admin, you have to deal with a bunch of stuff. Most of the time, unless it's extra important or you deal with it right there, you will forget. Hence, emailing and posting on the forums.
Apr 08, 2008 moldyman link
reserved for retort
Apr 08, 2008 moldyman link
reserved for counter retort
Apr 08, 2008 moldyman link
reserved for the "Dude, there's an edit button" comment
Apr 08, 2008 vIsitor link
You know what I want? Counter-Missile systems. Flares, Electronic Counter Measures, Point-Defense weapons, the whole bag of tricks.
Apr 08, 2008 ryan reign link
another really good idea...seriously, the futures looking bleak as it stands. we've mastered intergalactic space flight, to the point where its something 1 pilot in a 1 man craft can do, but we have no defense against enemy fire but the ability to dodge?!?! wow...technology has managed to set its self back 50 years from the 20th century!!!
Apr 08, 2008 upper case link
well yeah we could turn this game into a galactic-sized simcity but what's the point?
Apr 08, 2008 ryan reign link
pretty sure no ones suggesting a "galactic-sized simcity"...just something to make it more realistic. it took me 6 hours to modify the back of my jeep laredo into a mobile digital photography lab. Han Solo modified the Falcon for smuggling and combat...we of VO...cant modify a damn thing.

I'm willing to bet most of us have modified something in life to better suit our needs...most people can and do, so why not in VO?
Apr 08, 2008 Dr. Lecter link
Most people die, for good, when incinerated by weapons fire in the cold vacuum of space. Why not in VO?
Apr 08, 2008 roguelazer link
ryan, if all you're going to do is post in every suggestions thread and bitch about the development process, perhaps you should just keep your comments to yourself.
Apr 08, 2008 ryan reign link
rogue...im just frustrated. this game has potential, the same potential it had when I started playing. i took break for several months, it still has the same potential. its stagnant. potenial is wasted when not used.

ps...if you dont like what i say perhaps you should just not respond to me.
Apr 08, 2008 Dr. Lecter link
Reign, if you don't like VO as it stands, leave. If you don't like it but want it to get better, buy a year sub and then leave. Either way, you've already conveyed your message and are saying nothing new. So, kindly shut the fuck up.