Why do on foot weapons damage ships so much?

hunvagy

hunvagy
Base defenses would also require for the engangement to make sense. Currently ground CZs boil down to a bunch of pantsless commandos playing CTF in a burning base. Normally, wouldn't it be.. Faction A attacking a fully powered base Faction B has? You know, like UT2k4 Onslaught mode. With objectives.. oh wait, that would take actual effort.

The worst part is, we already have infiltration missions, raid missions, delivery missions, sabotage missions. Why can't we have mission objectives for a CZ encounter?
 

MacIntoc

MacIntoc
Morbad said:
Which would be a simplistic, but important, tactical consideration if anything mattered/made sense.
Click to expand...
That would imply a complet rework from scratch of the sphere of combat, not something that could be done in few month. But for the next expansion, sure !
 

alexzk

A
Morbad said:
A 400kg ship-mounted artillery piece, with the density of whipped cream, almost being able to match the destructive power of a small arm that is 1/100th it's mass and 1/10000th it's volume is not going to help any plausibility argument.
Click to expand...
Nuclear hand-held (imaginary one) grenade is same effective for single ship as nuclear bomb - in both cases ship is gone.
 

alexzk

A
1 Kg of TNT produces 4.16 Mj of energy. This means suit has charge equal to 4 Kg of it. So we can assume plasma can do same 1 shoot/charge. I.e, each hit of plasma equals to 4Kgs of TNT.
Tomahawk rockets of base modifications could have couple tens of Kgs of TNT so this equals to about 10 plasma hits. So you still think it can't destroy tanks?
 
Last edited:

Fishy

Fishy
So, I made this one for the Cat Memes thread, but it's very much about this topic:

QfCnsGo.jpg
 

MrShinyTorterra

M
Obsidian Ant said:
This is the real problem with the design.

Whilst it doesn't make any logical sense that hand weapons are so powerful, the real problem is how it prevents true combined arms gameplay.
Click to expand...
How can a giant ship made to withstand severe laser damage, explosions, torpedoes and other things be blown up my 2 guys with a gun? I mean cmon Fdev... A huge Farragut ship can shoot me longer than 2 handguns. Where is the logic (and fun) in that. It's not like ships can shoot back at on foot people.

They say there is a "sphere of combat" but I am not really seeing it. Srv's can't do anything against ships, ships's can't do anything against on foot players (except missiles but still if you come to close kiss your ship goodbye) and people with small guns seem to be able to destroy all the rest. That doesn't sound like a "sphere of combat". They said they would keep everything balanced in video's and Q&A's. To be honest, Odyssey is not what I expected it to be after video's like this:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p4zIZgWqcU
. In one of the video's they say 3-6 players are needed to take out a SRV and a person alone can't do that. Yet you can take out a ship with 2 people. Where is the logic in that?
 

biggbno

B
MacIntoc said:
Let personnal weapons ignore ship shield. Why not. We can now have a coherent difference of power between personnal and ship weapons.

So if we decrease the power of personnal weapons, we have to decrease the personnal shield and armor strength. That mean a ship weapons should be able to OS any on-foot player/NPC. Personnaly, i have no real issue to shoot an on-foot NPC with my ship weapons (probably the only case where mouse have an advantage over HOTAS), so i find this a bit too op. But what ever, that also mean that a single ship can easily be able to cover a large area or to force players to stay on cover (cover doesn't need you to hit to do this, just to fire).
Click to expand...
May work if you somehow make ship weapons need on ground spotting or maybe some sort of limpet you can launch if you like me have no friends.
 

MacIntoc

MacIntoc
biggbno said:
May work if you somehow make ship weapons need on ground spotting or maybe some sort of limpet you can launch if you like me have no friends.
Click to expand...
Because you also want a way to target players/NPCs on foot ? Being invulnerable with infinite ammo and OS anything on foot isn't enough ?
 

FightingFirst

F
Because yet again it is lazy design decisions. To have meaningful, fun and impactfull interactions thought would have to be made about how ground and space interact. How fun would it be for a destroy base mission, your team drop down 2 KM away in purpose built SRV which act like an IFV. They go in and storm the base to disable base sheilds and weapons, your team in the ship can then safely come in and destroy the rest of the ground forces. Instead FD have just completely removed any meaningful interaction further making space legs feel like an after thought. I hate to say it so many time but SC has at least given the interaction between ground and space some though and given players the tools in theory to counter ships with AA vehicles or handheld AA. Whether this will work in practice is a big if but at least they are thinking about these problems. I wish FD had done the same due diligence.
 

