I’ve seen this everywhere and everytime. It’s in comics, movies, novels and games.
What I meant by “superman” trap is someone or something that’s super in every way that they literally don’t need help from others. And in order to keep the “story” interesting, the author must introduce a stronger adversary. And other characters/players just there to watch on the sideline. Then the cycle with repeat with the protagonist becomes stronger which then the story needs another new and stronger adversary. Commonly found in manga!
Please don’t add upgrades to ships that give total domination. Upgrades is good, but some games really push them that such upgrades enable the ship/player to trash other players without upgrades. They can easily win in 1 vs 3 or even more.
Don’t fall into situation where arms race will create scaled up battle time. Example: better weapon with better shield and armor, better agility. Where it takes minutes to wear down shield, minutes to wear down hull, and minutes to get your shots aligned, dogfights become 30++ minutes affairs! Battle should be done with great tacticians, strategists and cunning moves.
Stick to old mantra, in direct engagement numbers/quantity will overcome quality but cunning/great tactic/strategic moves can overcome numbers/quantity. This will make players work together and cooperate and think(prepare) instead moving/fighting alone (i’m hero! hard to kill! even if i make mistake, i will still survive) due to their superior ships/equipment over the majority. Then one group with 10 super ships beat 100 players with normal ships in a single engagement.
This is what i feel with Elite Dangerous. Hardcore engineered ships really skewed the gameplay and balance. If there’s no engineering, E:D can ditch private and solo play. This will force players to seek others help when they go trading, mining for protection. And wing combats will be more meaningful. As it stands now, no reason to band together other than to earn money faster and comple a massacre mission faster. Squadron feels nothing more and than a chat/social group. BGS and PowerPlay also doesn’t help, I feel like there’s a lost opportunity there. I hope this game doesn’t fall into the same template…
They can not make the game easy mostly because the only thing you do in the game is kill stuff in an open arena, after about 10 hours of killing stuff you have had enough for a decade, make it easy to kill and the situation is even worse.
The game is inherently hard as it is, it’s 6dof and has a hundred different functions bound to keys and menus and has two completely different flight modes that it takes a while for someone not accustomed to playing similar games to get used to.
The main attraction here will be the experiences with other people and the devs are responsive enough that if we moan they will patch it, I wouldn’t worry about any major unbalances.
As a solo ED and Eve player; ED’s engineers upgrades are quite powerful which resulted in ED players being pulled from warp and demolished by upgraded weapons. Eve does not upgrade weapons that unbalancing. The cautionary tale is that to offers upgrades; know how they will be used. Players will min-max to the extreme which can unbalance the game for others.
I was in squadron supporting minor faction. Yes it gives more purpose but again, when you reach such state where you no longer need others help or fear anything, you just go about doing your stuffs. The fact that E:D has private and solo mode worsen the interaction as “hey I go solo/private for mining and trade, I go back open when I’m strong enough”. Overall I enjoyed E:D and still playing it always in open, but it could have been more lively and crowded with players without the engineering stuffs.
Yes it’s nice to be op, I love that as well. But it can’t be applied to every type of game. In MOBA it’s fine because everyone has the chance to progreess and takes only so many minutes to reach that state, providing your team works well together, which what makes MOBA shine, teamworks!
I shouldn’t have brought E:D into this as they are not the same type of game, but the main point is don;t make upgrades that overly skewed the balance which will take out the fun. No one like to be a loser and no one like to be a puchbag. There must be some kind of challenge and chance to fight back. Otherwise players will leave and forget about playing it again.
Our goal for the game is that every class of ship will have opposing ships that it’s good against and opposing ships that it’s bad against. Weapons will work similarly in that we will balance cost, damage, tracking rate, etc such that choosing one weapon over another will always be about tradeoffs.
I actually proposed a system that had to do with AI and effective logistical use by players in another thread. I explain in some depth as to how we can use ints and bombers to a greater effect throughout a match regardless of the number of larger ships are present in the field. I will provide a link of a thread I made just so this current thread does not go off topic.
like I posted in another thread, I don’t think there should be substantial upgrades at all other than potentially more expensive alternate versions of the 4 smallest ships. This is essentially a rounds-based large arena game. If you break the balance for power creep, like has killed Planetside 2 multiple times, you break the game:
This game is more comparable to something like Planetside 2, and I have horror stories from a SoE employee of how fucked up the balance of that game was. The designers were actually using a tool I made to compare stats, TTKS, etc in the game that I made through data-mining and testing but also didn’t understand the context of some of those stats and kept making things worse. And they were doing this because the programmers couldn’t/wouldn’t give the design team the numbers.
I don’t want to see power creep and arbitrary changes of stats ruining this game too, for sure.