Development Q&A

Talk about Battlefleet Gothic: Armada here!
sjaugust1
Posts: 42
Joined: 09 April 2016, 18:24
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby sjaugust1 » 20 July 2016, 21:34

Lol I worded that poorly. I ment all there is currently are a few random bits of mines/rocks and gas clouds. At the moment it doesn't exactly offer much in terms of strategic value. It offers a little with gas clouds. But everything else is just something to fly around.
Neutral capturable space Stations and defense platforms, moving hazards, abandoned shipyards, repair stations, ect. More random events?

User avatar
CALiGeR190
Community Moderator
Posts: 1202
Joined: 27 October 2015, 19:03
Location: Manchester, England
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby CALiGeR190 » 20 July 2016, 21:44

sjaugust1 wrote:Lol I worded that poorly. I ment all there is currently are a few random bits of mines/rocks and gas clouds. At the moment it doesn't exactly offer much in terms of strategic value. It offers a little with gas clouds. But everything else is just something to fly around.
Neutral capturable space Stations and defense platforms, moving hazards, abandoned shipyards, repair stations, ect. More random events?

I disagree.
The fact that you have to avoid certain objects, and that you can use them for botlenecks or cover is strategy enough.

Scenarios where there are something like what you mentions in a PvE format would be fun, but generally it's needless complexity.
Where's your Federation now?
-Imperial Navy

Alpha Tester - Getting the game on its feet
Technical Tester - We had to get the balance right somehow
Community Moderator - Purging spammers and maintaining the realm
BFG Wiki Founding Member

User avatar
Ahzek Ahriman
Posts: 434
Joined: 15 May 2016, 12:51
Location: Krakow, Poland
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby Ahzek Ahriman » 21 July 2016, 00:36

sjaugust1 wrote:Lol I worded that poorly. I ment all there is currently are a few random bits of mines/rocks and gas clouds. At the moment it doesn't exactly offer much in terms of strategic value. It offers a little with gas clouds. But everything else is just something to fly around.
Neutral capturable space Stations and defense platforms, moving hazards, abandoned shipyards, repair stations, ect. More random events?


The way current environmental objects are generated they already often have a very major impact on the game. Gas clouds and asteroid fields may massively affect the flow of the game if they randomize on one side only. Introducing something like repairing stations would potentially break the game if spawned on one side, and that player would be able to make a proper use of it.

I've had plenty of situations when hazards deployment dictated the game. Blind skirmishes with gas clouds literally everywhere (sometimes with solar radiation), literal labyrinth of asteroid fields to utilize. They alone offer plenty of strategic diversity and I'm not even mentioning minefields and unsurpassable objects.

Hell, my transporters have navigational shields because if I do get asteroid field to the side, I can pretty much go with 6 stack of transporters, smuggle them through asteroid fields and lose none.

While I would welcome even more diversity, your suggestions are definitely too extreme.
And since they are too extreme for potential balance, what else could there be on the maps?

Gas clouds are already a stretch, since real-life wise, gas clouds in space are less dense than the most perfect void created on Earth so they shouldn't affect the systems the way they do. Asteroid fields are fine, though also a bit too strong reality-wise (thank Tzeentch they aren't scientifically proper). Minefields are perfect, though I think there should be variation in their size like with gas/asteroids, and RNG should allow for more dense scattering of minefields.

The one idea of yours that I fully approve is moving hazards. Like moving plasma bubbles (remnants of star's coronal matter ejections), comets and so on.
The sentence below is true
Spoiler : :
The sentence above is false

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

Re: Development Q&A

Postby Imperator5 » 21 July 2016, 01:32

Ahzek Ahriman wrote:
sjaugust1 wrote:Lol I worded that poorly. I ment all there is currently are a few random bits of mines/rocks and gas clouds. At the moment it doesn't exactly offer much in terms of strategic value. It offers a little with gas clouds. But everything else is just something to fly around.
Neutral capturable space Stations and defense platforms, moving hazards, abandoned shipyards, repair stations, ect. More random events?


The way current environmental objects are generated they already often have a very major impact on the game. Gas clouds and asteroid fields may massively affect the flow of the game if they randomize on one side only. Introducing something like repairing stations would potentially break the game if spawned on one side, and that player would be able to make a proper use of it.

I've had plenty of situations when hazards deployment dictated the game. Blind skirmishes with gas clouds literally everywhere (sometimes with solar radiation), literal labyrinth of asteroid fields to utilize. They alone offer plenty of strategic diversity and I'm not even mentioning minefields and unsurpassable objects.

Hell, my transporters have navigational shields because if I do get asteroid field to the side, I can pretty much go with 6 stack of transporters, smuggle them through asteroid fields and lose none.

While I would welcome even more diversity, your suggestions are definitely too extreme.
And since they are too extreme for potential balance, what else could there be on the maps?

Gas clouds are already a stretch, since real-life wise, gas clouds in space are less dense than the most perfect void created on Earth so they shouldn't affect the systems the way they do. Asteroid fields are fine, though also a bit too strong reality-wise (thank Tzeentch they aren't scientifically proper). Minefields are perfect, though I think there should be variation in their size like with gas/asteroids, and RNG should allow for more dense scattering of minefields.

The one idea of yours that I fully approve is moving hazards. Like moving plasma bubbles (remnants of star's coronal matter ejections), comets and so on.


Pretty much this. Though in Starwars and Startrek do the same with nebulas.

However yeah, if more objects randomly spawned, it would make even bigger a mess.

It was done well enough in Empire at War where such stuff spawned at the center to be fought over, however the devs have the current modes to fix before they would add more game modes.
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.

WhiteHawke
Posts: 8
Joined: 25 April 2016, 17:15
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby WhiteHawke » 24 July 2016, 20:37

Are the devs looking at changing the 300 point limit in cooperative 2v2 versus AI (Skirmish)? It seems I am never able to use a space marine battle barge in this mode :( . I saw patch notes that seemed to imply that this had been fixed in the last patch, but I have played well over 30 games and the games always cap at 300 points. Played a lot of games yesterday also (7/23/16) and this was still the case.

User avatar
CALiGeR190
Community Moderator
Posts: 1202
Joined: 27 October 2015, 19:03
Location: Manchester, England
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby CALiGeR190 » 24 July 2016, 20:48

WhiteHawke wrote:Are the devs looking at changing the 300 point limit in cooperative 2v2 versus AI (Skirmish)? It seems I am never able to use a space marine battle barge in this mode :( . I saw patch notes that seemed to imply that this had been fixed in the last patch, but I have played well over 30 games and the games always cap at 300 points. Played a lot of games yesterday also (7/23/16) and this was still the case.

Being increased to 350 very soon I believe. Next patch.
Where's your Federation now?
-Imperial Navy

Alpha Tester - Getting the game on its feet
Technical Tester - We had to get the balance right somehow
Community Moderator - Purging spammers and maintaining the realm
BFG Wiki Founding Member

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

Re: Development Q&A

Postby Imperator5 » 24 July 2016, 22:22

CALiGeR190 wrote:
WhiteHawke wrote:Are the devs looking at changing the 300 point limit in cooperative 2v2 versus AI (Skirmish)? It seems I am never able to use a space marine battle barge in this mode :( . I saw patch notes that seemed to imply that this had been fixed in the last patch, but I have played well over 30 games and the games always cap at 300 points. Played a lot of games yesterday also (7/23/16) and this was still the case.

Being increased to 350 very soon I believe. Next patch.


Currently its only fixed for a few game modes only I think. Cruiser clash and maybe something else.
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
CALiGeR190
Community Moderator
Posts: 1202
Joined: 27 October 2015, 19:03
Location: Manchester, England
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby CALiGeR190 » 25 July 2016, 10:23

Imperator5 wrote:
CALiGeR190 wrote:
WhiteHawke wrote:Are the devs looking at changing the 300 point limit in cooperative 2v2 versus AI (Skirmish)? It seems I am never able to use a space marine battle barge in this mode :( . I saw patch notes that seemed to imply that this had been fixed in the last patch, but I have played well over 30 games and the games always cap at 300 points. Played a lot of games yesterday also (7/23/16) and this was still the case.

Being increased to 350 very soon I believe. Next patch.


Currently its only fixed for a few game modes only I think. Cruiser clash and maybe something else.

He said 2v2, 2v2 multiplayer and customs are getting the point increase.
Where's your Federation now?
-Imperial Navy

Alpha Tester - Getting the game on its feet
Technical Tester - We had to get the balance right somehow
Community Moderator - Purging spammers and maintaining the realm
BFG Wiki Founding Member

Pleb Squasher
Posts: 227
Joined: 13 March 2016, 03:54
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby Pleb Squasher » 13 October 2016, 03:24

CALiGeR190 wrote:I know I'm a mod and not a Dev, but I frequently see people voicing concerns over the silence and apparent inactivity from the Devs.
That's why I've stepped in to recieve your questions.

Anything you ask I will attempt to answer to the best of my ability or forward to the relavent person.

I'll start by saying the next patch should appear in the coming weeks (can't give you an exact date, nobody is quite sure when it'll be ready): 2 or 3 weeks is my best guess.

Next 'big' thing you will see is a ranked mode and global leaderboard.

Any further questions: please voice them here.


Hey there, just tagging you here as there's a thread I'd like you devs to take a look at on behalf of the community if possible.
The thread is titled 'Making Orks Viable' it's just a compilation of ideas I developed with help from a few friends that we thought would help you guys balance out Orks a bit better.
We just want BFG to be fun for players of all factions and Orks have been really hurting for a long time, hopefully you like some of the ideas.

User avatar
CALiGeR190
Community Moderator
Posts: 1202
Joined: 27 October 2015, 19:03
Location: Manchester, England
Contact:

Re: Development Q&A

Postby CALiGeR190 » 13 October 2016, 08:26

Pleb Squasher wrote:Hey there, just tagging you here as there's a thread I'd like you devs to take a look at on behalf of the community if possible.
The thread is titled 'Making Orks Viable' it's just a compilation of ideas I developed with help from a few friends that we thought would help you guys balance out Orks a bit better.
We just want BFG to be fun for players of all factions and Orks have been really hurting for a long time, hopefully you like some of the ideas.

Orks are already being addressed by the mod I'm helping to develop.
Full list of changes will be posted once agreed on but one primary change was to half the damage of all Ork weapons but double the rate of fire. Effectively increasing hit chances across the board. There also plans to add a few new ships to the Ork roster that use new or different weapon systems, details still not determined.
Where's your Federation now?
-Imperial Navy

Alpha Tester - Getting the game on its feet
Technical Tester - We had to get the balance right somehow
Community Moderator - Purging spammers and maintaining the realm
BFG Wiki Founding Member


Return to “General Gameplay Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests