Suggestions for potential game improvements

[Yotampocomeselacontraseña]

All in all I´m fine with the ideas and I like them. There are only two things I have to say something about:


Once you change/fix the effect for these two Cortex I doubt the reset needs to be changed down to 7 days as they would be more wanted then resulting in higher activity on Phobos and Arkon by itself. So I don´t think that´s really needed then. Otherwise it will end up in people asking for a third Cortex-Slot because they have no idea any more where to put the cortex on



Got a couple more words regarding this:
How should the "power" of the Taunt be included then? Taking the 10 seconds only it will end up in people using the lowest available Taunt (like symbolic one in Tau Ceti), because going by that idea it will have the same effect as the rare Taunt.
Taking an individual duration for each Taunt would be a hard thing to programm, as the duration for it is fixed while the power for each level is different. Might be a lot of paperwork for poor Alexw then to find the best balance, keeping in mind that a lower leveled target should be affected stronger by a higher taunt than vice versa. You might already see, working on the Taunt looks easy on the first bit, but going into the details it shows a lot more problems.

One way to make the taunt better might be not changing anything on the duration, but if I take that "lock the enemy to only shoot the pilot who used it"-part of your idea I might have another solution:
If the Taunt is used, the target can only shoot the taunting unit/player. So far, so good. In that case the Taunt-Level could decrease the damage dealt by the target. I know this idea was written somewhere a while ago already, but combined with that target-lock you brought in it might be the best (or easiest) way to work on the taunt.

Perfectly a taunt with your idea would be very dangerous, i talk about long and strong taunt. They could be a good boost for ships like tank, what is used now only for trolling in pvp/pve

 

[STAIN]

Very good suggestions cant wait to see them not being implemented... oh wait...
I see my Hgus bot is doing fantastic job by keeping you entertained. Keep it up.

 

[KingSub]

Very good suggestions cant wait to see them not being implemented... oh wait...
I see my Hgus bot is doing fantastic job by keeping you entertained. Keep it up.

@HGus is the goat. Let him gow. Lerry gow. And you're the guy who dislikes/disagree everything, fits very well to korell server @-I- S N O W -I-

 

[STAIN]

I like your PFP tho thats why im here.

 

[KingSub]

@KingSub he's cooking bro, stop him xD

I can't, my wasserkocher is over cooking already. @HGus your turn, we did help you out, just imagine this was "eye of the storm" we did stop the watchdog @STAIN

 

[KingSub]

It's time for @HGus to place the Scramblers, before any sabotage is beeing done by @Kapljeu HAHAHHA

Man this just hits harder than dutch van der linde's betrayal on his own gang

 

[Hecatte]

Man u 2 snow and kingsub are here to only mess or actually help the game by giving suggestions? Like I only see you 2 either crying about some Korell behaviour in which I bet you 2 arent any better, or post random 'not funny memes' here and there and only jump off actual topic

 

[Steel_Blue]

I would say, it would sound easier to make Taunt affect speed of a ship then. The math formula would obviously be something like

ship1 = shipSource x,z position
ship2 = shipTarget x,z position
direction = shipTarget facing direction
ray = ship2 - ship1
activePercent = specialConstant * cos(angle(direction, ray))

Note, cosine here means that you move faster when traveling relatively closer to the caster.
In this case, activePercent is the current percentage change to a ship's speed based on the formula, and can easily be changed via specialConstant. On ships of equal level, this could be .25 for 25% maximum slow. Siri variants could be 40% or 17%, or inherit whatever numbers are for magnet trap pvp(I have never been hit by a pvp magnettrap), and level of taunt compared to level of target could have something like (8 - difference) to scale it down or up. In this case, taunt has a fixed activation duration like other active items.

Of course, this comes with the "modest proposal" that this calculation will have to be done on the server, every tick, could affect other network things, etc. I notice that magnet trap applies a minus speed debuff that's fixed for the duration that you're affected by it, and that does NOT update per tick. a plus speed like afterburner applied after magnet trap is different than a plus speed applied before magnet trap. Taunt is mitigated by the fact it only affects one target per cast.

 

[dragonarh]

ship1 = shipSource x,z position ship2 = shipTarget x,z position direction = shipTarget facing direction ray = ship2 - ship1 activePercent = specialConstant * cos(angle(direction, ray))

Problem then would be that when u have a faster ship chasing a slower one, it wouldn't activate since the distance would technically be decreasing over time between them

 

[WoW]

Once you change/fix the effect for these two Cortex I doubt the reset needs to be changed down to 7 days as they would be more wanted then resulting in higher activity on Phobos and Arkon by itself. So I don´t think that´s really needed then. Otherwise it will end up in people asking for a third Cortex-Slot because they have no idea any more where to put the cortex on

Yeah, you are right about this. If these changes were implemented they will pull many players to actively participate in them. Although, even if there are many squad competing, some of them depending on their place on the leaderboard will still take upto 2-months to complete a single cortex (assuming that squad is always ranking low). This may discourage people from playing reactor and that is why we proposed the time to be 1 week. Alternative solution would be to slightly rework the reward system or allow making cortex parts in different ways. We thought about few very interesting possibilities that may even be better, but decided that the reset reduction is the fastest solution.

 

[Steel_Blue]

Problem then would be that when u have a faster ship chasing a slower one, it wouldn't activate since the distance would technically be decreasing over time between them

Unfortunatly, the math has literally no reliance on ship speed or distance between ships. What's important to the discussion is that either a slow based taunt or a armor weakness taunt or a targeting manipulation taunt are all essentially trivial to implement in a vacuum (we do not have source code). What's most important on deciding is taunt's niche in conquest and pvp, because we all know that removing something that exists will be impossible to negotiate with the player base. If taunt changes were to be implemented based on this thread, at least.

 

[dragonarh]

Unfortunatly, the math has literally no reliance on ship speed or distance between ships. What's important to the discussion is that either a slow based taunt or a armor weakness taunt or a targeting manipulation taunt are all essentially trivial to implement in a vacuum (we do not have source code). What's most important on deciding is taunt's niche in conquest and pvp, because we all know that removing something that exists will be impossible to negotiate with the player base. If taunt changes were to be implemented based on this thread, at least.

I would like to remind you that this items name is "taunt" not "engine hack" or a "target painter", so logically it would deal with agro. This isn't something we can decide anyway. I'd also like you to explain to me what we are removing in theory thats gonna be so "impossible to negotiate with players", since this idea is only adding something and not removing it.

Very good suggestions cant wait to see them not being implemented...

You'd be surprised to hear that last time WoW and Vishnu made a post about implementing a randomizer to OTBs, devs not only took the suggestions from the post itself, but even from comments on it that KillerSoldier and i posted. As a result we have more players on average playing them which we all are very grateful for. For statistics on this topic you can ask KillerSoldier!

 

[STAIN]

Congratulations after so many topics with ideas/suggestions/plans/lore/mechanics/ships/balance fixes (9 years maybe?) they finally listened to you and did 1 thing that players themselfes developed... and they even provide more live stats of that function while gms are nowhere to be seen. Keep it up shame noone is paying you to do someone elses job ;p

 

[ben1982]

Hmm Believe me, if this game had twice or three times as many players, we wouldn't have such problems with improvements/suggestions/changes. In my opinion this happens out of sheer boredom and too much time to think about how to improve the game.

i actually think the reason is because there is a content drought in the game currently, most of the people who enjoy the game have run out of things to do in it, we are fast approaching 20months since TC4 was released and there hasnt been much in the way of new things to do since then.
But regardless, i dont think there is ever a "real" reason to not think of ways to improve the game, everyone wants a better experience with Pirate Galaxy or at least i hope everyone does. There have always been some obvious improvements that should have been made since ages ago such as the Cortex parts overflow thingy which got improved a few years back by now? i forgot.
Discussion on where we can improve the game should always be welcome if u ask me

 

[Steel_Blue]

I would like to remind you that this items name is "taunt" not "engine hack" or a "target painter", so logically it would deal with agro.

I've once flown a tank on collosus, I think it was the STAM mizar tank, and my summary of the experience is that to kill a tank you either need to gang up on it, otherwise you runaway and ignore it. Because the default tank class has low speed, if your enemy decides to fly in 1 direction for long enough, your blaster will not damage them. In a 1v1 situation, a tank could use a taunt that modifes enemy flight speed to force them back into the engagement, without applying enough of an effect like stun to prevent them from fighting. This was the core of my initial idea. If there were a Hunter vs a Dominator, a taunt would serve to force the Hunter out of sniper range and back into blaster range, and eventually into aggrobomb range (YOU CANNOT RUN!!! I AM TANK! I HAVE BIG CLUB AND HUGE HP! WE FIGHT FOR HONOR AND GLORY! AGGRO-BONK!).

