Excellent suggestions for Standoff team

iamtheman83

Spaceman
Firstly, well done on a marvellous job at recreating an important chapter in the Wing Commander Universe. The following suggestions are merely nitpicking, but would, in my opinion, make the game much more enjoyable.

-Give us specs for all weapons systems in the game in a text document or implemented into the game itself. Not all players know the precise range of guns and would therefore waste precious gun energy opening fire early during a heated dogfight. This is important with the absence of the I.T.T.S on many ships.

-To offshoot the above suggestion, perhaps having the legend, "target it's engaged" implemented in WC3, to notify the player when their guns are in range of a target.

-If there is any way to modify AI, it would be much appreciated. There has been a strange glitch that kick-started AI ever since WC3. What I'm talking about is whenever the player is fighting an ally (because of plot development or when they're bored and shoot at their wing mates), they become super manoeuvrable, making it extremely hard to get a bead on them from behind especially with the higher difficulties (e.g., Flash and Hobbes in WC3, Maniac and Seether in WC4). If wingmen have these Top Ace piloting skills in these situations, why can't they be used during missions to preserve their longevity and usefulness? Standoff missions therefore become extremely frustrating when a highly skilled and egotistical player is forced to downgrade the difficulty level because of being left to single-handedly ensure the protection of mission critical craft, cover wing mates, take out enemy fighter screens to enable incompetent bombers to make their torpedo runs all while hoping they survive long enough to take out enemy
cap ships, then your kills have reached fifty and your hard work is wasted when there aren't any torpedos left to destroy that last cap ship because your ship doesn't carry them.

-Sound levels of in-flight comms aren't loud enough. It would be good to be able to hear important messages during heated dogfights instead of relying on the messages log. I nevertheless appreciate the efforts of even putting voice-overs in this game.

-Please make text bigger for between-mission communications with 1024x768 resolution if you can. I like having graphics set to the highest resolution but find the very small text hard to read and it's a nuisance having to reset the resolution between comms and missions.

-There seems to be a strange absence of the "Shelton Slide". Even without Caps Lock auto sliding in WC1 and WC2, the afterburner slide was an extremely effective manoeuvre. However, even this is hard to do with the game engine.

-This may be an extremely hard concept to pull off, but would be great if you could introduce for the first time in the Wing Commander series, much more varied wingmen orders. For example: "attack turrets", "protect mission critical craft/cover this craft", "Ignore target/hold your fire", "attack bombers", "destroy cap-ship missile", "destroy turrets BEFORE wasting torpedos".

-For some unknown reason, starting with Secret Ops, the "return to base" order was removed. If there was a way to bring this back, it would help greatly to ensure wingmen returned with their ship in one piece.

Appreciate the time to read my thread. Apologies if I am repeating stuff from other messages.
 
iamtheman83 said:
-Give us specs for all weapons systems in the game in a text document or implemented into the game itself. Not all players know the precise range of guns and would therefore waste precious gun energy opening fire early during a heated dogfight. This is important with the absence of the I.T.T.S on many ships.

The game manuals and the CIC itself have all this information at your disposal already. If you log enough flight time you should get a feeling of how the guns operate in combat situations. I'd recommend strapping yourself in the sim for a few missions.

-To offshoot the above suggestion, perhaps having the legend, "target it's engaged" implemented in WC3, to notify the player when their guns are in range of a target.

Sounds like ITTS. Not all ships have this feature and that adds to the game. If you look through this forum you'll see many people (especially the Standoff team) commenting on how they and other's think the Rapier II is an artist's ship because it requires you to fly more than just pointing the crosshairs at the ITTS diamond.

-If there is any way to modify AI, it would be much appreciated.

Check previous posts. It's beyond their control.

-Sound levels of in-flight comms aren't loud enough. It would be good to be able to hear important messages during heated dogfights instead of relying on the messages log. I nevertheless appreciate the efforts of even putting voice-overs in this game.

There is a volume control for this in the game itself. You might want to try turning yours up. It's in the Options menu.


-There seems to be a strange absence of the "Shelton Slide". Even without Caps Lock auto sliding in WC1 and WC2, the afterburner slide was an extremely effective manoeuvre. However, even this is hard to do with the game engine.

I don't think it's hard, it's just not as pronounced as in WC1/2. The amount your fighter slides is just reduced.

-This may be an extremely hard concept to pull off, but would be great if you could introduce for the first time in the Wing Commander series, much more varied wingmen orders. For example: "attack turrets", "protect mission critical craft/cover this craft", "Ignore target/hold your fire", "attack bombers", "destroy cap-ship missile", "destroy turrets BEFORE wasting torpedos".

See previous reply to A.I. These are things that are not possible without cracking open the exe and doing some real tweaking.

-For some unknown reason, starting with Secret Ops, the "return to base" order was removed. If there was a way to bring this back, it would help greatly to ensure wingmen returned with their ship in one piece.

Same as above.
 
Glad you like the game, and thanks for registering on our forums ! Now you can participate to the scoreboards and see how you compare to the other players in the simulator gauntlets.

iamtheman83 said:
-If there is any way to modify AI, it would be much appreciated. [...] If wingmen have these Top Ace piloting skills in these situations, why can't they be used during missions to preserve their longevity and usefulness? Standoff missions therefore become extremely frustrating when a highly skilled and egotistical player is forced to downgrade the difficulty level because of being left to single-handedly ensure the protection of mission critical craft, cover wing mates, take out enemy fighter screens to enable incompetent bombers to make their torpedo runs all while hoping they survive long enough to take out enemy cap ships, then your kills have reached fifty and your hard work is wasted when there aren't any torpedos left to destroy that last cap ship because your ship doesn't carry them.
Standoff is set in the saw era as WC2, back when coming back from a mission with 10 kills was an accomplishement. Wing Commander has always been about you, the player, shifting the balance against impossible odds to win a mission, and it's a feeling that is, IMHO, conveyed in Standoff too. Standoff also implements a new twist that has never been seen in the official WC games: it keeps track of the fighters you loose, making less wingmen available for future missions. What it means is if you finish a mission all alone (your entire wing having been destroyed), then in the next mission your strike force will be reduced in size.

You should be able to monitor how many ships are left in the communications terminal between the missions.

iamtheman83 said:
-Sound levels of in-flight comms aren't loud enough. It would be good to be able to hear important messages during heated dogfights instead of relying on the messages log. I nevertheless appreciate the efforts of even putting voice-overs in this game.
Can't you adjust the sound settings in the option (Escape) menu so you can hear them clearly ?

iamtheman83 said:
-Please make text bigger for between-mission communications with 1024x768 resolution if you can. I like having graphics set to the highest resolution but find the very small text hard to read and it's a nuisance having to reset the resolution between comms and missions.
If your monitor can't display the text sharply in 1024x768, either buy a new monitor or set the game in 800x600. We won't change that aspect of the game.

iamtheman83 said:
-There seems to be a strange absence of the "Shelton Slide". Even without Caps Lock auto sliding in WC1 and WC2, the afterburner slide was an extremely effective manoeuvre. However, even this is hard to do with the game engine.
Now that's an intertesting comment. The afterburner slide has to do with the ship's mass AFAIK, and it might not have been given much thoughts as the other ships stats took many hours of adjustments to make them "right". I believe it is Quarto who set those, we'll ask him to take a look, see if they are correct or not.

iamtheman83 said:
-This may be an extremely hard concept to pull off, but would be great if you could introduce for the first time in the Wing Commander series, much more varied wingmen orders.
[...]
-For some unknown reason, starting with Secret Ops, the "return to base" order was removed. If there was a way to bring this back, it would help greatly to ensure wingmen returned with their ship in one piece.
We don't intend to even try to implement new commands. Our game is a mod, meaning we do stuff for the engine we have (even if we already push it way beyond it's original capacities). While extending the engine is sometimes doable, it must pay off in a game-design sense, else we won't bother, especially as far as the AI is concerned; the AI is much more complex to hack than anything else.
 
Re. Excellent suggestions for Standoff team

Thankyou for all your comments. I'd like to point out that adjusting the in-flight comms audio was the first thing I did. I don't mean to be rude but the voices are still hard to hear at times (Lt. Freyers mainly). Is there no way to match the crispness of WCP and Secret Ops or close to thereof?

I was already aware of Standoff keeping tabs on lost ships. Might I suggest a possible solution to offset lack of wingman AI? Perhaps giving wing mates quadruple shield strength or armour integrity. The downside to this of course is making the game too easy. Maybe, just maybe, there is a way to tweak it enough to give them a fighting chance, yet still retaining the challenge for the player.

Oh, and which date do the specs for the weapons systems correspond to? I have all the Wing Commander games and am aware specs changed accordingly to the timeframe and, as such, Standoff features ships from WC1, WC2, Privateer and Armada. Are there universal figures for all specs irrespective of dates or do they reflect the separate game timelines (e.g. 2654, 2668, 2669)? Please clarify.
 
I'll agree with the slide. I know in wing 1 the 'shelton' or Afterburner slide was really helpful, however the effect seems to have dimmed in this game. Let's just say the first run on wave X of fighters can be tricky (dumb fire'd to death) because of the limited effect of the slide.
 
If you find the sliding in Standoff inadequate, try practising with WC1 Hell's Kitchen missions with no wingman. That will really teach you to exaggerate your slides, which will come in handy here.
 
iamtheman83 said:
Oh, and which date do the specs for the weapons systems correspond to? I have all the Wing Commander games and am aware specs changed accordingly to the timeframe and, as such, Standoff features ships from WC1, WC2, Privateer and Armada. Are there universal figures for all specs irrespective of dates or do they reflect the separate game timelines (e.g. 2654, 2668, 2669)? Please clarify.

IIRC the weapons stats are based around the period (2668). So a laser on a hornet will be the same as the one on a gladius.
 
iamtheman83 said:
Thankyou for all your comments. I'd like to point out that adjusting the in-flight comms audio was the first thing I did. I don't mean to be rude but the voices are still hard to hear at times (Lt. Freyers mainly). Is there no way to match the crispness of WCP and Secret Ops or close to thereof?.

I´ve been testing the game for almost two years and I never noticed anything wrong with the voices´volume. All of our voice lines are filtered, converted and volumised so that they´re supposed to be as clear as possible on your speakers. What sound card do you have?

iamtheman83 said:
I was already aware of Standoff keeping tabs on lost ships. Might I suggest a possible solution to offset lack of wingman AI? Perhaps giving wing mates quadruple shield strength or armour integrity. The downside to this of course is making the game too easy. Maybe, just maybe, there is a way to tweak it enough to give them a fighting chance, yet still retaining the challenge for the player.

That would do crazy stuff on mission balancing. There´s a tip, though: the lower your difficulty setting is, the dumber both the kilrathi AND your wingmen get. I often lose many more wingmen playing on Veteran than playing on Ace or Hero.

iamtheman83 said:
Oh, and which date do the specs for the weapons systems correspond to? I have all the Wing Commander games and am aware specs changed accordingly to the timeframe and, as such, Standoff features ships from WC1, WC2, Privateer and Armada. Are there universal figures for all specs irrespective of dates or do they reflect the separate game timelines (e.g. 2654, 2668, 2669)? Please clarify.

IIRC, each ship features stats from the respective original games where they show up. I mean, the Rapier II has WC2 stats, Stillettos have Priv stats, etc. The Arrow uses stats from Armada.

However, also IIRC, the power for each gun is set by WC2 standards.
 
Quote:
"I´ve been testing the game for almost two years and I never noticed anything wrong with the voices´volume. All of our voice lines are filtered, converted and volumised so that they´re supposed to be as clear as possible on your speakers. What sound card do you have?"

I have an AC 97 sound card. There is nothing wrong with it and doesn't cause me any problems. I'm not sure if I've expressed myself adequately - I am certain players know how loud and clear the mission comms are in Wing Commander Prophecy and Secret Ops. I prefer headphones when playing games and often have to turn down the volume of voices in Prophecy and Secret Ops because they can be TOO loud. There is a noticeable difference between Standoff's voice levels. I want to emphatically state that I am NOT ungrateful because of the time and effort the Standoff team has put into this project. Just wondering whether the process of putting voices into Standoff downgrades the sound quality somewhat? Therefore making it hard to match the quality of Prophecy and Secret Ops.
 
Starkey said:
... However, also IIRC, the power for each gun is set by WC2 standards.
If so, I'd say it seems to me (which of course is a subjective point of view) that the range of the mass driver is too large compared to, for example, particle cannons, while it's speed is too slow.

And also I'd like to suggest to make Hornet and Raptor smaller (not sure to which amount, maybe to 2/3 or 1/2 of their current size) - both because I think they look a bit too large (especially the Raptor, I remember it looking in WC1 about as large as a Rapier - though then, that was a Rapier-1...) and because targeting seems to be far too difficult because of their current size.

And I don't know why, but the FEARSOME Jathi usually shys back from frontal assaults and tries to outturn me, which is sort of strange, especially given its low maneuverability... don't know why the AI does something as silly as this. And yes, I know you won't do anything on the AI, I just wanted to have it mentioned, but maybe even someone finds a reason for the AI acting like this in the ship stats, making a change of this behaviour possible. :)

And as I'm talking about the AI - it pretty much likes to try asteroid diving as in "diving into asteroids", doesn't it? :/


Having said that, I know that such changes would invalidate all current scores, and thus are somewhat counter-productive and will propably not be done... So I'll try to get used to the balancing as it is now.


[edit: This propably should have gone into the balancing thread, but its 3:07 AM here right now and I'm too tired to adapt it to that, sorry... and good night :) ]
 
MavS said:
And also I'd like to suggest to make Hornet and Raptor smaller (not sure to which amount, maybe to 2/3 or 1/2 of their current size) - both because I think they look a bit too large (especially the Raptor, I remember it looking in WC1 about as large as a Rapier - though then, that was a Rapier-1...) and because targeting seems to be far too difficult because of their current size.
We can't do things like that. Origin has given us sizes for those ships, so we have to use them, even if they look weird.
 
Couldn't you compare the size of the WCI and WCII Rapier in relation to their dimensions. The ship is definately scaled down beyond any restructuring. If you work out by how much you can use that factor to rescale the Raptor and Hornet.
 
No, we can't, because the reason we're given different lengths for both the WC1 Rapier and the WC2 Rapier is that they're different designs. :p

I strongly dislike the whole Rapier-Comparison-Theory... the reason why people usually want to dismiss the ship sizes given in the WC1 blueprints is that they (correctly) feel the ships look smaller than the given measures. However, the ships in WC2 also look smaller than their given measures. Moreover, the WC2 Rapier and the WC1 Rapier are clearly different designs, therefore they don't need to be the same length. Why, then, would you want to "fix" a ship's length by making it the same as another ship's, if that second ship doesn't exactly look it's length either?
 
More suggestions...

1).-Please allow players to select a more appropriate weapons loadout for selected ship in the simulator or provide default loadouts for various roles (e.g. wild weasel, bombing, interceptor). Especially the gauntlet levels where Sabres, Morningstars, and the Gladius are prepped with torpedos. To me it seems unecessary, as such weapons loadouts are completely useless in these instances (not to mention unfair as most of these ships have barely two missiles accompanying the torps in their armoury).

2).-I've noticed the many posts related to the shortage of afterburner fuel. As I remember, WC1 and WC2 didn't really have this problem - I'm not disregarding the obvious difference of enemy popultion between these games and Standoff, it's just that cruising speed to afterburn speed ratios seemed adjusted in a way that made each ship's cruising speed count more (thus, helping balance the game). Most players know the Rapier, being the fastest confed ship in WC1, is TOO fast if throttle is set to the max (450) during dogfights - a cruising speed of about 360-380 would be safest to prevent collisions (and 320, being about the Broadsword's top speed is considered much more slower in Standoff than it was in WC2!). Who remembers having to fly at a speed of at least 250 to navigate an asteroid belt or mine field? (And yes, I'm aware of how much smaller space was in these games as opposed to Prophecy and Standoff. Nav points could be flown to manually in no time at all, so I suppose this is another reason for the speed differences). Perhaps the Standoff team could adjust cruising speeds in their game to be more like WC1 and WC2.

Another point I might add is the amazing differential between cruising speed and afterburning speed. Players must carefully use their afterburners amidst a swarm of enemies in WC1 and WC2 for fear of collision - which happened to me constantly until I learned what to set my cruising speed to and use burners in short bursts. Also, short stops are much more effective in WC1 and WC2 because of the sudden drop in speed that would often put the enemy tailing you in your sights - something the Prophecy engine has trouble with, because it encourages the player to rely on their afterburners more - that, for which, fuel is in ample supply of.

P.S. Notwithstanding the afterburner issue, I'd like to thank the Standoff team for not designing the game exactly like WC1 and WC2 in regard to the stupidity of AI constantly colliding with the player and other ships (they, and the player, just "bounce" off like in Prophecy and Secret Ops - but asteroids are fatal which is great). I hated, hated, hated the frustrations of playing WC1 and WC2 when wingman and enemies would crash into me particularly at times when I'd tried to afterburn away and then some blind Kilrathi would fly straight into me, killing me instantly.
 
iamtheman83 said:
1).-Please allow players to select a more appropriate weapons loadout for selected ship in the simulator or provide default loadouts for various roles (e.g. wild weasel, bombing, interceptor). Especially the gauntlet levels where Sabres, Morningstars, and the Gladius are prepped with torpedos. To me it seems unecessary, as such weapons loadouts are completely useless in these instances (not to mention unfair as most of these ships have barely two missiles accompanying the torps in their armoury).
It's not possible to change loadouts in the prophecy engine without creating a whole new ship which there is (currently) a limit on.
iamtheman83 said:
2).-I've noticed the many posts related to the shortage of afterburner fuel. As I remember, WC1 and WC2 didn't really have this problem - I'm not disregarding the obvious difference of enemy popultion between these games and Standoff, it's just that cruising speed to afterburn speed ratios seemed adjusted in a way that made each ship's cruising speed count more (thus, helping balance the game). Most players know the Rapier, being the fastest confed ship in WC1, is TOO fast if throttle is set to the max (450) during dogfights - a cruising speed of about 360-380 would be safest to prevent collisions (and 320, being about the Broadsword's top speed is considered much more slower in Standoff than it was in WC2!). Who remembers having to fly at a speed of at least 250 to navigate an asteroid belt or mine field? (And yes, I'm aware of how much smaller space was in these games as opposed to Prophecy and Standoff. Nav points could be flown to manually in no time at all, so I suppose this is another reason for the speed differences). Perhaps the Standoff team could adjust cruising speeds in their game to be more like WC1 and WC2.
450? I would fly at twice that and still get the job done! :p
iamtheman83 said:
Another point I might add is the amazing differential between cruising speed and afterburning speed. Players must carefully use their afterburners amidst a swarm of enemies in WC1 and WC2 for fear of collision - which happened to me constantly until I learned what to set my cruising speed to and use burners in short bursts. Also, short stops are much more effective in WC1 and WC2 because of the sudden drop in speed that would often put the enemy tailing you in your sights - something the Prophecy engine has trouble with, because it encourages the player to rely on their afterburners more - that, for which, fuel is in ample supply of.
I agree on this point
iamtheman83 said:
P.S. Notwithstanding the afterburner issue, I'd like to thank the Standoff team for not designing the game exactly like WC1 and WC2 in regard to the stupidity of AI constantly colliding with the player and other ships (they, and the player, just "bounce" off like in Prophecy and Secret Ops - but asteroids are fatal which is great). I hated, hated, hated the frustrations of playing WC1 and WC2 when wingman and enemies would crash into me particularly at times when I'd tried to afterburn away and then some blind Kilrathi would fly straight into me, killing me instantly.
Yes I miss the danger of it, but this is also lost without WC2-style hit-detection.
 
"450? I would fly at twice that and still get the job done!" - Lt. Death100.

Yeah. Right...
How did you survive long enough at twice that speed without crashing into anything (which I'm assuming is double the Rapier's cruising speed in WC1 and assuming you sit on afterburners)? :D

I admit now, I miscalculated my 'safe' cruising speed in WC1 and can confirm that I actually consider 400 kps my prefered speed during heavy enemy resistence. I use my afterburners in WC1 and WC2 primarily to shake missile locks and perform the afterburner slide (which I note as the move that keeps me alive in the hardest missions - one in particular from SM1, an insane "rescue" mission with me and Spirit getting ambushed by the Gwenhyvar with me in a Raptor against 4 Rapiers as well as 4 waves of Kilrathi fighters).

With WC1, I think the Raptor is better than a Rapier - it has a perfect speed of 400 and handles very smoothly and isn't as touchy to fly as the Rapier - however, it lacks the firepower of the Rapier, calling for accurate shots because gun recharge rates are very slow.
 
Gotta agree there, I always loved the Raptor in WC1. I think the Rapier is better, but I like the Raptor more if you understand my meaning.

About collisions... eh, they were annoying yes. And you did have to be very careful. Even at cruising speed there were times that the Kilrathi would just crash right into you. However I didn't consider this so much as crashing as I did 'ramming'. Big difference. :) I was always on the lookout for Kilrathi kamikaze pilots.

One thing I loved, and miss in the later games, is the deadly debris. You can't just blow up a fighter and fly through its debris field at top speed, you'll blow up. Some of the neatest deaths I've ever had were in WC2 when a Sartha would go head to head with me, I'd blow it up at the last second, and the debris would wash right over my fighter and blow me up.
 
Falcon988 said:
One thing I loved, and miss in the later games, is the deadly debris. You can't just blow up a fighter and fly through its debris field at top speed, you'll blow up. Some of the neatest deaths I've ever had were in WC2 when a Sartha would go head to head with me, I'd blow it up at the last second, and the debris would wash right over my fighter and blow me up.

I agree with you on that. The early games often had more neat things like this that did get left out as the games moved on.
 
Re. "Deadly debris."

Yes, I also wish Standoff implemented the "deadly debris” - but I know they can't because the short-comings of AI would make the game too easy (AND hard because wingmen are no different) as the majority will crash into things and die. If that were the case, there would be barely anything to shoot at.

Not only that, but I have missed the danger of navigating through asteroid belts and mine fields since Privateer - no other WC game after that had the same level of constant danger - not to mention the dynamic it added to dogfights when you could lure a lesser pilot or incoming missile into a nearby asteroid or mine..

Actually, I was going to ask about the absence of deadly debris in my earlier posts but anticipated the probable answer I'd get – lack of AI to function correctly.

-Something completely off-topic: another improvement that would be nice is if whole cockpit art were visible from each view (left, right, rear). I enjoy how the team have rendered the classic cockpits from the early games, it’s just I’ve missed the whole of a cockpit being visible since Armada. I appreciate the details in the art, even if visibility is restricted – cockpit struts can always be turned off, but it would still be good to have them there anyway.

AND, I miss the rear-view camera that can be turned on with Ctrl F4. I know they are trying to keep with the retro feel, but couldn’t the Standoff team make an exception?
 
iamtheman83 said:
Yes, I also wish Standoff implemented the "deadly debris” - but I know they can't because the short-comings of AI would make the game too easy (AND hard because wingmen are no different) as the majority will crash into things and die.
That was exactly the case. All our in-game armor levels are actually multiplied by 20 (what we call "40 cm of armor" in the object viewer is actually 800 armor points as far as the game's engine goes) because the damage levels of collisions seemed to be hardcoded... so with the un-multiplied armor levels, Wingmen and enemies would just die all the time near asteroids or capships, and that wasn't fun.

iamtheman83 said:
-Something completely off-topic: another improvement that would be nice is if whole cockpit art were visible from each view (left, right, rear). I enjoy how the team have rendered the classic cockpits from the early games, it’s just I’ve missed the whole of a cockpit being visible since Armada. I appreciate the details in the art, even if visibility is restricted – cockpit struts can always be turned off, but it would still be good to have them there anyway.
I had tried doing that by just making complete cockpit models, but it seems the struts get automatically turned off when you switch from front view to another view. One of our coders could probably have fixed this, but it's too late now that all the strut meshes have been made with only the front view in mind.
 
Back
Top