Battlefleet Engineer

Battlefleet Engineer

View Stats:
Metalfusion  [developer] Jan 14, 2018 @ 4:24am
New damage model and game rebalancing discussion
Please give the beta a try and share your thoughts.
Do you think this is a good direction to take the game? Is it less fun? too complex? too random due to lucky shots hitting a weak point?

Should I really have worked on something else for the last few months?
< >
Showing 1-8 of 8 comments
Baker™ Jan 15, 2018 @ 11:56am 
How would i go about accessing the beta, or is it already implemented in the game as a trial?
Metalfusion  [developer] Jan 15, 2018 @ 1:25pm 
Originally posted by Fresh_Baguette:
How would i go about accessing the beta, or is it already implemented in the game as a trial?

Right click on Battlefleet Engineer in your Steam library -> Properties -> Betas -> Select "development" from the dropdown and close the dialog. Steam will then download the beta version.

Please also see the announcement from the news section for details what has changed.
Baker™ Jan 16, 2018 @ 12:56pm 
thanks, i look forward to seeing this game grow.
dudderswrxbl Oct 10, 2018 @ 8:14pm 
Hello :) let me start by saying ive put in 28 hours game time in the last 3 days. So no these months have not been wasted my freind. I have so many ideas and so much dyslexia but ill try my best.

Weapons - So far you have defines some good classes of weapon The ranges an uses are good. And they are all verry accurate. however it seems to me that some weapons that are more in direct might be usefull. For example Tractor beams to slow down fast ships stop them escaping. Also i was thinking of maby a repair beam (that can only be fitted to sructures with no movement) This May add a new layer of tactics without producing lots of lagg. Basically some interaction btween my ships would be nice. ALSO Missiles need to bypass sheilds in our ships are going to empty themselfs before we get close enought to take those sheilds down first.

Building (My favourite part) - So first of all thrusters... I think having no ability to place a block behind a thrusters path limmits the ammount of possibilities for ship shape and kinda kills the idea of splitting ships. (each lacks a side of thrusters.) Instead have varying falloff distences for each type of thruster correlating to the generated thrust?
- So lets talk looks here. i realise you want people to be able to see individual modules and target them (brilliant BTW) But we need sleek nice hulls! so how about scanners that let you see and target modules? then we get the best of both worlds. A few paints Including black and change the colour of my sheilds TO Purple!!!!
- the battle editor is great but i cant get any big asteroids. like 1 every 100 clicks. A few things i might like to see are debris, walls, maby nebulae that effect ships systems or conseal them from veiw/sensors. or throw off enemy tracking systems causing them to miss.
- Different sizes of sheild or different shapes?

Gameplay - Yes its fun, the phisics of cutting big boxes in half never gets old! Head on collisions need a tiny bit of work perhaps if you had ramming armor it would make the programming easier to change? and a new module ;).
- I hope we will have a public challenge board soon or a way to send other players challenges featuring our ships. ( with the bluprints as the prize for winning.)
- PvP budget limmits and true skill ranks lose you go down a rank win you go up. only match players within 5 levels. This is the best way i have ever seen matchmakeing work in 15 years of hard gaming.
- As far as a Campaign I would reccomend something along the lines of terra tech but instead of a proceadurally generrated series of asteroids have the player living in a wormhole with it oppening for certain ammounts of time before cycelling to a new scenario. bing the salvage to the base repair it with ore from roids ( mining) theres your progression and your way of limmiting the players to managable fleet sizes. A few acheivments with cash bonuses, then a modual shop the player can trade with.
- Ok so i mentioned the idea of a base, Mining and Trade.
-Base This will start of as a place where you can store ships your not using and that repairs your ships (including the replacment of broken modules) also stores ore. After you raid a few wormhole destinations youd get blueprints for a refinary and some in the salvage. (as with all new tech you find out there.) (i hope hehe) eventually your base will be able to collapse or sustain wormholes (at the cost of a rare ore or something) Then you can give your fleets more time away or get a fresh oppertunity faster.
- Mining Things i think i will need (scanner to find the ore. Lazer to get it. cargo hold to store it.) starts of with manule mining with low yeild lazers then auto miner AI modules and high yeild lazers. bigger cargo holds that take up the same space as 2 small ones but can hold more as no walls. Back at thebase the refinary makes the ore into the material you use to build or repair ships.
- Trade. With other players from a module in my base! can you imagine how sweet that would be?

Ok its getting late here so ill stop there but this game just keeps giving me ideas so let me know what you think.

Also i have a question for you Sir... Where do you want this game to go? and what do you see as realistically in this games future? ( next few months)

And i think people will pay alot for this game if you get it right. But man, seriously this game is already 9/10 well done!
Metalfusion  [developer] Oct 11, 2018 @ 11:04am 
Thanks for your feedback dudderswrxbl, I really appreciate it. That is a lot of interesting ideas, and most of them are new as well. However, with a indie game like this the sad truth is that there are maybe 10x or even 100x of nice features to implement compared to what is actually feasible. I'll consider them and at least some of the smaller ones should be doable.

Currently the focus is on infrastructure for campaign play such as and algorithm for rebuilding any ship to any other ship module-by-module so that it remains valid thorough. My current vision for the "survival campaign" is quite different from yours, but I still have gameplay prototyping to do which will ultimately decide the direction to take there.

What I have in mind is somewhat similar to Starsector, but with Newtonian fleet motion (but without orbital mechanics) and stealth mechanics. Basically the player would be intercepting weaker and slower fleets, while avoiding stronger enemy combat fleets like in some submarine games. Having multiple fleets and simple territory control would be part of it too, and you would need to scavenge modules from defeated enemies to keep your fleets going and to expand them.

Originally posted by dudderswrxbl:
- the battle editor is great but i cant get any big asteroids. like 1 every 100 clicks.

I consider the battle editor working but incomplete and unfinished. You can actually scale asteroids and set their motion with key + mouse combinations, which I have now added to this getting started guide:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1113501016

Originally posted by dudderswrxbl:
Also i have a question for you Sir... Where do you want this game to go? and what do you see as realistically in this games future? ( next few months)

Frankly, progress is very slow simply because (apart from audio design outsourcing) this is a one-man half time job. I've been working on this for many years already and would like to see it finish in some reasonable time frame. In the next few months I would expect to have some rough campaign gameplay prototype playable that I can share in a beta branch.
dudderswrxbl Oct 11, 2018 @ 7:57pm 
Thank you for the speedy reply :) its good to talk to someone who is able to make a game happen. This all sounds very promising. but just so i can get a bit extra excited, i was wandering if i could get a few will and wont and might works on a few things.

1) players sending battle challenges to eachother? not live pvp but just hey can you defete this?

2) fall off on thrusters.

3) Interaction between ships in your fleet.

do you have kickstarter? (im poor but i have started telling my buddies on vega conflict about the game and seeing if they will download it.)

This is a very good game, for alot of reasons you may not have thought of. one of which centers arround the fact that kids these days are playing so many games. there are games out there that can put a negative spin on a kids development. but this game would build braincells! one day in the future ill have kids and they will play this game. it will teach them trajectory ballence phisics building maths.... the list goes on. In short the is a great teaching tool

with games replacing toys, games like this will be as important as leggo was for me
Last edited by dudderswrxbl; Oct 12, 2018 @ 6:19am
Metalfusion  [developer] Oct 13, 2018 @ 4:48am 
1.
Sharing battle challenges to workshop and having highscores for them is on the todo list, but maybe I should prioritize that over more long-term feature development. It shouldn't be that much work anyway since I already have the infra for sharing blueprints and the battle challenges listing UI in the game.

2.
This has been proposed before and here is my old response:
Originally posted by Metalfusion:
This would be really easy to change in code, but it is a design decision I'm not really willing to change. This in addition to the armor modules not transmitting resources and missing connection points on the armor face are intended to force some weak points in all designs. Without those you could make ships with unlimited layers of armor and that is no fun.
A related suggestion I have been considering is that you could place inactive spare thrusters that automatically get enabled when the modules in front of them are destroyed.
Specifically what I'm worried about is that ships could be completely enclosed by armor but still quite mobile. It could work if the clearance distance would be quite high, e.g. 10 tiles, as then it would require making compromises in the overall ship design just to get internal thrusters. Maybe I should make the change and let you experiment in the development branch.

3.
Probably not too difficult to implement the main functionality, but incorporating those to the fleet / ship combat AI could be hard. The fleet level AI would need overall improvements with current features too, as even simple things such as moving in groups / formation are quite difficult to implement when everything moves with realistic physics. Tractor and repair beams are also bit too fictional for my taste, but I understand it would enrich the battles if retreating back to base for repairs would be an option. However, with current mechanics you could just camp around your repair platform for the whole battle, since the enemy will always come to you and there is no time limit.
dudderswrxbl Oct 13, 2018 @ 5:06am 
1) I read around the discussions to get a better idea of whats possible and why. I definatly think it would increase the ammount of time people put into learning the game if there were an unlimmited ammount of challenges on offer. ive made some maps im dieing to share. and if its fast your also increasing your content release rate. thats always good for player moral.

2) I think trying to stop us in this way wont be verry effective because we will always be able to build our ay past it. what might work is focusing on the trade offs. e.g. armor weighs more = reduced ship manuverability, So you can stack a base but a ship will slow your whole fleet down if you choose to stay in formation. and i need lost of armor because currently i can pus way to many weapons on my ships.

3) I fully respect your veiw on repair beams but I would point out that we are in space with lazor beams already. This is a Sci Fi game fiction is in the description. but like I said I trust your veiw. and to stop people camping at the base make the repairs come from drones that the enemy can shoot. and will shoot first. ime sure youve seen my post about drones hehe.
< >
Showing 1-8 of 8 comments
Per page: 15 30 50