The "taunt as PVP aggro" idea and forced target locking has an inherit UI issue of whoever gets taunted. If a player is taunted by 2 enemies, do they get to choose which enemy they target? Or is it other rules such as "earliest" or "latest" cast takes priority? There would need to be a UI solution telling the player who they are allowed to target. We'll assume the giant disco on their player ship is indication enough for them to know they have the targeting restriction.

I suppose I'm not experienced enough in group pvp to know how these changes would effect a 3 on 3 engagement or a 10 on 10 engagement as part of a conquest. If there was a 2v1, would you prefer to back up your friend of 1 with a Chromium or a Dominator with your buffed taunt? When would your buffed taunt provide support in a way you would like to switch the tides of battle, in comparison to an obsidian aimpc+orbital strike, or a blazing lava corruption cloud?

As for "removing" stuff, that's me putting the cart ahead of the horse, or the attack droid ahead of the sniper.

 

[dragonarh]

The "taunt as PVP aggro" idea and forced target locking has an inherit UI issue of whoever gets taunted. If a player is taunted by 2 enemies, do they get to choose which enemy they target? Or is it other rules such as "earliest" or "latest" cast takes priority?

This is a very good question. Similar events already exist in PVP like for example when 2 opals scope each other, where only the one placing it first gets the effect. My assumption would be that a player placing the taunt last would steal aggro even if the target was taunted prior to this since the target switch would be hard codded in the start of taunt being activated. Again though this depends on the potential code around it so i can only make a guess.

As for the slowing effect id say it probably would be op against some ships if it was combined with the target lock

 

[Vesperion]

This is a very good question. Similar events already exist in PVP like for example when 2 opals scope each other, where only the one placing it first gets the effect. My assumption would be that a player placing the taunt last would steal aggro even if the target was taunted prior to this since the target switch would be hard codded in the start of taunt being activated. Again though this depends on the potential code around it so i can only make a guess.

As for the slowing effect id say it probably would be op against some ships if it was combined with the target lock

I guess it would give at least 3 possible options the devs could decide on what they will use

1. If the same player/enemy is taunted by at least 2 different taunts the 1st taunt will have the target lock over the duration. If 1st taunt ends the 2nd taunt will directly switch the target lock to the 2nd taunt user and if this ends the 3rd taunt will lock and so on

2. If during 1st taunt another taunt is counted it overrides the 1st taunt so that 2nd taunt now locks the target and 1st lock is released

3. The taunted target will get some sort of "taunt immunity" that lasts for 30 seconds after taunt ended and no taunt can be used against the target for the duration in order to prevent a possible endless taunt loop.

 

[Razor2278]

I have nothing to do in the game, I have almost everything I'm waiting for Reaven Dynamic I once wondered that it was written that there were supposed to be player-controlled invasions, I think I would prefer the server to launch invasions on planets itself, let's assume it writes a notification on the server that the Gemini system will be attacked soon by praying mantises or ancients and there would be some units that would allow people to earn money from cryo or some things to get, but it would probably end with there being interest at the beginning and then hardly anyone would fly xd

 

[KingSub]

I have nothing to do in the game, I have almost everything I'm waiting for Reaven Dynamic I once wondered that it was written that there were supposed to be player-controlled invasions, I think I would prefer the server to launch invasions on planets itself, let's assume it writes a notification on the server that the Gemini system will be attacked soon by praying mantises or ancients and there would be some units that would allow people to earn money from cryo or some things to get, but it would probably end with there being interest at the beginning and then hardly anyone would fly xd

True that. I still need some am blues and r1-r3 blues. Do I need them to unlock something? No. Next month should be raven dynamics again about 22.2 I guess. Last year it was the 16.22 if I remember correctly. Still need the sable heron, I just wanted to collect 2 new ships in one rush.

Player controlled invasions is something that we don't have any information about. I rather think it will appear in one particularly planet than in the whole starsystems. In my mind I would guess the Oort system or draconis mephisto nebula(ancient lore) because the unit that was tested 1-2 years ago was an ancient kenyte device and not an mantis unit. After the completion off Tau Ceti story it would make sense that the invasion could have something to do with the ancients again or maybe the mantis enforcer. If you read all the blueprints you will get some pretty good information about Mephisto nebula and ancient stuff. I believe that this place exist in draconis

 

[Razor2278]

I also didn't get the earlier one because I wasn't at home and had no way to do it, but now I'll collect two like ships