Sublime

S
SpaceDad said:
Imagine Keelback equipped with 99 plasma riffles instead of oversized sticks
Click to expand...

I guess if you could do that what would be the range of those? I don’t imagine the range of the ground weapons is very large compared to the space ones so maybe that’s where the extra power goes.

Not making excuses, it’s still designed badly and scales very poorly.
 
Last edited:

Obsidian Ant

Obsidian Ant
MrShinyTorterra said:
How can a giant ship made to withstand severe laser damage, explosions, torpedoes and other things be blown up my 2 guys with a gun? I mean cmon Fdev... A huge Farragut ship can shoot me longer than 2 handguns. Where is the logic (and fun) in that. It's not like ships can shoot back at on foot people.

They say there is a "sphere of combat" but I am not really seeing it. Srv's can't do anything against ships, ships's can't do anything against on foot players (except missiles but still if you come to close kiss your ship goodbye) and people with small guns seem to be able to destroy all the rest. That doesn't sound like a "sphere of combat". They said they would keep everything balanced in video's and Q&A's. To be honest, Odyssey is not what I expected it to be after video's like this:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p4zIZgWqcU
. In one of the video's they say 3-6 players are needed to take out a SRV and a person alone can't do that. Yet you can take out a ship with 2 people. Where is the logic in that?
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I meant. Sorry I probably wasn't very clear.

The ridiculous nature of hand weapons vs. ships completely breaks any notion of a sphere of combat.
 

zimms

zimms
Obsidian Ant said:
This is exactly what I meant. Sorry I probably wasn't very clear.

The ridiculous nature of hand weapons vs. ships completely breaks any notion of a sphere of combat.
Click to expand...
And we're back at more transparent development. If Frontier hadn't been completely radio silent concerning Odyssey and its features, they would have gotten some feedback and maybe realized that this isn't what people want the "sphere of combat" to be like.

But the communication problem isn't purely external, it's also internal it seems. It really looks like Odyssey was developed by a completely different development team. When they told us the weapons' damage types are "inspired" by Elite, I feared the worst.

Surely this is how it's supposed to be, right? It's still the same game, you design it with a coherent and holistic view in mind? As it turns out, Odyssey really is its own thing and Odyssey and Horizons content is very clearly separated in almost every way.

"Dovetailing a completely new game into Elite" unfortunately turned out to be meant more literally than I'd had assumed.
 

MrShinyTorterra

M
It is kind of a let down that not only Odyssey has alot of bugs in it (but I don't really care about those, they are doing everything to fix it. Making a Roadmap, handling bug reports better. I mean I don't have Odyssey but I can imagine it is frustrating for you. But those will eventually get sorted out and if you happen to loose credits or ships from a bug they will refund it) but also the gamemechanics seem broken. All those pre-released video's they showed us gave us high expectations. It seemed all very cool and awesome. Those people where really passionate and exited about their work. Going to a shooting range to make the sounds for guns, making sure to add emotions and feelings to those animations, stating that on foot combat will require some creative thinking, ... Seeing how it turned out to have broken mechanics is kind of a let down, not only to us but I can imagine for those at Fdev who worked on it for so long too. They worked so hard for it and probably see howmuch blame they get that they don't deserve. That counts for Dr Kay Ross too, she has gotten a lot of Tweets about the broken graphics and it might all not even be her fault.

Personaly I find those broken gamemechanics a lot worst than the bugs. They will eventualy get fixed and Fdev is open about those. Replieing to Tweets, forum posts, and (not sure) even Reddit posts about those bugs. But I have not seen any responses to broken gamemechanics or the fact that the lore aspect of the game is almost completly gone. I understand they have other things to do than lore or gamemechanics and that fixing those bugs is priority. But at least be more open about that too. If Fdev made a forum post saying "ok guys we are busy fixing bugs and don't have time right now for Lore or gamemechanics, but we will look at that after putting out the fire" that would at least give us the feeling of being listened to. Because of their (Fdev's) reactions to bugs I know they will be fixed, but keeping us completly in the dark about gamemechanics and Lore is what I'm really worried about.
 

dawud

D
I just watched the "Sphere of Combat"-Video again, and oh my.. that did not age well.


That roadmap, better be special.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom