X4 Version 2.0 Beta 4 is now available

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

EmperorDragon
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat, 13. Apr 13, 14:45
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by EmperorDragon » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:22

GCU Grey Area wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:04
Horux wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 11:19
Also I have a problem with your description, if a K can kill an argon carry in 20s how is a teladi carry an effective hiding spot?
Because it's lasting longer than 20 seconds, a lot longer. So far it's always won & has only encountered serious problems if it's outnumbered, or if attacked by a second K while it's shields are still recharging from the last one. Condor's loadout is 12xM Plasma & 1xL Beam (good for rapid subsystem destruction). Also has a set of 3 docked Pulse-turreted Osprey Sentinels providing anti-fighter defences, so the Condor's own turrets can be employed entirely for anti-capital work.
If the Teladi carrier is that much stronger than an Argon carrier, then we have a serious balancing issue here. Argon carrier is destroyed in 20s but a Teladi carrier always wins? This warrants a bug report (if true).

The Xenon ships can do with more firepower but, simply buffing up their L turrets this much is not a solution. It has "band-aid fix" written all over it (especially considering the massive difference between IS and OOS efficiency). In fact, it does not provide actual challenge, it just feels like someone tried to make a badly balanced damage mod or applied a cheat to the incorrect weapon. It also makes the AI look more stupid because with such extreme L turrets at the front, it's imperative to approach it from the rear or top. The AI still just charge in head-on.

Xenon L turrets can indeed do with a bit of a buff but, what they really need to make them properly challenging is to add 2-3 additional L turrets, especially on the blind spots, and give all turrets some more hull strength so fighters don't destroy them as easily.
“To be the first to enter the cosmos, to engage, single-handed, in an unprecedented duel with nature - could one dream of anything more?” - Yuri Gagarin

GCU Grey Area
Posts: 7778
Joined: Sat, 14. Feb 04, 23:07
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by GCU Grey Area » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:47

EmperorDragon wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:22
If the Teladi carrier is that much stronger than an Argon carrier, then we have a serious balancing issue here. Argon carrier is destroyed in 20s but a Teladi carrier always wins? This warrants a bug report (if true).
Have not tried Colossus in 2.0 (started new Teladi game as soon as the 2.0 beta became available) so have no experience as to how they perform against 2.0 Xenon capitals. Though did have a lot of fun with one in my previous game. I am however sceptical about this 20 second claim, they're not all that much weaker than Condor with regard to hull & shield strength (Colossus in my previous game actually had ~10% stronger shields than my current Condor IIRC).

Guess a lot depends on loadout & whether the ship can kill Xenon capitals efficiently, without taking excessive damage in the process (longer battle = more damage and/or lost subsystems). Have noticed that the symmetrical placement of turrets on the Condor does allow a greater degree of coordination between turret groups - often a good 2/3 of the guns on Condor can be focused on a single target. Suspect that even though it's turrets are weaker than those on a K, it is often simply outgunning the K by sheer weight of numbers - from some angles (flanks etc) K can only bring a couple of it's L turrets to bear & those can be swiftly eliminated, either by myself, or Condor's L beam turret (seems to be quite efficient at that).

Shehriazad
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed, 5. Dec 18, 00:56
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by Shehriazad » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 18:19

GCU Grey Area wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:47
EmperorDragon wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 12:22
If the Teladi carrier is that much stronger than an Argon carrier, then we have a serious balancing issue here. Argon carrier is destroyed in 20s but a Teladi carrier always wins? This warrants a bug report (if true).
Have not tried Colossus in 2.0 (started new Teladi game as soon as the 2.0 beta became available) so have no experience as to how they perform against 2.0 Xenon capitals. Though did have a lot of fun with one in my previous game. I am however sceptical about this 20 second claim, they're not all that much weaker than Condor with regard to hull & shield strength (Colossus in my previous game actually had ~10% stronger shields than my current Condor IIRC).

Guess a lot depends on loadout & whether the ship can kill Xenon capitals efficiently, without taking excessive damage in the process (longer battle = more damage and/or lost subsystems). Have noticed that the symmetrical placement of turrets on the Condor does allow a greater degree of coordination between turret groups - often a good 2/3 of the guns on Condor can be focused on a single target. Suspect that even though it's turrets are weaker than those on a K, it is often simply outgunning the K by sheer weight of numbers - from some angles (flanks etc) K can only bring a couple of it's L turrets to bear & those can be swiftly eliminated, either by myself, or Condor's L beam turret (seems to be quite efficient at that).


Yea 20 seconds is completely unbelievable(to me)...ESPECIALLY since the Colossus has 1 more shield slot than a Condor for some motherhugging reason even though the Teladi are supposedly the tankier faction of the 3 in the game atm.. Condor is HELLA weak compared to a Colossus (even though I love it the most).

And in damage they are also pretty much EQUAL if you look at the target correctly.

For a Condor you want to do a broadside (which is what AI does now))..you on average get 8M and 1L to fire iif done correctly, sometimes maybe 9.
For a Colossuus you want to point your nose "below" the target so 8M and and 1L will always hit. Large targets can be pointed at horizontally and then even some lowerside turrets will hit.


I've yeete to lose a carrier to a 2.0 Xenon K...I take SOME damage for sure, but I simply tell my Condor with Swarm Missiles and L Laser turret to target the L Turrets that are pointing at me first...after that it's just a floating hunk of metal.

Only way I can explain it would be if the Colossus was fit with all laser weapons which is incredibly silly if you want to use the Carrier as an attack vessel.

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51740
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by CBJ » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 18:23

The damage for Xenon turrets has been toned down a little in the latest update, which is now available. It is still higher than in 1.60 but a little less extreme than in earlier 2.00 builds.

HBK
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri, 10. Mar 06, 15:23
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by HBK » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 18:38

CBJ wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 18:23
The damage for Xenon turrets has been toned down a little in the latest update, which is now available. It is still higher than in 1.60 but a little less extreme than in earlier 2.00 builds.
I might have been lucky with my testing run, but it feels way better now. You can take 11 behemoths and assault a shipyard and while you’ll suffer heavy losses, it’ll feel like a proper battle and not some weird Benny Hill sketch.

For the record, Xenon turrets still hurt a lot. But that’s it, they "hurt a lot", they don’t wtfpawnbbq everything within range.

Nice change :thumb_up:

pref
Posts: 5589
Joined: Sat, 10. Nov 12, 17:55
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by pref » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 20:56

Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 08:27
In general, I think developers like Egosoft should ignore those that complain about things being too easy overall - especially in the context of games like the X-series. Some apparent balancing issues can be due to other bugs (e.g. AI) rather than weapon/shield balance. Try to change both at the same time and you would not know for sure which is the primary cause, this unfortunately is the main mistake most developers make when trying to appease those complaining. They should concentrate on the key control and AI issues then only look at shields/weapons if necessary AFTER those changes have been reviewed by those complaining.
True that you have to do everything step by step if each improvement is released in separate patches, as each change with even just slight effects on combat can change the balance considerably.

AI, turret targeting and dps/shield balance needs a change - the latter at least with Xen capitals. I tried a couple days back standing still in front of a K's L turrets and it took less then 50% of my shields in an M ship under the time i killed its 2 L and 1 M turret (all had me in LOS and were hitting me even).

But then there is the issue with missile defence not working, terrible hitrate of turrets in cases, AI boosting in combat in an ineffective way, OOS/IS balance, and terribly low DPS of some capship turrets compared to that of missile turrets and general ship hull strength.

If they do more of this in one pass that can reduce time spent on balancing drastically as they don't need to rebalance after each change individually.
I trust they will get it right, XR was extremely easy combat wise at start then i think they managed to have a better balance later on.
X3 was pretty nicely balanced all things considered by the time i started to play it, so can't say much about that.

Regarding income for big complexes i feel too that they make way too much money compared to costs we have in the game currently. My first bigger plex did 100m an hour or so even before it got finished, as soon as docks got built, without a single credit transfer to the manager. And there is no buy offers in quantity for the wares it produces.
I was expecting it making next to no profit as long as the storage modules are filled up a bit.
I really miss a report on what ware made how much profit/income as currently it's hard to guess having many intermediate prod modules.

sh1pman
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed, 10. Aug 16, 13:28
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by sh1pman » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 21:46

pref wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 20:56

Regarding income for big complexes i feel too that they make way too much money compared to costs we have in the game currently. My first bigger plex did 100m an hour or so even before it got finished, as soon as docks got built, without a single credit transfer to the manager. And there is no buy offers in quantity for the wares it produces.
I was expecting it making next to no profit as long as the storage modules are filled up a bit.
I really miss a report on what ware made how much profit/income as currently it's hard to guess having many intermediate prod modules.
Same, my mega-plex with 18 claytronics fabs and a bunch of other end products doesn’t really have much work, because everything is already saturated... I guess there’s not enough money in the universe to pay for my wares :) Which is a shame. Maybe resource cost for ships and stations should be increased, along with station storage capacity.

User avatar
Sam L.R. Griffiths
Posts: 10522
Joined: Fri, 12. Mar 04, 19:47
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 2 is now available

Post by Sam L.R. Griffiths » Fri, 15. Feb 19, 22:28

pref wrote:
Fri, 15. Feb 19, 20:56
If they do more of this in one pass that can reduce time spent on balancing drastically as they don't need to rebalance after each change individually.
The problem is that in the process they can make the game effectively unplayable for some - making lots of changes in a big hit is exactly the wrong way to do things when dealing with a live product, it flies in the face of best practices.

It may or may not take longer to do things in smaller steps, it depends on the end effect of the changes - either way you end up with less issues with overcompensating for potential/perceived issues unnecessarily which is the key risk with any big bang changes (and often is ultimately what happens).
Lenna (aka [SRK] The_Rabbit)

"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55

"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb

"When eating an elephant take one bite at a time" - Creighton Abrams

sintri
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun, 2. Dec 18, 08:19
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by sintri » Sat, 16. Feb 19, 04:49

Pretty sure building stations in enemy territory's gotten far more aggressive. Also nice on the clear logs button.

Also good time as any to remind that sector blacklists with 2.0 would be really helpful

Edit:
Seems the xenon outbreak isn't just me, would not suggest playing beta 3 atm.

Thecrippler
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue, 8. Jan 19, 15:43

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Thecrippler » Sat, 16. Feb 19, 12:12

need to now was the performance improve in 2.0 beta 2

Fame
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed, 16. Aug 06, 22:58
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Fame » Sat, 16. Feb 19, 12:41

Hello all,

By looking into reports of ver 2.0 Beta 3 it looks like that Xenon arent no wimps anymore... so looking forward to this :D When its done.


However here are some ideias that might be already in place in regards of "faction logic" or what i like to call "dinamic agressivness". Or mayby some else already stated them in the past without me knowing :?

A given race or faction has 10 on the scale of being agressive means that the faction is bent or fully commited to rule all the Universe having -10 it will have the attitude kill me i want to die ... lol... sorts off.
As pointers to make up this scale there are several stats about the player that could be used, such as fight rank, trading rank, faction relation or the number of Xenon killed, etc.
Using only one of this pointers is easier to put into game i think but makes the game pretty much predictable. And some uncertanty might be preffered. Spanning bigger number of ships is the easy road but using "clever" tricks such as camping on a bussy trade route, etc might be better.

The called dinamic part comes into it when its "races agressivness" is updated, higher or lower, based on the previous player stats versus current stats, over time. Some fail safes should or already are in place in order to avoid Paranid , as example to become the "new peacefull Goners" :lol:
I guess some of this is already in place but mayby with different names.
But i do understand that some or all of it might not even be possible due to other reasons which i do not know.

Ps: Since the impact will be great in each universe changes could/should be done in little baby steps if something like this is even possible in the first place that is :)

Cheers,
Fame
Its a problem if you don´t have any problems.

User avatar
Sam L.R. Griffiths
Posts: 10522
Joined: Fri, 12. Mar 04, 19:47
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Sam L.R. Griffiths » Sat, 16. Feb 19, 16:59

Fame wrote:
Sat, 16. Feb 19, 12:41
However here are some ideias that might be already in place in regards of "faction logic" or what i like to call "dinamic agressivness". Or mayby some else already stated them in the past without me knowing :?
Such an option has always been present in X-games, just not on the fly - those of us in the know call them mods. ;)

Personally, I do not support the idea of making the baseline experience more contentious unless it is done via opt-in logic means (e.g. sign up to the war missions and that kicks things off - albeit with warnings for the player). For those that have already signed up to war missions there should be the option for things to stay as-is.
Last edited by Sam L.R. Griffiths on Sun, 17. Feb 19, 08:04, edited 1 time in total.
Lenna (aka [SRK] The_Rabbit)

"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55

"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb

"When eating an elephant take one bite at a time" - Creighton Abrams

Shehriazad
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed, 5. Dec 18, 00:56
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Shehriazad » Sat, 16. Feb 19, 17:40

Are there any plans to give NPC factions the ability to remove plots if they have built too many?

You stopped them from "usually" building too many...but I still see some cases where this happens i.e. when one is only semi-finished or has been destroyed.

Like a simple script that makes sure the oldest station plot is automatically removed when it exceeds the maximum number of plots you have allowed the AI to build?


I don't particularly fancy them having 6+ defense station plots that they keep trying to feed...some of these being exclusively from beta 3 and some remnants from beta 2.

Fame
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed, 16. Aug 06, 22:58
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Fame » Sun, 17. Feb 19, 10:11

Personally, I do not support the idea of making the baseline experience more contentious unless it is done via opt-in logic means (e.g. sign up to the war missions and that kicks things off - albeit with warnings for the player). For those that have already signed up to war missions there should be the option for things to stay as-is.
I see your point. And its a good one. "opt-in logic" gives the player the option the start things when he/she is ready.
But i still think that after a while, several in game days the base line could use a little bit of "contentious activity". And by a little i really mean a little, even its only the pirates making the presence noted.
Not by a long shot as much as ver2.0 seems to bring along though.

Fame
Its a problem if you don´t have any problems.

User avatar
Sam L.R. Griffiths
Posts: 10522
Joined: Fri, 12. Mar 04, 19:47
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Sam L.R. Griffiths » Sun, 17. Feb 19, 10:39

Fame wrote:
Sun, 17. Feb 19, 10:11
Personally, I do not support the idea of making the baseline experience more contentious unless it is done via opt-in logic means (e.g. sign up to the war missions and that kicks things off - albeit with warnings for the player). For those that have already signed up to war missions there should be the option for things to stay as-is.
I see your point. And its a good one. "opt-in logic" gives the player the option the start things when he/she is ready.
But i still think that after a while, several in game days the base line could use a little bit of "contentious activity". And by a little i really mean a little, even its only the pirates making the presence noted.
Not by a long shot as much as ver2.0 seems to bring along though.

Fame
Arguably that was already there pre-1.60/pre-1.50, things have calmed down quite a bit for me after v1.60 - I used to regularly get notifications of pirate demands from my trade ships, but now such incidents seem to be not as frequent. However, that could as much be down to me building up my reputation with the factions as anything else. SCA are seemingly locked at -5 thus there is not much that I can do about that but for most of the other (non-inherently hostile) factions I have reputation levels of 24+ currently, the exception being the Ministry of Finance which is currently holding at +9 for now (had built up MIN rep a few times only to have it knocked down again because my trade ships were defending themselves in Teladi space).

Xenon raids have been sporadic in frequency so it is difficult for me to assess whether much has changed since v1.0 versus the current v1.60 experience.

As for baseline contentious activity, versus the player it should be dampened by having a good reputation with the relevant factions and should not penalise the player for themselves (or their assets) defending themselves against rogue elements when they are playing by the local rules (i.e. not trading in illegal cargo wares).
Lenna (aka [SRK] The_Rabbit)

"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55

"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb

"When eating an elephant take one bite at a time" - Creighton Abrams

Fame
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed, 16. Aug 06, 22:58
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by Fame » Sun, 17. Feb 19, 17:26

... the exception being the Ministry of Finance which is currently holding at +9 for now (had built up MIN rep a few times only to have it knocked down again because my trade ships were defending themselves in Teladi space).
Happened to me also in regards of Min .... but none of my traders has any turrets instaled though as far as i know. I do have an (1) L freighter that has (1) defense drone with him :lol:
Its a problem if you don´t have any problems.

biological
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun, 23. Dec 18, 09:14
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by biological » Mon, 18. Feb 19, 01:43

Autotrader jump range reduced to 4_5 intentional? Or bug due to the change to autominer?

consiefe
Posts: 214
Joined: Thu, 3. Sep 15, 11:23

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by consiefe » Tue, 19. Feb 19, 09:47

biological wrote:
Mon, 18. Feb 19, 01:43
Autotrader jump range reduced to 4_5 intentional? Or bug due to the change to autominer?
Can it be pilot star levels?

HBK
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri, 10. Mar 06, 15:23
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 3 is now available

Post by HBK » Tue, 19. Feb 19, 10:21

consiefe wrote:
Tue, 19. Feb 19, 09:47
Can it be pilot star levels?
Just like before. They just seriously nerfed the "jump range" you got. Right now it seems to be about 1 star = 1 jump. Previous versions were much more generous. Probably too generous granted, but current version seems to be one hell of a nerf. Going from 24 to 4 is quite the decrease.

lordmuck
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sun, 1. Mar 09, 12:25
x4

Re: X4 Version 2.0 Beta 4 is now available

Post by lordmuck » Tue, 19. Feb 19, 14:13

Ty for the update looking forward to see my torpedoes working again.. Praying you guys make a little priority on the the whole defend position/patrol/defend station and stopping ships from following the target all over the universe :)

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”