Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Share your ideas and suggestions for Battlefleet Gothic: Armada.
User avatar
Deca
Posts: 101
Joined: 13 March 2016, 23:06
Contact:

Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Deca » 14 March 2016, 03:11

I wanted to offer some feedback on some of my observations in regards to certain missions as well as additional game suggestions. This is not to start any drama, but hopefully open up some dialogue about ways to help improve the game by pointing out some areas of concern/improvement.


Mission: Assassination
Currently the way it is set up, I think it will be done in a manner in which the Attacker (the one trying to kill/assassinate the ship) can kill the target using tactics that would otherwise mean he'd take serious losses; however, due to the game mechanic that forces the Match to end in an immediate victory if the target is killed, the Attacker can circumvent consequences.

I, personally, use that tactic. Any of my ships which might be near death or would surely die.....don't die because the game ends in a Victory thereby 'saving' any nearly dead ships from certain doom.....because the match immediately ended.

That's an issue.

I should still have to fight or at minimum warp out. However, as stated, I can avoid that because the match immediately ends. Hence, I get a Victory & I do not lose the ship that by right...I would have lost if the game did not abruptly end.



Mission: Convoy
Again, the same issue as above. I can blitz, ram, suicide charge the enemy convoy. As soon as I kill 2 or 3 (depending on the mission/tier), I get an immediate Victory with no losses to my ships.

Again, that type of tactic should not be rewarded. My ships would at minimum need to flee or warp out, but instead there is a game mechanic in place that allows me to gain a victory while at the same time protecting my fleet from any further damage.

In 1 game I achieved "Victory" in 1 minute and 52 seconds because I went as fast a possible for a couple of their transports.

That doesn't seem 'right'.




Mission: Data Capture
Same as Assassination & Convoy .



Mission: Breakthrough
In break through, I leave the stations alone and go for the enemy ships as if it was a Cruiser Clash & do much better each time that I play in that manner.

I do not know what the "answer" is to help address it....but I know that is not the intent of the mission; however, that works out best for me in point & Victory. However, I feel like there are 2 tactics mainly used.
---Long range forces defending enemy player to sit by and watch the structure(s) get destroyed or come out and fight.
---Kill enemy ships, thereby negating need to engage facility




Mission: Cruiser Clash
Currently, this is my favorite mission because of the other things I mentioned above for the other's. So far, it is the best mission with the way the other missions are currently designed. I like the idea of the other missions, however, they are to easy to be "gamed". The only suggestion i have for this one is that the game should not tell both players the EXACT number of remaining enemy ship, but only mention that Enemy Remain.



6 Final Thoughts:
Small % chance of perma-death
Similar to Mordheim: City of the Damned. There needs to be more of an incentive to flee rather than just a couple of turns being damaged and a turn of no XP for dying. That is too "soft". I can maintain enough Renown to immediately repair my ships. It does not have to be a high percentage chance for perma-death, but it should be a small % ability to happen so that players will have to think twice before choosing to stay/fight or warp out with their nearly dead Emperor Class BB. If not, the game will slowly over time lose any meaning if there is not some type of consequence(s) greater than a few battles of dmg and no XP. That simply is not enough.

In regards to small % chance of perma-death, if that is not popular, I'd like to at least suggest that like many other things in games, it could be a "game mode". Those who done want to play it....don't have to. Those who want to play Hardcore Multiplayer with a % chance of perma-death can do so. Game rules stay the same, rewards stay the same etc.... A new "FLEET" would need to be created for that mode, just like it is now. Win Win for everyone.



Larger maps
Not all maps, but some 1v1 maps need to be much larger so that speed, maneuver, conceal, etc... matter more. With the size of the maps now, enemy can close the distance too quickly and most matches end VERY quickly.


The match should NOT immediately end
Even if the Victory conditions are achieved, the game should NOT end. Make people surrender, or fight it out, or warp out....something. The current Victory condition that allows the game to end immediately seems incorrect and will be used to "game the system". Players should have to disengage in order to keep their ships alive or have destroyed all of the enemy. Again, if the Victory condition has already been achieved, then if the person who lost wants to run & hide....no big deal...the Victor can warp out as he has already Won the match.


Formations
There should be a way to have a group formation. I am not referring to a Group #, but something that allows the ships to maintain the same distance from each other and maintain that formation as they are moved through space.


Ramming
As of now, Ramming it too easy since we play on a single "plane".
In regards to Ramming, I think that it should be a skill & that unless it is taken both ships take horrendous damage even if the same size.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one doing the Ramming has the skill, the "target" still takes the same damage as it currently does, but the one doing the Ramming take even less than they do now.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one being Rammed has the skill, then they take less damage that they would have.

Basically, the Ramming skill would make it more "profitable" to Ram as well as defend better against it if being Rammed. Likewise, not having the skill means it is less effective.


Keep Ship Abilities Hidden
Currently when you select/highlight an enemy ship, you immediate know how they have upgraded.
That should remain hidden.
The only thing that an enemy should be able to "see" are Favors.




I'd like to hear other opinion & ideas.
Thanks in advance.
Last edited by Deca on 16 March 2016, 03:32, edited 7 times in total.
Mission Feedback & Suggestions
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=796


"A corpse for the Corpse God!"

"Innocence proves nothing"

"Show me a fortress and I'll show you a ruin"

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + some additional suggestions

Postby Imperator5 » 14 March 2016, 10:32

Harsher punishments is not something the PVP community seem to want, they are mostly yelling for less punishment and I can understand it. Point costs are insane in higher levels.

Yeah some missions are unbalanced a bit though.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Deca
Posts: 101
Joined: 13 March 2016, 23:06
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + some additional suggestions

Postby Deca » 14 March 2016, 16:09

Imperator5 wrote:Harsher punishments is not something the PVP community seem to want, they are mostly yelling for less punishment and I can understand it. Point costs are insane in higher levels.


In regards to small % chance of perma-death, if that is not popular, I'd like to at least suggest that like many other things in games, it could be a "game mode".

Those who do not want to play it....don't have to.

Those who want to play Hardcore Multiplayer with a % chance of perma-death can do so. Game rules stay the same, rewards stay the same etc.... A new "FLEET" would need to be created for that mode, just like it is now for Solo, Campaign, Multiplayer and per faction. Nothing changes other than it is a Hardcore Mode Multiplayer.

Win Win for everyone.




Imperator5 wrote:Yeah some missions are unbalanced a bit though.

For Convoy, Assassination, Data Capture I think that these are some things that they developers will consider.
-regardless of whether or not the victory conditions are met, there should be no immediate end of the match
-in those 3 matches, the players reverse their Roles
Match 1: Player 1 is Attacker & Player 2 is Defender
Match 2: Player 2 is Attacker & Player 1 is Defender
The "Winner" is the one who did the most damage? Or achieved Victory the quickest? Or <fill in some other ideas>

Basically, this would allow each player to have to not only play 1 match protecting their convoy, but likewise attempting to them destroy the other players convoy the very next match.

Same logic would apply to the Assassination & Data Capture missions.
Mission Feedback & Suggestions
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=796


"A corpse for the Corpse God!"

"Innocence proves nothing"

"Show me a fortress and I'll show you a ruin"

User avatar
Deca
Posts: 101
Joined: 13 March 2016, 23:06
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Deca » 16 March 2016, 03:29

Thought of something else to suggest for Mission: Cruiser Clash

-opponents should not the exact number of remaining enemy

-the way it currently lists how many enemy remain, it should simply state that Enemy Remain.

-one of the reasons for this suggestion is that there are many current Skills, Focus, Upgrades..etc...that deal specifically with the ability to reveal the enemy as well as hide from the enemy (or at least remain unrevealed).

-that would make those more "valuable" that they currently are

-this would also help those who place their ships in clouds to at least be more helpful; whereas if they know the total #, you know somebody is hiding in a cloud.

-basically, i am not advocating that we remove all "intelligence" but only that they don't know the exact number.


I, personally, would like think that if the enemy see's 2 signatures that they don't automatically know that's all I have because I could have went with two large ships or I could have 4 more sitting in the cloud across the map on my starting area.
Mission Feedback & Suggestions
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=796


"A corpse for the Corpse God!"

"Innocence proves nothing"

"Show me a fortress and I'll show you a ruin"

User avatar
Ravensburg
Tindalos Team
Posts: 122
Joined: 28 October 2015, 14:55
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Ravensburg » 16 March 2016, 11:50

Deca wrote:

Mission: Assassination
Currently the way it is set up, I think it will be done in a manner in which the Attacker (the one trying to kill/assassinate the ship) can kill the target using tactics that would otherwise mean he'd take serious losses; however, due to the game mechanic that forces the Match to end in an immediate victory if the target is killed, the Attacker can circumvent consequences.

I, personally, use that tactic. Any of my ships which might be near death or would surely die.....don't die because the game ends in a Victory thereby 'saving' any nearly dead ships from certain doom.....because the match immediately ended.

That's an issue.

I should still have to fight or at minimum warp out. However, as stated, I can avoid that because the match immediately ends. Hence, I get a Victory & I do not lose the ship that by right...I would have lost if the game did not abruptly end.



Mission: Convoy
Again, the same issue as above. I can blitz, ram, suicide charge the enemy convoy. As soon as I kill 2 or 3 (depending on the mission/tier), I get an immediate Victory with no losses to my ships.

Again, that type of tactic should not be rewarded. My ships would at minimum need to flee or warp out, but instead there is a game mechanic in place that allows me to gain a victory while at the same time protecting my fleet from any further damage.

In 1 game I achieved "Victory" in 1 minute and 52 seconds because I went as fast a possible for a couple of their transports.

That doesn't seem 'right'.




Mission: Data Capture
Same as Assassination & Convoy .



Mission: Breakthrough
In break through, I leave the stations alone and go for the enemy ships as if it was a Cruiser Clash & do much better each time that I play in that manner.

I do not know what the "answer" is to help address it....but I know that is not the intent of the mission; however, that works out best for me in point & Victory. However, I feel like there are 2 tactics mainly used.
---Long range forces defending enemy player to sit by and watch the structure(s) get destroyed or come out and fight.
---Kill enemy ships, thereby negating need to engage facility




Mission: Cruiser Clash
Currently, this is my favorite mission because of the other things I mentioned above for the other's. So far, it is the best mission with the way the other missions are currently designed. I like the idea of the other missions, however, they are to easy to be "gamed". The only suggestion i have for this one is that the game should not tell both players the EXACT number of remaining enemy ship, but only mention that Enemy Remain.



Thanks Deca, for this feedback about missions. I don't make any promises, but i will seriously consider your propositions.

Deca wrote:6 Final Thoughts:
Small % chance of perma-death
Similar to Mordheim: City of the Damned. There needs to be more of an incentive to flee rather than just a couple of turns being damaged and a turn of no XP for dying. That is too "soft". I can maintain enough Renown to immediately repair my ships. It does not have to be a high percentage chance for perma-death, but it should be a small % ability to happen so that players will have to think twice before choosing to stay/fight or warp out with their nearly dead Emperor Class BB. If not, the game will slowly over time lose any meaning if there is not some type of consequence(s) greater than a few battles of dmg and no XP. That simply is not enough.

In regards to small % chance of perma-death, if that is not popular, I'd like to at least suggest that like many other things in games, it could be a "game mode". Those who done want to play it....don't have to. Those who want to play Hardcore Multiplayer with a % chance of perma-death can do so. Game rules stay the same, rewards stay the same etc.... A new "FLEET" would need to be created for that mode, just like it is now. Win Win for everyone.


We already think about such a mode at the studio. We like the idea, just not sure many players will accept such an hardcore feature. And if they do, it will split the community which is maybe not a good idea.

Deca wrote:Larger maps
Not all maps, but some 1v1 maps need to be much larger so that speed, maneuver, conceal, etc... matter more. With the size of the maps now, enemy can close the distance too quickly and most matches end VERY quickly.


This is something that we will not be able to implement at release. Maybe later.

Deca wrote:Formations
There should be a way to have a group formation. I am not referring to a Group #, but something that allows the ships to maintain the same distance from each other and maintain that formation as they are moved through space.


This is something I already answer in another thread. We tried many different approach regarding formation system without satisfying results. But we will keep trying to do something regarding this point.

Deca wrote:Ramming
As of now, Ramming it too easy since we play on a single "plane".
In regards to Ramming, I think that it should be a skill & that unless it is taken both ships take horrendous damage even if the same size.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one doing the Ramming has the skill, the "target" still takes the same damage as it currently does, but the one doing the Ramming take even less than they do now.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one being Rammed has the skill, then they take less damage that they would have.

Basically, the Ramming skill would make it more "profitable" to Ram as well as defend better against it if being Rammed. Likewise, not having the skill means it is less effective.


We also think that ramming is a bit too easy to perform at the moment. But, we think it would be better to just prevent a ship on "full ahead" to turn instead of having a rotation speed reduction.

Deca wrote:Keep Ship Abilities Hidden
Currently when you select/highlight an enemy ship, you immediate know how they have upgraded.
That should remain hidden.
The only thing that an enemy should be able to "see" are Favors.


I don't agree on this point. Knowing which skills are on a ship introduce an interesting meta regarding the crits focusing mechanic.

Thanks for your feedback,

Ravensburg

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Imperator5 » 16 March 2016, 11:57

Ravensburg wrote:
Deca wrote:

Mission: Assassination
Currently the way it is set up, I think it will be done in a manner in which the Attacker (the one trying to kill/assassinate the ship) can kill the target using tactics that would otherwise mean he'd take serious losses; however, due to the game mechanic that forces the Match to end in an immediate victory if the target is killed, the Attacker can circumvent consequences.

I, personally, use that tactic. Any of my ships which might be near death or would surely die.....don't die because the game ends in a Victory thereby 'saving' any nearly dead ships from certain doom.....because the match immediately ended.

That's an issue.

I should still have to fight or at minimum warp out. However, as stated, I can avoid that because the match immediately ends. Hence, I get a Victory & I do not lose the ship that by right...I would have lost if the game did not abruptly end.



Mission: Convoy
Again, the same issue as above. I can blitz, ram, suicide charge the enemy convoy. As soon as I kill 2 or 3 (depending on the mission/tier), I get an immediate Victory with no losses to my ships.

Again, that type of tactic should not be rewarded. My ships would at minimum need to flee or warp out, but instead there is a game mechanic in place that allows me to gain a victory while at the same time protecting my fleet from any further damage.

In 1 game I achieved "Victory" in 1 minute and 52 seconds because I went as fast a possible for a couple of their transports.

That doesn't seem 'right'.




Mission: Data Capture
Same as Assassination & Convoy .



Mission: Breakthrough
In break through, I leave the stations alone and go for the enemy ships as if it was a Cruiser Clash & do much better each time that I play in that manner.

I do not know what the "answer" is to help address it....but I know that is not the intent of the mission; however, that works out best for me in point & Victory. However, I feel like there are 2 tactics mainly used.
---Long range forces defending enemy player to sit by and watch the structure(s) get destroyed or come out and fight.
---Kill enemy ships, thereby negating need to engage facility




Mission: Cruiser Clash
Currently, this is my favorite mission because of the other things I mentioned above for the other's. So far, it is the best mission with the way the other missions are currently designed. I like the idea of the other missions, however, they are to easy to be "gamed". The only suggestion i have for this one is that the game should not tell both players the EXACT number of remaining enemy ship, but only mention that Enemy Remain.



Thanks Deca, for this feedback about missions. I don't make any promises, but i will seriously consider your propositions.

Deca wrote:6 Final Thoughts:
Small % chance of perma-death
Similar to Mordheim: City of the Damned. There needs to be more of an incentive to flee rather than just a couple of turns being damaged and a turn of no XP for dying. That is too "soft". I can maintain enough Renown to immediately repair my ships. It does not have to be a high percentage chance for perma-death, but it should be a small % ability to happen so that players will have to think twice before choosing to stay/fight or warp out with their nearly dead Emperor Class BB. If not, the game will slowly over time lose any meaning if there is not some type of consequence(s) greater than a few battles of dmg and no XP. That simply is not enough.

In regards to small % chance of perma-death, if that is not popular, I'd like to at least suggest that like many other things in games, it could be a "game mode". Those who done want to play it....don't have to. Those who want to play Hardcore Multiplayer with a % chance of perma-death can do so. Game rules stay the same, rewards stay the same etc.... A new "FLEET" would need to be created for that mode, just like it is now. Win Win for everyone.


We already think about such a mode at the studio. We like the idea, just not sure many players will accept such an hardcore feature. And if they do, it will split the community which is maybe not a good idea.

Deca wrote:Larger maps
Not all maps, but some 1v1 maps need to be much larger so that speed, maneuver, conceal, etc... matter more. With the size of the maps now, enemy can close the distance too quickly and most matches end VERY quickly.


This is something that we will not be able to implement at release. Maybe later.

Deca wrote:Formations
There should be a way to have a group formation. I am not referring to a Group #, but something that allows the ships to maintain the same distance from each other and maintain that formation as they are moved through space.


This is something I already answer in another thread. We tried many different approach regarding formation system without satisfying results. But we will keep trying to do something regarding this point.

Deca wrote:Ramming
As of now, Ramming it too easy since we play on a single "plane".
In regards to Ramming, I think that it should be a skill & that unless it is taken both ships take horrendous damage even if the same size.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one doing the Ramming has the skill, the "target" still takes the same damage as it currently does, but the one doing the Ramming take even less than they do now.

Ex: If a Ramming skill is taken & the one being Rammed has the skill, then they take less damage that they would have.

Basically, the Ramming skill would make it more "profitable" to Ram as well as defend better against it if being Rammed. Likewise, not having the skill means it is less effective.


We also think that ramming is a bit too easy to perform at the moment. But, we think it would be better to just prevent a ship on "full ahead" to turn instead of having a rotation speed reduction.

Deca wrote:Keep Ship Abilities Hidden
Currently when you select/highlight an enemy ship, you immediate know how they have upgraded.
That should remain hidden.
The only thing that an enemy should be able to "see" are Favors.


I don't agree on this point. Knowing which skills are on a ship introduce an interesting meta regarding the crits focusing mechanic.

Thanks for your feedback,

Ravensburg


Maybe ramming could be an ability with a cooldown? Click the target to give the ramming order, the ship turns to the target and rams it automatically. Give it a 60-90 sec cooldown. This would also help with Eldar accidentally ramming things and exploding.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Deca
Posts: 101
Joined: 13 March 2016, 23:06
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Deca » 17 March 2016, 15:20

I appreciate the reply.
Mission Feedback & Suggestions
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=796


"A corpse for the Corpse God!"

"Innocence proves nothing"

"Show me a fortress and I'll show you a ruin"

TheDeadlyShoe
Posts: 134
Joined: 15 March 2016, 23:06
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby TheDeadlyShoe » 17 March 2016, 22:06

Ramming in general, and Full Speed Ahead:

I'm not sure how much it will help, since you can drop into and out of FSA so quickly. People can FSA, high energy turn, FSA again to get a hit. Maybe if maneuvers wern't available again until the combustion gauge was full?

However, it is possible to counter-ram to protect a vulnerable target, which is something not done enough.

Convoy:

Improve the transports hull to 300, and give the defender an additional transport that they can lose in each mode (keep 2 of 4 alive, keep 4 of 7 alive). Possibly reduce the transports shield. This will make the transport more resistant to ramming. and give the defender an easier time of it - for example, the defender can split the transports into 2 convoys, and if only 1 makes it through than they still win. My only problem with this is that the attackers will probably just zerg their whole force at one convoy, kill all the defenders by outnumbering them, and shrug when they lose since they didnt lose any ships.

Personally, I find misdirection very powerful in Convoy, to the point that I almost always win as defender by using a 'false convoy' to distract the enemy. Escorts: so expendable.

Assassination, Data Recovery,

I disagree totally re: Assassination. The attacker has such an enormous advantage of forces that the insta-end can only favor the defender. If there was no insta-end, then the attacker would then simply butcher the remainder of the defender's ships.

I am baffled that you think Data Recovery has the same dynamic going on, since forces are equal. The winning player with the data should indeed have control of the mission ending times, since they are forced to protect the data.


Basically, losing insta-end would be a huge downside for anyone actually trying to accomplish objectives rather than just fighting every match as Cruiser Clash, since intrinsically attempting to accomplish objectives puts you on the back foot in a fight.

Beernchips
Posts: 824
Joined: 12 March 2016, 09:53
Location: Strasbourg
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby Beernchips » 18 March 2016, 13:00

Some ideas to balance missions :

Convoy : convoy ships starts with running silent order
Like that it will be much harder for attacker to just pack and rush the tranports

Assassination : Change deploy zone : Defender deploy zone is at center of map / Attacker deploy zone is the 4 borders
The difficulty for defender is to save 1 identified ship which enemy fleet will focus but at same time if attacker starts too far he will have no time to get the kill before warp out
In addition with current deploy zone, half of map is never used (all zone behind attacker deploy zone)
With the new deployment, Attacker is still not too far from the target but will have to spread his fleet to not let the defender some safe zone he will rush at
Repent, for tomorrow you die

keanbin
Posts: 10
Joined: 03 May 2016, 22:41
Contact:

Re: Mission Feedback + Additional suggestions UPDATED

Postby keanbin » 04 May 2016, 05:03

simple solution was the detection range on each ship, maybe what we can do was give each ship active detection range was 5000-7500 with upgrade or 10k-12.5k on some ship, and passive detection range just show a ping like right now, but passive range should be more or less 1.5-2 time the active range anything outside the range we can't see it, that mean scouting will be more important.


Return to “Ideas & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest