Blog: Galactic News - August 2nd

5 Likes

there seems to be a bug with docked ships, they dont seem to contribute to points, i havent lost points since last week, in fact i have built several more ships but have docked many. id likely be top 10 if i undocked and im sure many others would be too.

This should be written up under a separate heading. Not sure if it’s a bug or intended. Same goes for upgrades to buildings, the leaderboards don’t get credit for upgrades to existing structures either.

@joe a new awaken the dark server is pointless when the current one isnt being used for balance changes and tests.

What will help Outscape currently will be a new Main3 slow server, however i personally think that the overall future of Outscape is a gamemode that consists of Awaken the dark fast early game and Main 2 slow endgame. Therefor fast T1 buildings and ships, and slow T3 ships and structures. Even the resource overflow can be fixed by that, with 6h deep mines instead of 30min, or 24h cruisers instead of 30min. With a solid defense mechanic other than minefields for people that dont want to fight and therefor can choose to stay out of it.

However right now we need:

rebalance each tier resource costs:
We need balance changes as in rebalance of all weapon costs, its madness that T5 weapons cost basicly less than T1.

Lets take a look at the Power Cannon SPC:

T1: 3 DPS 250 Farsu 250 Zyril
T5: 11.5 DPS 1,125 Farsu 250 Zyril

So for a 3,83x increase in damage, the cost goes only up by 4,5x for Farsu and there is no increase for Zyril at all. In other words, if someone was to bring the same amount of damage with T1 guns to fight someone with a single T5 gun, the resources needed will be T1: 4x Guns (12DPS) 1000 Farsu 1000 Zyril compared to T5: 1x Gun (11.5DPS) 1125 Farsu and 250 Zyril. So its even more expansive for casual players to use low tier guns than hardcore players have to pay for their dps. It needs to be the other way round. Highend weapons need to cost MUCH MORE per DPS than lower tier weapons, because A so casual players can inflict damage that hurts veterans. (think 1 million Farsu/Zyril per single Battleship) and B because of the way the combat system is designed, as the amount of gun slots is limited by the ships and fleetcapacity. Combat fleet battles will always be about the most damage you can fit in a 18/18 fleet. Therefor no matter how expansive fleets will be, the more damage a fleet has the better it will be. So we need T5 weapons to cost 10x or even 20x as much as T1 variants. So people might even use lower tier variants as they offer a better cost/dps ratio, while endgame will always be about the most damage you can bring anyway no matter the cost.

Hull Costs:
Also the base hull cost of Battleships / Cruisers and Dreadnoughts needs to be increased by atleast 100k Farsu for T3 ships and 200k for Dreadnoughts.

Missile balance:
Missiles need either a rework or some sort of downside, cause currently full missile fleets are the king of combat. Its simply better to have every ship shoot the whole combat than wait for ships to get line of sight with turrets / canons. This problem could also be reworked by increasing the command radius by 100%.

command radius is too small
there is no way to setup big fleets, that might have been a balance choice in the past but it just takes away from the game experience

T1 and T2 combat ships have no place in combat:
Currently there is no place for Destroyers or Frigates in combat. The combat system is designed around 1 fleet vs 1 fleet, therefor people bring the best weapon plattforms there are and spam them massivly, which are Battleships or Cruisers currently. However this could easily be changed by “true damage” comin from M size slots and bigger ships (L slots) not offering “more damage” but special stuff Destroyers and Frigates dont. Like special types of firing (already: Lightning guns) or support modules like: shield modules that offer increased shields to all ships within 800m, fire coordination modules that offer more damage to nearby ships and so on.

fast fix:
more S and M slot damage, higher cost for T3 / T4
future fix:
support modules for L slots

balance between kinetic and energy weapons is terrible
energy weapons need a massive damage buff to be reasonable

overall time to kill in battles is way too low
we need overall more hp or much less damage, so battles take a bit longer

fleet rotation speed is too high
the ships rotate way too fast, maybe give the angle of attack special ability from cloaked fleets to normal fleets aswell make it standard for every battle that the attacker attacks at the angle that the fleet is approaching


resource balance:
asteriod mining
asteriod mining is in the game but… its so poorly balanced that it is terrible to do so. Although it could be a perfect alternative for bio species to get resources in space instead via mines and not having to build massive amounts of entertainment centers. Bio races have lots of fleet slots which Syntis simply dont. So maybe remove the fixed amount of resources from Asteroids and give them density and unlimited amount of resources.

raiding time reduction
maybe reduce the time to just 10min and make corvettes immune to ODS damage.

visibility changes:

its too time consuming to explore the galaxy, and then do it all again to find that single hidden base. Therefor all colonies need to start as revealed with maybe the option of having certain colonies hidden for an extra cost. This will greatly increase the interaction of every player, especially the casual players as they often dont scout much at all and therefor never find their active neighbours.

Also the cost for cloaking a fleet should be based on the sum of all ship lenghs and not a fixed amount so its harder to cloak every single freight fleet people have. Currently people cloak all their freight fleets so no one finds their fleets and colonies in the first place, or just dont give a damn cause the activity is so low that people just run dreadnought freights.

3 Likes

Alongside this we are also preparing some changes to balance. But these changes would have to come with a new Awaken the Dark galaxy, so we may well launch another Awaken the Dark galaxy later this month. What do you think?

I understand that the AtD galaxy was up for basically 20 months and most galaxies get reset after 6ish months, but are the changes specifically for that galaxy? I ask because I feel M2 needs the reset and the AtD galaxy appears to be alive and well.

I believe this was removed as a simple online vs offline balance. If you were online, you would never allow another player to hit you from behind. A simple automation fix. Maybe one quarter of the angle can be given though? If hit directly from behind, the battle would start at a 45 degree angle from the front and if hit from the side, the battle would start at a 22.5 degree angle from the front.

Basically what @Rae said. We need a reason to build lower tier ships. Give destroyers a module which gives them a percentage dps boost. Cannons, turrets need buffing, missiles outmatch them all the time.

He said a great many things. I am just referring to the 1 item and do not wish to respond to the rest of his post.

Oh, that was a mistake. I didnt mean to directly respond to your comment.

Also @joe can you give us a teaser as to what balance changes are planned?

1 Like

Great to see new balance changes and a new server. But I personally think this new server should be even faster, in some regards, to the current Awaken server.

Ship building/building speed and resource extraction is fine but should maybe slowed down a little bit to reduce late game spam.

However movement and other active activities should faster. Such as bombing, raiding should be increased (with corresponding reduction to ODS cycle time). I don’t find it particularly enjoying having to slowly see my fleet move from one side of my empire to another (1+ hours) and waiting 30 minutes for a bombing strike, why?

Is that supposed to allow for people to login and defend? If so then it is not enough anyway and we need a new solid offline defense.

The rule of thumb should be that active acitivies, go to X, attack Y etc should be fast and passive activities, building etc should be slow because you dont need to sit around to wait for passive activies were as active activities is something you often want to finish during an actual game session. This is how it worked for Eve and a model that I think would fit well for this game.

However a rock solid offline protection is what this game needs the most imo. Otherwise you can go on a weekend vacation and come back and see your empire in shambles.

This makes battles “more expensive” as each ship would then have more value. The opposite of this would encourage fights as lost fleets would quickly be replenished.

As far as passive defenses go, there are a good number of ideas that have been put forth. The devs need to pick one if they haven’t and it does not appear the player base will.

Rather then boost lower tier hulls might be better to have tier slots. Drednaught flag could have 10 t3 slots and the rest limited to tier 2/1 hulls. Race limits on hulls could be tied in too. Say a syntis drednaught could only hold 10 battleship, 4 syntis vetts, 3 Destroyers. Forcing mixed fleet building with all tiers.

1 Like

or simply have T3 / T4 take up 2 slots in a fleet.

1 Like

You are right. I felt that I could mass produce DN fleets after a month of playing but since I was not engaged into an active war, I didn’t realise that how fast you could lose those DN fleets. So good point, keep building as it is so we can keep having more battles, which is what you play on a speed server for.

There are some inequalities among the different races ships so a basic double slot cost might not work.

We need a spam of T1 ships, normal amounts of T2 and then some very few high value T3 / T4 endgame fleets.

Currently all there is is T3 spam.

3 Likes

Yes. The idea of a point system for ships is used across alot of game, in my experience it was Sins of a Solar Empire.

I think the flagship levels should go up, but Based on tier, your ship takes so many points off of the level.
T1 would be 1 point.
T2 would be 2 points.
T3 would be 3 points.
T4 4 points.

A dreadnought using this should have a flag of 30. You could have 8 battleships and 1 destroyer, or 13 t2 destroyers, or 26 t1 destroyers. I think for races such as mankind or ripchee, the levels should go down a bit for t2 and below. Say, t1 would be 0.5 points and t2 would be 1 point.

4 Likes

Yeah the current system, where one destroyer is the same as one BS as far as fleets are concerned, is pretty dumb. Something like you said would make sense but would need to be carefully balanced so a spam of T1 destroyers would not defeat a spam of BS because then there would be no point but to spam build cheap ships and overwhelm your opponent.

It is a very difficult thing to balance as even in Sins of Solar empire, excellent game btw, I rarely felt the reason to produce the cheapest ship unless it had a unique role that the larger one’s could not fill, such as repairing and long range sniping.

I think the best way to balance things like this is to use a sort of rock, paper, scissor setup. Rock (large ships) beat Scissor (medium ships) which in turn beat Paper (small ships) which beat Rock.

That system would encourage you to build different mixes of size of ships rather than just go for big (or small) ships.

Ever seen a scout next to a DN? You wouldnt be able to see it and it would increase the usefulness of large aoe weapons. Also, most t3 ships are more than 3 times the ship a t1 is. Further balancing would be needed to the point that 2 t1 ships could take out a t2 ship, generally accross the races.