Combat control.

[Gizil]

This is one of the worst tactical controls I've ever seen. It is inconvenient, non-functional, non-intuitive and does not allow tactical schemes to be implemented. But you have to suffer, because AI control is a horror that will lose you any battle.
There is Homeworld, there is Nexus: The Jupiter Incident - take it, copy it. But no, the developers had to make non-working garbage.
Potentially the most interesting part is spoiled.

[ulzgoroth]

You do realize that this is a newtonian game where facing is critical?

There's very much room for improvement (and it seems they're trying in the next patch), but standard RTS controls are not that improvement.

[Gizil]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

You do realize that this is a newtonian game where facing is critical?
There's very much room for improvement (and it seems they're trying in the next patch), but standard RTS controls are not that improvement.

And how is Newtonian physics and ease of control related?
The problem is that it is inconvenient to carry out tactical COMMAND. It is inconvenient to aim at the enemy, there is no way to group, split into units, form orders. There is no simple way to click on a point in space and direct the ship there. Let him make all the necessary maneuvers, turns, but he will come where I need and attack not in the forehead of the enemy.
Tactical management was done by crazy people.

[Sinsling]

Sadly agree, tactical is my only major complaint about the game currently. The current controls are a mess and far too finicky to achieve the same result as just setting a way point, a facing, and letting the ship sort itself out to where it needs to be to achieve that.

[ulzgoroth]

Originally posted by Gizil:

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

You do realize that this is a newtonian game where facing is critical?
There's very much room for improvement (and it seems they're trying in the next patch), but standard RTS controls are not that improvement.

And how is Newtonian physics and ease of control related?
The problem is that it is inconvenient to carry out tactical COMMAND. It is inconvenient to aim at the enemy, there is no way to group, split into units, form orders. There is no simple way to click on a point in space and direct the ship there. Let him make all the necessary maneuvers, turns, but he will come where I need and attack not in the forehead of the enemy.
Tactical management was done by crazy people.

Right, and then all your ships die from catastrophic stupidity as they pivot around and expose their sides and rear to the enemy in order to stop at the spot you moved them to, while pointing their frontal weapons in random directions.

Standard RTS controls don't make any sense in a newtonian space. If you want to order your ship to move to a particular spot in space, in most cases it means you aren't thinking right. (The exception is when you're moving to rendezvous with your own station defences because battles insist on starting with the defenders charging away from their base of fire.)

[Sinsling]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Originally posted by Gizil:

And how is Newtonian physics and ease of control related?
The problem is that it is inconvenient to carry out tactical COMMAND. It is inconvenient to aim at the enemy, there is no way to group, split into units, form orders. There is no simple way to click on a point in space and direct the ship there. Let him make all the necessary maneuvers, turns, but he will come where I need and attack not in the forehead of the enemy.
Tactical management was done by crazy people.

Right, and then all your ships die from catastrophic stupidity as they pivot around and expose their sides and rear to the enemy in order to stop at the spot you moved them to, while pointing their frontal weapons in random directions.

did you know the ai already does this?

[Sinsling]

also dont pretend there arent ways it could be made to work with a simpler scheme than whatever this headache is

[ulzgoroth]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Right, and then all your ships die from catastrophic stupidity as they pivot around and expose their sides and rear to the enemy in order to stop at the spot you moved them to, while pointing their frontal weapons in random directions.

did you know the ai already does this?

A bit, though trying to follow RTS controls would probably be actually worse than the current AI. And the current AI is not okay.

Originally posted by Sinsling:

also dont pretend there arent ways it could be made to work with a simpler scheme than whatever this headache is

I mean I said there's room for improvement in the first post.

I'm not sure I agree that there's a simpler scheme, though. Definitely refinements available on the existing scheme...

[Gizil]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Right, and then all your ships die from catastrophic stupidity as they pivot around and expose their sides and rear to the enemy in order to stop at the spot you moved them to, while pointing their frontal weapons in random directions.

I don't even know, my English is so bad that I can't convey an elementary idea or are you so .... how not to offend you, strange person.
IN GAME. MUST. TO BE. OPPORTUNITY. MANAGEMENT. CONTROLS.
OPPORTUNITY TO WIN.
POSSIBILITY TO LOSE.
POSSIBILITY TO QUICKLY RETAIL GROUPS TO DIFFERENT ENEMIES.
OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AN ORDER FOR BETTER MUTUAL PROTECTION.
HUNDREDS OF POSSIBILITIES.
You completely lack imagination and spatial thinking.

[ulzgoroth]

Originally posted by Gizil:

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Right, and then all your ships die from catastrophic stupidity as they pivot around and expose their sides and rear to the enemy in order to stop at the spot you moved them to, while pointing their frontal weapons in random directions.

I don't even know, my English is so bad that I can't convey an elementary idea or are you so .... how not to offend you, strange person.
IN GAME. MUST. TO BE. OPPORTUNITY. MANAGEMENT. CONTROLS.
OPPORTUNITY TO WIN.
POSSIBILITY TO LOSE.
POSSIBILITY TO QUICKLY RETAIL GROUPS TO DIFFERENT ENEMIES.
OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AN ORDER FOR BETTER MUTUAL PROTECTION.
HUNDREDS OF POSSIBILITIES.
You completely lack imagination and spatial thinking.

Weird word salad manifesto rant aside, I'd be interested if you suggested anything that actually made sense in Newtonian context.

But you went with Homeworld controls, which are completely not that. Not sure about Jupiter, I played that at one point but don't remember it well.

Technically speaking, the current controls give you the possibilities almost completely. What they do quite badly is making it at all user-friendly to use those possibilities.

The solution cannot be 'okay, all ships are driven by an artificial stupid being ordered by someone who doesn't want to understand that space is not Starcraft'.

[Sinsling]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Originally posted by Sinsling:

did you know the ai already does this?

A bit, though trying to follow RTS controls would probably be actually worse than the current AI. And the current AI is not okay.

rts controls(ala homeworld) would be a major improvement over the current ai, as it offers any symbolence of control to the player at all. Instead of a janky, half-working control scheme or an ai that will intentionally turn side-ways rather than leaving its nose forward when there isn't a single flanking enemy.

seriously this is like the easiest ♥♥♥♥ ever. you put a waypoint, the ship shows a ghost path of how it wants to get there. Allow the player to set a facing for the ship to be oriented at when it gets there. allow waypoints and have the game curve the path to the endpoint. allow the player to set a "fullstop" at a waypoint, a setting that is already in the damn game.(sidenote: the actual coding is a lot harder, but the idea is easy af)

[Mufflebuns]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Originally posted by Gizil:

I don't even know, my English is so bad that I can't convey an elementary idea or are you so .... how not to offend you, strange person.
IN GAME. MUST. TO BE. OPPORTUNITY. MANAGEMENT. CONTROLS.
OPPORTUNITY TO WIN.
POSSIBILITY TO LOSE.
POSSIBILITY TO QUICKLY RETAIL GROUPS TO DIFFERENT ENEMIES.
OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AN ORDER FOR BETTER MUTUAL PROTECTION.
HUNDREDS OF POSSIBILITIES.
You completely lack imagination and spatial thinking.

Weird word salad manifesto rant aside, I'd be interested if you suggested anything that actually made sense in Newtonian context.

But you went with Homeworld controls, which are completely not that. Not sure about Jupiter, I played that at one point but don't remember it well.

Technically speaking, the current controls give you the possibilities almost completely. What they do quite badly is making it at all user-friendly to use those possibilities.

The solution cannot be 'okay, all ships are driven by an artificial stupid being ordered by someone who doesn't want to understand that space is not Starcraft'.

I don't get your obsession with newtonian physics, I loved SOASE, Nexus, Homeworld and I am looking for something similar. Whoever posted that rant was right, and those commands are a common thing in space games.
I had high hopes for this one, I hope it turns out OK in the end.

[DigitalVulpine]

Pause is your friend here. Yes, the controls are slow and clunky to use. I've heard there are hotkeys to lock on to an axis for waypoint movements, I need to look those up since using them would help a lot for when moving a waypoint in one direction also causes it to move in another, undesired direction ("I need to to turn left and up, so stop turning right when I get to the up part!")

However the big key is to pause. Pause, assess situation, plot your flight paths, select your targets, unpause and let it play out. If all is going according to plan, let it keep running. If you need to make a change, pause again. Do not let the aliens be too proud of the technological terrors they have constructed, the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power to control time.

[Fairin the Drakitty]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

You do realize that this is a newtonian game where facing is critical?

There's very much room for improvement (and it seems they're trying in the next patch), but standard RTS controls are not that improvement.

am very tired of reading this exact comment. The OP has a very **very** valid point

i don't even watch the spacebattles anymore because the most optimal way to play is to not touch the controls and let the slow march of my ships.

i'd let auto calc do its thing honestly if i stop losing ships since MY tactics of alt tabbing and doing something else while the battle plays ends up with all the aliens dead and none of my ships damaged.

take that Newtonian physics

[Gizil]

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

Цитата

I see. I'm fine with English, you are not catching up. And you have no imagination either.
1. Homeworld is given as an example of a great implementation of positioning and direction in real 3D space.
2. The Nexus is given as an example of an excellent implementation of the direct control of a warship with the conditions of Newtonian physics and a good implementation of positioning and direction in a real three-dimensional space. But most importantly, an adequate and intuitive possibility of combat control of the ship and the issuance of group (not general fleet) orders.
If the developers, instead of giving birth to this cadavers, used the experience of these games, the tactical part would be interesting. Now she is a piece of vomit. And the player has the choice between suffering or collecting a doomstack that, under the control of the AI, will not lose.
Why are you clinging to the RTS, I absolutely do not understand.

Originally posted by DigitalVulpine:

Pause is your friend here.

Do you seriously think other people are so stupid that they would not have guessed in the TACTICAL part of the game to give all commands through a pause?

Originally posted by Mufflebuns:

I don't get your obsession with newtonian physics, I loved SOASE, Nexus, Homeworld and I am looking for something similar. Whoever posted that rant was right, and those commands are a common thing in space games.
I had high hopes for this one, I hope it turns out OK in the end.

I don't see how the physics in the game can conflict with the ability to easily task the end point of a route, or the in-depth controls like in the Nexus.

[ulzgoroth]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Originally posted by ulzgoroth:

A bit, though trying to follow RTS controls would probably be actually worse than the current AI. And the current AI is not okay.

rts controls(ala homeworld) would be a major improvement over the current ai, as it offers any symbolence of control to the player at all. Instead of a janky, half-working control scheme or an ai that will intentionally turn side-ways rather than leaving its nose forward when there isn't a single flanking enemy.

seriously this is like the easiest ♥♥♥♥ ever. you put a waypoint, the ship shows a ghost path of how it wants to get there. Allow the player to set a facing for the ship to be oriented at when it gets there. allow waypoints and have the game curve the path to the endpoint. allow the player to set a "fullstop" at a waypoint, a setting that is already in the damn game.(sidenote: the actual coding is a lot harder, but the idea is easy af)

Do you not get that in the process of coming to a stop at your waypoint, the ship has to turn around and apply thrust? And that's if it's even possible for it to do so, which in many cases it won't be without it overshooting, flying back, and then stopping on the mark.

So you're giving orders that are potentially way more complicated than you expect and that involve your ships changing facing in ways that are quite likely to be catastrophic for combat. This isn't a good idea.

Originally posted by Mufflebuns:

I don't get your obsession with newtonian physics, I loved SOASE, Nexus, Homeworld and I am looking for something similar. Whoever posted that rant was right, and those commands are a common thing in space games.
I had high hopes for this one, I hope it turns out OK in the end.

Well, Homeworld is totally non-Newtonian. I'm pretty sure Nexus is too. SoaSE is that and two-dimensional besides.

It's fine that you like those things, but TI doesn't want to be those things.