More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

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

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59

In this topic i just want to make a few suggestions for changes and also hear from the community how they would change a few things in the game.

I would also be very happy to receive feedback and suggestions for improvements from the community.

I started the discussion on Steam some time ago and now wanted to post it here.

The original discussion can be found here: https://steamcommunity.com/app/392160/d ... 678493566/

The point about a better economic and diplomacy system is not included here as changes are still being discussed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Crew training:

A lot has already been written about it just taking too long to improve the pilot skill. The seminar system is simply completely unfinished and thoughtlessly integrated into the game. Why do you have simple seminars (to get your pilot to 2 stars) that you can buy from a dealer and why are there better ones that can only be obtained through missions?

First of all, the system with which the pilot skill is improved should be completely revised. It just takes too long and after what I've read, it's a real gamble if a pilot improves. The pilot should have experience of covering long distances (flown distance), the general flight time (flight hours of the pilot), and performing commands (for example, a trade completed).

It would also be a nice idea if you could build crew training centers (and the other factions too). There you could have the opportunity to improve your crew for money and also recruit better staff. It would also be great if you could buy all crew seminars there but you have to buy first a certain license from the respective faction (depending on the rank you have with a faction). The system with the seminars should generally be revised a bit.

The system with the seminars is very laboriously integrated. To improve the pilot by 1 star you need the same seminar 3 times (Now seminars give 1 Star). If I want to improve 5 pilots I have to spark the pilot every time and tell him to do a seminar. Very cumbersome and time consuming if I want to improve several pilots. With update 3.30, the whole thing was improved with a better overview of your staff, but it would be nice if you could assign your staff a certain training module in order to improve them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- SETA:

So I have no idea how the device was integrated into previous X games or whether it was available at all, but why can we build a device that can speed up the time without prior knowledge of this device? I mean does everyone in space own this device or have knowledge of it?

In addition, it is just annoying to farm the parts for it. As far as I know, the parts for the device can only be found with luck on destroyed ships and the data vaults, which in my eyes is again totally player unfriendly and unrealistic integrated into the game. I am forced as a player to destroy ships in order to get the necessary components, if I have no idea about the data vaults. That can happen quickly if I'm lucky, but also a few hours if I'm unlucky. After over 40 hours and hundreds of destroyed xenon ships (and 2 stations) i still miss 1 part to assemble it.

So why didn't you integrate the device into the game so that you can buy the parts for the device or even better integrate it into a quest for the hq. It would be a nice thing if you had a little quest to get the device or you also have to research it in the hq to build it (but then with parts that you can also buy.)

If you are new to the game you have no idea what it is doing and you can easily overlook it. So a small quest intigration explaining the function of the device would not be a bad idea.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Station construction:

Building stations and factories in the game just takes too long. A production module in the game takes about 10 to 60 minutes (depends on the module and the number of construction drones on a construction ship). So if I want to build a factory with let's say 50 production modules, with an average construction time of 30 minutes per module, I need 25 hours! (without SETA) Even with SETA it takes several hours to finish a bigger factory.

At the moment I don't do anything else in X4 than start the game, activate SETA and wait until my factories are finally finished. It's so time-consuming that I go shopping on the side, meet friends or watch TV and just let the game run.

So why can't we assign more than one construction ship to a factory to speed up construction? It would be a real improvement if you could assign 3 to 5 construction ships to a station to speed up construction?

One could increase the construction time and give us the opportunity to assign more than one construction ship to a station. Let's say we can assign 5 construction ships to a station at the same time, but would only achieve a faster construction speed with 4 ships than is the case now. Of course, it also depends on how the A.I. behaves. If the A.I. starts building dozens of construction ships at once and always builds the stations with the maximum number of construction ships, this change would also make no sense. You can give the order to the construction ships to find building orders. This would be expanded a bit with the change and you could now help factions more directly in the construction of sations.

This change should generally slow down the building of the station at the beginning for the player and the other factions. If you want to build quickly, you really need several construction ships that are fully equipped.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Paint modifications:

I think I speak for many players when I say that the way paint modifications have been integrated into the game is just ridiculous and absolutely player unfriendly.

You can only get paint jobs through missions and the expeditions, which is stupid enough. But that you can only use a paint modification that you got for 1 ship really shoots the bird. That means if I want my combat fleet of 50 ships in the same paint modification, i need 50 times the same modification!!!

In the menu tab Empire we can also set the standard color of our ship, which means that the paintwork of our ship changes by magic. The problem with that is, however, if I switch to another of my ships, it automatically takes on the same color. But if I don't want this ship in the same color, I have to go back to the menu and change the color and that every time I change the ship.

Who the hell at Egosoft came up with this stupid idea!

Why not just integrate the paint modifications like the Staionts blueprints? This means that there are simple paint modifications that you can buy at any shipyard (blue, black, red, green ...) and others that are maybe race-specific (Argon, Teladi, Paranid) and also the opportunity to purchase the blueprints of the paint modifications so that you can equip them at your own shipyards (and the possibility to equip them for money at every shipyard after having bought the blueprints).

It would also be a good opportunity for a small company like Egosoft to generate some money with a small dlc with cool and unique looking paint modifications.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Black market traders:

If you are new to the game, you probably don't know that there are black market dealers where you can buy bombs or buy the parts you need to make bombs. Any why is this the case? Because it is totally ridiculous and player-unfriendly integrated into the game.

In order to unlock a black market dealer, you first have to find a data leak at a station which offers you a mission. The problem is that not every mission that is offered unlocks a black market dealer (You can see it in the reward description). That means that with a little luck I can go through a few stations until I find the right mission.

After accepting the mission, the black market trader suddenly appears in a bar on the station, which was not there before the mission was accepted. The funny thing about the mission is that you have to deliver some items to the black market dealer in a certain time which you can also buy from him. If you do not have these items in your inventory, it is extremely difficult to get them in a certain time, because you can only get them from destroyed enemies or from other black market dealers that you have already unlocked. Funnily enough, you can just land on the station and buy the items you need from him and then give them to him. After completing the mission, you have unlocked the black market dealer on the station and you also get a small symbol above the station which indicates that there is a black market dealer on the station.

Why do we not get this bar as a room at every station and why do we have to fly from station to station every time until we have found the right mission. This is again quite time consuming and player unfriendly integrated in my eyes.

The bar would be also a nice location where you could get offers for illegal missions or find better and unique pilots to recruit. In addition, missions for black market traders could be obtained directly in the local bar which would actually be safer (I am not a future expert, but illegal missions that are offered to data leaks at space stations do not sound very realistic, safe and well thought out to me). I find it rather annoying that you always have to go into scan mode and have to search the stations for missions.

@Egosoft: Would also be nice if you could enlarge or revise the bars a little.

Then you could immediately mark the stations on the map where black market traders are located. Or even better, a small black market dealer quest series to unlock them.

Does anyone have any other ideas?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Plot mission:

If we are already in the process of removing the data leak missions, you could also improve the first plot mission for the hq.

For example, you could get the mission as soon as you enter a certain sector and receive a mysterious signal.

Suggestions for better integration are welcome.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Ship design:

That the ship design is not the best in X4 is no secret. Yes X4 unfortunately has really ugly spaceships and some of them would look better with just a few design changes. Actually, all ships in the game should be revised (except for the Split ships). But 3 points in the ship design bother me extremely.

The first point is the design of the Khaak ships. I've seen a lot of spaceships in video games but no spaceship would be as ugly as the khaak ships. Who the hell has the idea to design these ugly pyramids and insert them into the game? Without joking, when a friend of mine who was interested in the game saw these spaceships, he was no longer interested in the game because he did not want to fight flying pyramids. In addition, the design makes no sense at all when you compare them with the ships of the other factions. For all other factions you can see the engines, the armament and the cockpit. With the Khaak ships you can just recognize in the exterior view where the engines should be. A cockpit cannot be seen at all and the lasers simply fire in the middle of nowhere from the spaceship. Honestly, either the ships should be completely redesigned or completely removed from the game.

The second point is the design of weapon systems (number of turrets) on ships. Some ships like the Odysseus have 12 medium and 4 large turrets and for example and a Behemoth has only 2 large and 8 medium turrets. That is quite a difference and my eyes are not particularly well balanced. The support ships also have far too few turrets for XL ships. In addition, some are so funny attached that they are absolutely useless. With the Nomad, for example, there are only 8 medium-sized turrets that were attached to the side of the ship. This means that if you come closer from the front, back, top or bottom, the turrets cannot hit you at all. Why the hell are the turrets not on the top and bottom? Are you argon too stupid to build reasonable ships? In addition, the number of turrets is too small for such a large ship. And with Split Vendetta we got the Raptor that has over 100 turrets. It's not very well balanced. All XL ships (except maybe the Raptor) should have more turrets.

The third point is the size of some XL ships. Xl carrier and support ships can carry 40 s and 10 m ships respectively. If you look at some ships (especially the Teladi) then I ask myself how 40 s ships, 10 m ships, 20 drones, 450 objects and a cargo hold should be in the ship? The landing sites are often placed in a strange way (as much as I like the Raptor, I would not have integrated an M landing site at the end of the ship. If so, the landing site for m ships should be in the middle of the ship in front of the shield generator).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ Egosoft:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/392160/d ... 093672400/

Johnson98
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 18, 19:16
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Johnson98 » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 17:02

I agree with your opinions on crew training and station building. I don´t like building enormous station complexes and instead go for smaller stations but I know many people who do so and would appreciate those proposed changes.
However there are also several things I don´t agree with.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- SETA:
In addition, it is just annoying to farm the parts for it. [...] I am forced as a player to destroy ships in order to get the necessary components, if I have no idea about the data vaults. That can happen quickly if I'm lucky, but also a few hours if I'm unlucky.
So why didn't you integrate the device into the game so that you can buy the parts for the device or even better integrate it into a quest for the hq. It would be a nice thing if you had a little quest to get the device or you also have to research it in the hq to build it (but then with parts that you can also buy.)
If you are new to the game you have no idea what it is doing and you can easily overlook it. So a small quest intigration explaining the function of the device would not be a bad idea.
If it annoys you, then don´t chase it. It´s not a required tool and is more a novelty left from older X games, you don´t need it. This is also the reason why I think it´s okay to be kinda hidden and unreliable to acquire (even though the rng can be brutal sometimes). A unique plot would be cool and would weaken the rng but I don´t think Egosoft should waste time and ressources for this alone.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Paint modifications:
I think I speak for many players when I say that the way paint modifications have been integrated into the game is just ridiculous and absolutely player unfriendly.
So I don´t care about paint mods, but that´s because I´m playing modded. What I´d like to see however is the ability to set different paint jobs as standard.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Black market traders:
If you are new to the game, you probably don't know that there are black market dealers where you can buy bombs or buy the parts you need to make bombs. Any why is this the case? Because it is totally ridiculous and player-unfriendly integrated into the game.
In order to unlock a black market dealer, you first have to find a data leak at a station which offers you a mission. The problem is that not every mission that is offered unlocks a black market dealer (You can see it in the reward description).
The bar would be also a nice location where you could get offers for illegal missions or find better and unique pilots to recruit. I find it rather annoying that you always have to go into scan mode and have to search the stations for missions.
[...] If we are already in the process of removing the data leak missions [...]
Black Marketeers and hidden missions are fine. You can´t expect them to just remove a whole mechanic they worked many work hours for just because some people disagree with it. You´ll want to improve it, not get rid of it.
I know some may disagree, but a game doesn´t have to be fully transparent to new players, sometimes it´s more rewarding to let them explore the game themselves.
The main questline being hidden behind such a sneaky mechanic is surely a strange decision though.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Ship design:
That the ship design is not the best in X4 is no secret. Yes X4 unfortunately has really ugly spaceships and some of them would look better with just a few design changes. Actually, all ships in the game should be revised (except for the Split ships).
[...] The landing sites are often placed in a strange way [...]
[...] as much as I like the Raptor, I would not have integrated an M landing site at the end of the ship [...]
So this just your opinion and many people would like to disagree with you. Sure there are more awesome looking ships out there in some games (my favorites being in Homeworld and X Rebirth) but calling someone´s work generally ugly is not only rude but also unhelpful to your goal. I recommend not using insults if you want someone´s work to geniunly improve.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
The first point is the design of the Khaak ships. I've seen a lot of spaceships in video games but no spaceship would be as ugly as the khaak ships. Who the hell has the idea to design these ugly pyramids and insert them into the game? Without joking, when a friend of mine who was interested in the game saw these spaceships, he was no longer interested in the game because he did not want to fight flying pyramids.
Rude, unfriendly and not helpful. Losing the intereset due to such a minor thing is just superficial imho. For every Khaak I see, I´ll see 100 pirates and 300 Xenon.
Egosoft shouldn´t waste their time redesigning such a minor enemy, but if they plan to expand on them (Khaak playing a major part in a future DLC or update), then some redesigns might be welcome.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
1.The second point is the design of weapon systems (number of turrets) on ships. Some ships like the Odysseus have 12 medium and 4 large turrets and for example and a Behemoth has only 2 large and 8 medium turrets. That is quite a difference and my eyes are not particularly well balanced.
2.The support ships also have far too few turrets for XL ships. In addition, some are so funny attached that they are absolutely useless. This means that if you come closer from the front, back, top or bottom, the turrets cannot hit you at all.
3.In addition, the number of turrets is too small for such a large ship. And with Split Vendetta we got the Raptor that has over 100 turrets. It's not very well balanced. All XL ships (except maybe the Raptor) should have more turrets.
1. Hardpoint amount is not the only quality of a ship, speed, shields, hull and price are all important too. I do agree that the Oddysseus is rather overperforming but it having more turrets is not the problem. It having as much hull, costing the same and being the fastest of the vanillas and also having an M dock on top is what makes it overperform even if it has 1 shield generator less. Phoenix should also get some kind of buff.
2. That´s fine, they´re not meant to be combat vessels and can rely on fighter escorts as they´re basically mini carriers.
3. Some do but I´d argue that most are just different design philosophies. The Raptor is insanely expensive (other carriers only cost as much as a Rattlesnake), slow and weakly shielded. It´s more like a Battlestar or a carrier-cruiser hybrid. Other Carriers are way more focused however, their job is to arrive, deploy fighters and stay out of danger. They don´t really need that many guns, because they rely on their strike craft which they even deploy faster than the Raptor does due to their launch bays.
I´d still love to see some get a few more M turrets here and there, just to make them a little bit less susceptible to strike craft, but nothing even remotely close to Raptor levels (somewhere around 20 total´d be enough imo).

Falcrack
Posts: 4929
Joined: Wed, 29. Jul 09, 00:46
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Falcrack » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 18:04

Of your suggestions, the one I would most be in support of is increasing the number of build ships that can be assigned to stations, to speed up the rate of construction.

User avatar
Nort The Fragrent
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri, 5. Jan 18, 21:00
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Nort The Fragrent » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 19:27

Speed, Speed, Speed, Quicker, quicker, quicker. !

Oh!

The game has finished to quickly, now what ?

Take your time, enjoy the grind.

:)

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 19:44

Nort The Fragrent wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 19:27
Speed, Speed, Speed, Quicker, quicker, quicker. !

Oh!

The game has finished to quickly, now what ?

Take your time, enjoy the grind.

:)
You should read through the original discussion on Steam, especially the last few comments.

It's not about making the game shorter in all respects, on the contrary. Especially the changes that relate to an improved economic and diplomacy system should give the game more depth and possibilities.

Especially when should the game be over? There is no end or real goal in the game you decide as a player yourself when it is over for you.
Last edited by IllMurdaU on Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:26, edited 2 times in total.

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16

Johnson98 wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 17:02
I agree with your opinions on crew training and station building. I don´t like building enormous station complexes and instead go for smaller stations but I know many people who do so and would appreciate those proposed changes.
However there are also several things I don´t agree with.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- SETA:
In addition, it is just annoying to farm the parts for it. [...] I am forced as a player to destroy ships in order to get the necessary components, if I have no idea about the data vaults. That can happen quickly if I'm lucky, but also a few hours if I'm unlucky.
So why didn't you integrate the device into the game so that you can buy the parts for the device or even better integrate it into a quest for the hq. It would be a nice thing if you had a little quest to get the device or you also have to research it in the hq to build it (but then with parts that you can also buy.)
If you are new to the game you have no idea what it is doing and you can easily overlook it. So a small quest intigration explaining the function of the device would not be a bad idea.
If it annoys you, then don´t chase it. It´s not a required tool and is more a novelty left from older X games, you don´t need it. This is also the reason why I think it´s okay to be kinda hidden and unreliable to acquire (even though the rng can be brutal sometimes). A unique plot would be cool and would weaken the rng but I don´t think Egosoft should waste time and ressources for this alone.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Paint modifications:
I think I speak for many players when I say that the way paint modifications have been integrated into the game is just ridiculous and absolutely player unfriendly.
So I don´t care about paint mods, but that´s because I´m playing modded. What I´d like to see however is the ability to set different paint jobs as standard.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Black market traders:
If you are new to the game, you probably don't know that there are black market dealers where you can buy bombs or buy the parts you need to make bombs. Any why is this the case? Because it is totally ridiculous and player-unfriendly integrated into the game.
In order to unlock a black market dealer, you first have to find a data leak at a station which offers you a mission. The problem is that not every mission that is offered unlocks a black market dealer (You can see it in the reward description).
The bar would be also a nice location where you could get offers for illegal missions or find better and unique pilots to recruit. I find it rather annoying that you always have to go into scan mode and have to search the stations for missions.
[...] If we are already in the process of removing the data leak missions [...]
Black Marketeers and hidden missions are fine. You can´t expect them to just remove a whole mechanic they worked many work hours for just because some people disagree with it. You´ll want to improve it, not get rid of it.
I know some may disagree, but a game doesn´t have to be fully transparent to new players, sometimes it´s more rewarding to let them explore the game themselves.
The main questline being hidden behind such a sneaky mechanic is surely a strange decision though.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
- Ship design:
That the ship design is not the best in X4 is no secret. Yes X4 unfortunately has really ugly spaceships and some of them would look better with just a few design changes. Actually, all ships in the game should be revised (except for the Split ships).
[...] The landing sites are often placed in a strange way [...]
[...] as much as I like the Raptor, I would not have integrated an M landing site at the end of the ship [...]
So this just your opinion and many people would like to disagree with you. Sure there are more awesome looking ships out there in some games (my favorites being in Homeworld and X Rebirth) but calling someone´s work generally ugly is not only rude but also unhelpful to your goal. I recommend not using insults if you want someone´s work to geniunly improve.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
The first point is the design of the Khaak ships. I've seen a lot of spaceships in video games but no spaceship would be as ugly as the khaak ships. Who the hell has the idea to design these ugly pyramids and insert them into the game? Without joking, when a friend of mine who was interested in the game saw these spaceships, he was no longer interested in the game because he did not want to fight flying pyramids.
Rude, unfriendly and not helpful. Losing the intereset due to such a minor thing is just superficial imho. For every Khaak I see, I´ll see 100 pirates and 300 Xenon.
Egosoft shouldn´t waste their time redesigning such a minor enemy, but if they plan to expand on them (Khaak playing a major part in a future DLC or update), then some redesigns might be welcome.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
1.The second point is the design of weapon systems (number of turrets) on ships. Some ships like the Odysseus have 12 medium and 4 large turrets and for example and a Behemoth has only 2 large and 8 medium turrets. That is quite a difference and my eyes are not particularly well balanced.
2.The support ships also have far too few turrets for XL ships. In addition, some are so funny attached that they are absolutely useless. This means that if you come closer from the front, back, top or bottom, the turrets cannot hit you at all.
3.In addition, the number of turrets is too small for such a large ship. And with Split Vendetta we got the Raptor that has over 100 turrets. It's not very well balanced. All XL ships (except maybe the Raptor) should have more turrets.
1. Hardpoint amount is not the only quality of a ship, speed, shields, hull and price are all important too. I do agree that the Oddysseus is rather overperforming but it having more turrets is not the problem. It having as much hull, costing the same and being the fastest of the vanillas and also having an M dock on top is what makes it overperform even if it has 1 shield generator less. Phoenix should also get some kind of buff.
2. That´s fine, they´re not meant to be combat vessels and can rely on fighter escorts as they´re basically mini carriers.
3. Some do but I´d argue that most are just different design philosophies. The Raptor is insanely expensive (other carriers only cost as much as a Rattlesnake), slow and weakly shielded. It´s more like a Battlestar or a carrier-cruiser hybrid. Other Carriers are way more focused however, their job is to arrive, deploy fighters and stay out of danger. They don´t really need that many guns, because they rely on their strike craft which they even deploy faster than the Raptor does due to their launch bays.
I´d still love to see some get a few more M turrets here and there, just to make them a little bit less susceptible to strike craft, but nothing even remotely close to Raptor levels (somewhere around 20 total´d be enough imo).

- SETA: So I know some people who would contradict you. If you build large stations and have to wait over 80 hours for them to finish, then SETA is a very useful device in the game. You don't have to use it if you want to, but personally I and many other players are happy that we have it in the game.

- Paint modifications: You already know that there is the possibility to set standard paint jobs. That is even at the point only it is extremely badly implemented.

- Black market traders: I don't expect any of this to be implemented, but I'll give my honest opinion here. Just because something has been integrated into the game that may have taken hours of work that doesn't mean it's good, on the contrary. I would actually be ashamed to integrate something so ridiculous and ill-conceived into a finished game. Are you telling me that illegal missions that are given to data leaks at space stations sound realistic and well thought out to you?

- Ship design: When looking at reviews of the X4 since it was released, one of the biggest criticisms (if not the biggest) has always been the poor ship design. Sorry, the Khaak ships look to me like a kid from the 90s designed them.
What use is it to me if other ships have better shields and are cheaper if you fight a ship that has 5 times as much firepower? I need 3 carrrier to defeat this in battle.

jlehtone
Posts: 21801
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by jlehtone » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:49

SETA:
* I don't have time to run SETA
* I have not been looking, yet have stumbled on plenty. Odds might be low, but not nil


Kha'ak ships were designed for X2 and have practically remained the same. If your mere looks scares your enemies from fighting you, then you have done something right. :twisted:
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.

Johnson98
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 18, 19:16
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Johnson98 » Wed, 16. Sep 20, 21:51

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
- SETA: So I know some people who would contradict you. If you build large stations and have to wait over 80 hours for them to finish, then SETA is a very useful device in the game. You don't have to use it if you want to, but personally I and many other players are happy that we have it in the game.
Never did I say that SETA is useless or shouldn´t be in the game, I said it´s not a necessary game mechanic and thus it´s justified if it´s harder to get.
Even if you made SETA super easy to come by it wouldn´t solve the issue of megacomplexes taking too long to build. That´s what the whole "use multiple station builders on a single station" idea is there for, which I agree with.
Besides that, if your station takes too long to build then split it up into multiple smaller stations and hire multiple builders instead of activating SETA and going afk for 5 hours.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
- Paint modifications: You already know that there is the possibility to set standard paint jobs. That is even at the point only it is extremely badly implemented.
I´m talking about unique paintjobs you have to acquire first, not the usual 8 or so you ca choose from the get go.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
- Black market traders: I don't expect any of this to be implemented, but I'll give my honest opinion here. Just because something has been integrated into the game that may have taken hours of work that doesn't mean it's good, on the contrary. I would actually be ashamed to integrate something so ridiculous and ill-conceived into a finished game. Are you telling me that illegal missions that are given to data leaks at space stations sound realistic and well thought out to you?
We are playing a space game with predefined axises of orientation, teleportation, talking lizards and magic gravity and that´s your complaint?
You have to think from the developers side of view, reworking and redesigning a new system is several times more work than improving a flawed one that is already in place.
I´m fine with the system and I never had problems with it.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
- Ship design: When looking at reviews of the X4 since it was released, one of the biggest criticisms (if not the biggest) has always been the poor ship design.
Sorry, the Khaak ships look to me like a kid from the 90s designed them.
I´m not saying you´re not allowed to say your opinions on the ship designs, in fact I´d encourage it, all I wanted is that people like you stop insulting someone elses work and try voicing your complaints more professionally, because this is the only way if you want things to change.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
What use is it to me if other ships have better shields and are cheaper if you fight a ship that has 5 times as much firepower? I need 3 carrrier to defeat this in battle.
We´re talking about the Raptor? It´s funny because those 3 carriers cost approximately as much as a single Raptor, so them winning would actually speak for my argument.

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16

Johnson98 wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 21:51
´m talking about unique paintjobs you have to acquire first, not the usual 8 or so you ca choose from the get go.
You already know that my suggestion would be the solution to your problem? Because if we would do it the way I suggest then we can decide during the construction which paintwork a ship should have and, above all, change it at any time on an equipment dock. That would also be much more realistic.
Johnson98 wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 21:51
We are playing a space game with predefined axises of orientation, teleportation, talking lizards and magic gravity and that´s your complaint?
You have to think from the developers side of view, reworking and redesigning a new system is several times more work than improving a flawed one that is already in place.
I´m fine with the system and I never had problems with it.
I see it from my perspective. And from the player's and even from the developer's point of view, it is absolutely badly and unbelievably integrated. Even if it should no longer be changed, the developers should take the criticism to heart and consider whether they are satisfied with the integration.
Johnson98 wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 21:51
We´re talking about the Raptor? It´s funny because those 3 carriers cost approximately as much as a single Raptor, so them winning would actually speak for my argument.
You don't seem to be very familiar with the game.

I just did a little test and compared the argon carriers with the raptor. I have the highest rank in all factions. All ships were equipped with their faction-specific weapons and shield systems (pulse turrets, no consumables and full crew)

Colossus (attacker):

Price: 30.790.406
Hull: 216.000
Shield: 388.443
AVG Group Shield: 7.360
AVG Turret output : 240
M turrets: 16
L turrets: 1

Colossus: (defender):

Price: 25.557.441
Hull: 259.000
Shield: 388.443
AVG Group Shield: 7.360
AVG Turret output : 240
M turrets: 16
L turrets: 1

Raptor:

Price: 50.419.269
Hull: 590.000
Shield: 110.058
AVG Group Shield: 10.719
AVG Turret output : 1.545
M turrets: 93
L turrets: 8

First of all, ship prices can fluctuate in the Extreme game. You can buy a ship at a shipyard and go back to the same shipyard seconds later and have a price difference of several hundred thousand to millions. How this price difference comes about or is calculated defies my logic. I could buy the Raptor for 46 million or less fully equipped.

Second, despite its weaker shield, the Raptor can withstand more than the Colossus. Just add up the hulls and shield points of the ships.

Thirdly, the AVG turret output is more than 6 times higher than that of the argon ships.

And as a 4 point you should consider whether you have already seen more than 1 Colossus carrier in an argon fleet. The argons usually build fleets with 1 carrier ship, a support ship, 2 destroyers and several fighters. And mostly the A.I. is too stupid to launch a coordinated attack, that's why the argons often have problems fighting the Paranids or Xenon, as their ships are far inferior to them in terms of firepower.

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51742
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by CBJ » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:42

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
the developers should take the criticism to heart
The point Johnson98 is making is that insults are not "criticism". I am not an artist, but I stop reading as soon as I see a player claim their insults are criticisms and their opinions are facts. If you want people to read your feedback and "take it to heart" then being rude is not the way to achieve that. The forum rules are also pretty clear on this matter.

Buzz2005
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat, 26. Feb 05, 01:47
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Buzz2005 » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:53

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
First of all, ship prices can fluctuate in the Extreme game. You can buy a ship at a shipyard and go back to the same shipyard seconds later and have a price difference of several hundred thousand to millions. How this price difference comes about or is calculated defies my logic. I could buy the Raptor for 46 million or less fully equipped.
the price is determined by the amount of wares the yard has, so if the storage is full the price is cheaper
Fixed ships getting spawned away from ship configuration menu at resupply ships from automatically getting deployables.

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:56

CBJ wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:42
IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
the developers should take the criticism to heart
The point Johnson98 is making is that insults are not "criticism". I am not an artist, but I stop reading as soon as I see a player claim their insults are criticisms and their opinions are facts. If you want people to read your feedback and "take it to heart" then being rude is not the way to achieve that. The forum rules are also pretty clear on this matter.
Can you tell me where I'm offending someone? Criticism can also be tough, especially when you make design decisions that are absolutely unrealistic and ill-considered. Personally, I would like to see more feedback like this because sometimes this is the only way to get people to think.

User avatar
PreSpawn
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 20:09
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by PreSpawn » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:26

IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
The first point is the design of the Khaak ships. I've seen a lot of spaceships in video games but no spaceship would be as ugly as the khaak ships. Who the hell has the idea to design these ugly pyramids and insert them into the game? Without joking, when a friend of mine who was interested in the game saw these spaceships, he was no longer interested in the game because he did not want to fight flying pyramids. In addition, the design makes no sense at all when you compare them with the ships of the other factions. For all other factions you can see the engines, the armament and the cockpit. With the Khaak ships you can just recognize in the exterior view where the engines should be. A cockpit cannot be seen at all and the lasers simply fire in the middle of nowhere from the spaceship. Honestly, either the ships should be completely redesigned or completely removed from the game.
I bet if you found a "doomed space marine" in DukeNukem3D, you would have called ID Software an reported 3D Realms for stealing their design, and also delete the game because you werent playing DOOM...
It are a friggin easter egg man! And by now you could call their design a "running gag" because its the one friggin thing that hasnt changed since 2003!!!
If you don't get what i mean, google/play X2 The Threat.
They are neither plot relevant nor a threat. So why you think, bringing them up to make a point, is a good idea... is beyond me :lol:
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
... S.E.T.A ...
1. When you play one of the previous games you can see how/why SETA was implemented and also ESSENTIAL!!!.(because back then we had no "travel drive"-mechanic)
2. You can play X4 or Rebirth without it, no problem. So why not let people for it.
I don't think someone would stop playing X4, because he doesn't know about SETA.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
... Building stations and factories in the game just takes too long. ...
Why the hell can't you do anything else while waiting for the station built to finish? Who cares how long they take, its not like you are stuck on that "site"!!!?
WHY aren't you:
- playing missions
- cleaning out invading xenons (maybe they drop some flux compensators :o) ...
- trading for build materials
- tuning your ships
- exploring
- trying out different ships and builds
- gaze out of stations windows
???
You could try the system from the previous game, where you had to buy, transport and place every friggin part of the station(and connectors) by yourself in the 3D Space...

AND MOST IMPORTANDLY!
I skipped most of your post, because every part of it started with an attack: Because it is totally ridiculous and player-unfriendly integrated into the game. :rant: :rant: :rant:
Some of you arguments might be valid... just nobody gives a damn, if they imagine you like this -> :evil: :evil:
X2: Ace of Aces 2nd - Advanced Mogul
X3: Overlord - Master Industrialist
XTM: Battlemaster - Manufacturer
X3TC: Hero - Capitalist
X3AP: Battlemaster - Manufacturer (146 Stunden)
XR: (108 Stunden)
X4: (224 Stunden) (https://www.twitch.tv/andimech)

User avatar
PreSpawn
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 20:09
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by PreSpawn » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:36

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
... would like to see more feedback like this because sometimes this is the only way to get people to think...
If you have to insult people, so that they listen to you... your initial argument/point/reasoning/etc. was simply flawed from the start.
i find it so funny that i skipped most of your post because of your aggresive tone... and now you are defending your rudeness as "well thought out plan" ... that in the end accomplished the exact opposite :lol:

I BET YOU! Without your rudeness, you would have had half of the responses in total... but the same amount concerning your topics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but maybe you just like the attention... in total...
X2: Ace of Aces 2nd - Advanced Mogul
X3: Overlord - Master Industrialist
XTM: Battlemaster - Manufacturer
X3TC: Hero - Capitalist
X3AP: Battlemaster - Manufacturer (146 Stunden)
XR: (108 Stunden)
X4: (224 Stunden) (https://www.twitch.tv/andimech)

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:39

PreSpawn wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:26
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
The first point is the design of the Khaak ships. I've seen a lot of spaceships in video games but no spaceship would be as ugly as the khaak ships. Who the hell has the idea to design these ugly pyramids and insert them into the game? Without joking, when a friend of mine who was interested in the game saw these spaceships, he was no longer interested in the game because he did not want to fight flying pyramids. In addition, the design makes no sense at all when you compare them with the ships of the other factions. For all other factions you can see the engines, the armament and the cockpit. With the Khaak ships you can just recognize in the exterior view where the engines should be. A cockpit cannot be seen at all and the lasers simply fire in the middle of nowhere from the spaceship. Honestly, either the ships should be completely redesigned or completely removed from the game.
I bet if you found a "doomed space marine" in DukeNukem3D, you would have called ID Software an reported 3D Realms for stealing their design, and also delete the game because you werent playing DOOM...
It are a friggin easter egg man! And by now you could call their design a "running gag" because its the one friggin thing that hasnt changed since 2003!!!
If you don't get what i mean, google/play X2 The Threat.
They are neither plot relevant nor a threat. So why you think, bringing them up to make a point, is a good idea... is beyond me :lol:
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
... S.E.T.A ...
1. When you play one of the previous games you can see how/why SETA was implemented and also ESSENTIAL!!!.(because back then we had no "travel drive"-mechanic)
2. You can play X4 or Rebirth without it, no problem. So why not let people for it.
I don't think someone would stop playing X4, because he doesn't know about SETA.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 13:59
... Building stations and factories in the game just takes too long. ...
Why the hell can't you do anything else while waiting for the station built to finish? Who cares how long they take, its not like you are stuck on that "site"!!!?
WHY aren't you:
- playing missions
- cleaning out invading xenons (maybe they drop some flux compensators :o) ...
- trading for build materials
- tuning your ships
- exploring
- trying out different ships and builds
- gaze out of stations windows
???
You could try the system from the previous game, where you had to buy, transport and place every friggin part of the station(and connectors) by yourself in the 3D Space...

AND MOST IMPORTANDLY!
I skipped most of your post, because every part of it started with an attack: Because it is totally ridiculous and player-unfriendly integrated into the game. :rant: :rant: :rant:
Some of you arguments might be valid... just nobody gives a damn, if they imagine you like this -> :evil: :evil:
Read the comments on Steam.

Exactly the same thing was discussed there. I can do all of your points in 50 hours of playtime or less. It also depends on whether these things are fun for me and suit my style of play.

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:43

PreSpawn wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:36
IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
... would like to see more feedback like this because sometimes this is the only way to get people to think...
If you have to insult people, so that they listen to you... your initial argument/point/reasoning/etc. was simply flawed from the start.
i find it so funny that i skipped most of your post because of your aggresive tone... and now you are defending your rudeness as "well thought out plan" ... that in the end accomplished the exact opposite :lol:

I BET YOU! Without your rudeness, you would have had half of the responses in total... but the same amount concerning your topics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but maybe you just like the attention... in total...
I don't insult anyone, please mark my alleged insults. There is a difference between insults and conductive and harsh criticism.

Gavrushka
Posts: 8072
Joined: Fri, 26. Mar 04, 19:28
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Gavrushka » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 15:55

Confucius, he say 'When your defence has become one of semantics, it is better to apologise, throw your arms skyward and shout 'my bad' rather than to obfuscate yourself deeper into the naughty pit.'
“Man, my poor head is battered,” Ed said.

“That explains its unusual shape,” Styanar said, grinning openly now. “Although it does little to illuminate just why your jowls are so flaccid or why you have quite so many chins.”

“I…” Had she just called him fat? “I am just a different species, that’s all.”

“Well nature sure does have a sense of humour then,” Styanar said. “Shall we go inside? It’d not be a good idea for me to be spotted by others.”

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51742
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by CBJ » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:02

We'll just take one line as an example.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
the Khaak ships look to me like a kid from the 90s designed them.
If that's not an insult to a professional artist then I don't know what is. And don't try to pull the "it's not an insult if it's the truth" line, which carries with it the implicit "it's the truth because it's my opinion, and my opinion is fact".

The matter isn't up for debate though. Contrary to your earlier statements, your feedback will not be taken more notice of if you are rude. Quite the opposite in fact.

IllMurdaU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed, 11. Mar 20, 15:03

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by IllMurdaU » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:15

CBJ wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:02
We'll just take one line as an example.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Wed, 16. Sep 20, 20:16
the Khaak ships look to me like a kid from the 90s designed them.
If that's not an insult to a professional artist then I don't know what is. And don't try to pull the "it's not an insult if it's the truth" line, which carries with it the implicit "it's the truth because it's my opinion, and my opinion is fact".

The matter isn't up for debate though. Contrary to your earlier statements, your feedback will not be taken more notice of if you are rude. Quite the opposite in fact.
Honestly, that's my honest opinion and when I say it looks like it for me, then I stand by my opinion. I'll say it again now there is a difference between an insult and a personal opinion / criticism.

I was recommended by an Egosoft moderator / employee to share these ideas in the Egosoft forum! He even sent me Bernd his email and said I should send it to him.

I don't care if your artist feels offended. This is my opinion.

Johnson98
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 18, 19:16
x4

Re: More sandbox and balance (Feedback welcome)

Post by Johnson98 » Thu, 17. Sep 20, 17:11

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:15
Honestly, that's my honest opinion and when I say it looks like it for me, then I stand by my opinion. I'll say it again now there is a difference between an insult and a personal opinion / criticism.
You´re twisting the meanings of critisism and insults. Those are defined terms with a meaning behind them and you should learn them.
Criticism: "I dislike the ship designs in this game, they feel uninspired and lazy and look lame"
Insult: "The person designing this is at the level of a kid from the 90s"

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 14:16
You already know that my suggestion would be the solution to your problem? Because if we would do it the way I suggest then we can decide during the construction which paintwork a ship should have and, above all, change it at any time on an equipment dock. That would also be much more realistic.
And where exactly did I disagree with you on this part? I said setting unique paintjobs as a standard is what I care about and not how it gets implemented.
IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:15
I see it from my perspective. And from the player's and even from the developer's point of view, it is absolutely badly and unbelievably integrated. Even if it should no longer be changed, the developers should take the criticism to heart and consider whether they are satisfied with the integration.
Which is a valuable opinion, all I said is that the change you proposed will not get intergrated because of the reasons I stated.

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:15
You don't seem to be very familiar with the game.
Keep the assumptions to yourself, I went out of my way and collected informations about weapons and weapon-heat-scaling in this game and published my findings on the X4 subreddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/X4Foundations/ ... _and_ship/

IllMurdaU wrote:
Thu, 17. Sep 20, 16:15
[numbers]
First of all, ship prices can fluctuate in the Extreme game. [...]
Second, despite its weaker shield, the Raptor can withstand more than the Colossus. Just add up the hulls and shield points of the ships.
Thirdly, the AVG turret output is more than 6 times higher than that of the argon ships.
And as a 4 point you should consider whether you have already seen more than 1 Colossus carrier.
1. Those numbers are bloated, you installed Mk.3 Thrusters on those carriers which inflates the price by 11 Mio which is about the whole hull price of a vanilla carrier. Of course this shifts the numbers in favor of the Raptor, but they´re not useful for the carrier´s performance. This is just number manipulation to suit your argument. From my experience vanilla carrier hulls cost about 12 mio, while Raptor´s cost 40-45 mio credits, with their equipment costing the same per unit.
And we´re still talking about carriers here, their main offensive tool lies in their fighters, not their weapons. Considering this 3 Colossus deploy their fighters 3 times faster (fighter bays oorah), have more of them in total, have way more internal volume for ressuplying (improving missile builds) and deploy M ships at 12 times the speed (which the Raptor just sucks at).
2. A Raptor has about 700.000 total hp. A single Colossus has about 600.000. This is not a big difference, considering you field 3 of them for the same price the Colossus´ combined hitpoints will be almost triple that of the Raptor.
3. Which is alot. I partly agree with you on this one, but I still think it´s somewhat justified because the Raptor´s not a straightforward carrier but a carrier-cruiser hybrid. I´d appreciate the vannilas getting a little bit more M turret coverage, but I don´t want them to go to Raptor extremes, 20-30 M turrets in total should be enough to enable reliable fighter defense.
4. This has nothing to do with ship balance. This is faction balance you´re talking about.

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”