Weapons/equipment suggestions

[Surrealistik]

Here's the thing though. The community as a whole, or by majority consensus hasn't demanded anything ridiculous like you've mentioned. A request for miniguns isn't comparable to one for lightsabres. It's one thing to give direction to the project. It's entirely another to tyrannize it to the detrement of its appeal and enjoyability.

[Woreczko]

A request for miniguns isn't comparable to one for lightsabres.

Well, neither lightsabres, nor miniguns are used as the infantry weapons. With current state of affairs, with no cybernetic implants or mechanized battlesuits, it`s not realistic for PHALANX soldiers to use such a heavy weapon as minigun. Besides, how would it differ from machine gun?

On the other hand, UGV with minigun - why not?

Anyway, base human weapons already offer a great variety, it`s other game areas, that need serous improvement. Visibility system (currently soldier can see through entire map LoS provided, there is no way to sneak), being able to set something on fire, improved air interceptions and so on...

[sirg]

Tbh, if someone from the dev team doesn't like an idea that is strongly supported by the community, people have to accept that or develop their own mod. We can't force someone like Winter to include a feature that he doesn't like.

However, we can talk about it, and see if there is any compromise solution, but I think in this case (minigun) there is, because it is included in the multiplayer mode.

I would like to point out that because the game is under development, weapons like the minigun, powerarmor and other items should be included in the campaign, to allow players to test everything. When the game reaches the final stages, then the devs can remove the content they don't like or consider that is out of place. And same goes with models and everything else.. I think it's more important to implement a feature, like a weapon, even if the model doesn't fit the setting or something like that, than not having it at all, because people can test the content and provide feedback. There is no need to work on a fancy complex weapon model, implement it and then find out that it's useless or to powerful so it will be removed.
I remember when the riot shotgun had several models, and one of them had no texture, but I didn't care because I knew it will have some day, and now it looks really cool. But more important, it was in the game.

[BTAxis]

@Sirg: You are basically correct, but even though the game is "not finished" and "in development" doesn't mean everything is temporary. There are some very solid design decisions we've made that will never be revoked, because they are exactly what we wanted when we envisioned the "final" game. Examples are the main gist of the storyline (we won't change it around to something else completely) and the inclusion of UGVs (we want them. Easy as that).

That said, a lot of the game's content *is* up for discussion. This thread, for example, has every right to be here. It's just that once we, the devs, have made up our minds, it's time to move on.

[sirg]

I was reffering only to some weapon ideas and perhaps an armor, maybe some tweaks here and there, but nothing like storyline or research tree.

Question - are you considering equiping some civilians with weapons? At least the military guys from the convoy or maybe some diehard civilians in the future? Maybe you could give them a basic pistol or a smg... weapons which are already in the game

[TroubleMaker]

At least the military guys from the convoy

...and bunker.

[BTAxis]

Question - are you considering equiping some civilians with weapons? At least the military guys from the convoy or maybe some diehard civilians in the future? Maybe you could give them a basic pistol or a smg... weapons which are already in the game

We are. But it should be noted that civilian weapons will do no appreciable damage. A civilian killing an alien simply doesn't work for us.

[sirg]

Yes, or if the civilian kills an alien maybe we could recruit him into PHALANX? LOL

Are you considering implementing some of the weapons proposed on the wiki for civlians?

[eleazar]

Whoa, hold on there smart guy, where did I say that I was 'owed' anything by the devs first off?

I can't imagine why you were offended unless you had a false sense of entitlement.   If not, consider it a general statement for those who do believe that the devs work for them.

Secondly, one of the biggest motivators that factors into the creation of a freeware game, if not the biggest is the enjoyment of its playerbase.

Are you just guessing, or have you developed freeware games, and/or asked developers this question?

I don't speak for the devs here, but as a developer on other projects and a contributor to this, my main motivation is that the process is fun.  Certainly working on something that will be shared with other players adds to the fun.  But if the players (as very unscientifically represented by a few vocal forum users) don't like something which i'm convinced is a way to go, my motivation is not effected.  It's simply not possible to make everyone happy, so it's not my goal.

I see no problem weighing the wishes of developers over those of the players.  Projects die much more readily from loss of developers than loss of players.

[BTAxis]

Are you considering implementing some of the weapons proposed on the wiki for civlians?

Sure. At some point. Lots of other stuff to do.

[Surrealistik]

Well, neither lightsabres, nor miniguns are used as the infantry weapons. With current state of affairs, with no cybernetic implants or mechanized battlesuits, it`s not realistic for PHALANX soldiers to use such a heavy weapon as minigun. Besides, how would it differ from machine gun?

Because the use of man portable particle cannons with knockback capable of blowing people off their feet without cybernetic implants or mechanized battlesuits is realistic, or plasma blasters so large, heavy and cumbersome that they can only be practically hefted by Ortnoks and UGVs. Further, an advanced design, minaturized infantry level minigun is nowhere near in the same category or league as a lightsabre in terms of implausibility. Some sixty plus years in the future, where humanity is capable of attaining technological singularity, is such a comparitively modest innovation beyond our means to create? The dubiousness of this is compounded by the fact that military technology has historically been, and presently is at the forefront of technological innovation and implimentation.

The minigun at present also differs from the machine gun in a variety of important ways, gameplay wise. It features greater efficiency (damage/tu), greater fire rates, a larger clip size, two handed operation and holding and less accuracy. In short, it is the king of suppression, and is one of the best weapons for close/medium range encounters versus medium and lighter armour. While it could, like most other firearms, use some tweaking, at present it is sufficiently unique to warrant inclusion in the human arsenal.

Anyway, base human weapons already offer a great variety, it`s other game areas, that need serous improvement. Visibility system (currently soldier can see through entire map LoS provided, there is no way to sneak), being able to set something on fire, improved air interceptions and so on...

Actually the human arsenal could use a great deal of work, with respect to both balance and gameplay. There are several unfilled niches that should be addressed and accounted for, and several weapons that are either over or underpowered, and/or have completely unsensible properties.

Are you just guessing, or have you developed freeware games, and/or asked developers this question?

I don't speak for the devs here, but as a developer on other projects and a contributor to this, my main motivation is that the process is fun.  Certainly working on something that will be shared with other players adds to the fun.  But if the players (as very unscientifically represented by a few vocal forum users) don't like something which i'm convinced is a way to go, my motivation is not effected.  It's simply not possible to make everyone happy, so it's not my goal.

I see no problem weighing the wishes of developers over those of the players.  Projects die much more readily from loss of developers than loss of players.

I am not guessing. I have done development work for various teams in the past, and have done solitary work (custom maps in warcraft 3, and modules in NWN for example). Personally I have mixed feelings about the actual process, with the main incentives for the work being both my personal enjoyment of the finished product, and the recognition and enjoyment of others who will play it with me. The majority opinion thus, in so far as I have been able to gauge it has been the predominant influence on my work. These sentiments have often been shared by those I have worked with, so I am not making speculations. Of course, there has been the occasional developer who wanted to skew things selfishly for his own personal satisfaction or enjoyment at the expense of the playerbase, and rightfully, his actions were either overturned or he was outright dismissed.

Further, even though you are correct in your assertion that the majority is unscientifically represented by the opinions of forum posters, it should be noted that these posters represent a sample that can usually be extrapolated to gauge the general sentiment of the playerbase at large with reasonable accuracy.

[eleazar]

I am not guessing. I have done development work for various teams in the past, and have done solitary work (custom maps in warcraft 3, and modules in NWN for example). Personally I have mixed feelings about the actual process, with the main incentives for the work being both my personal enjoyment of the finished product, and the recognition and enjoyment of others who will play it with me. The majority opinion thus, in so far as I have been able to gauge it has been the predominant influence on my work. These sentiments have often been shared by those I have worked with, so I am not making speculations.

Ok, for sake of argument, lets assume that the motivation of every freeware developer in the world is 100% altruism

[Surrealistik]

Let me put things this way. I have never known any developer of a game or mod to ever retain a feature, concept or stricture that the apparent majority of his audience dislikes, with the exception of the hopelessly self-absorbed, and I'm willing to bet that, these people aside, this is more or less a constant.

[BTAxis]

Let me put things this way. I have never known any developer of a game or mod to ever retain a feature, concept or stricture that the apparent majority of his audience dislikes, with the exception of the hopelessly self-absorbed, and I'm willing to bet that, these people aside, this is more or less a constant.

Aaron Hall, author of the Space Empires series. Kept the hard-coded limit of one space port per planet until Space Empires V, and only then in a fairly late patch. This was despite repeated requests, including from me. And I wouldn't call Aaron "hopelessly self-absorbed". He did answer to my mail.

[Surrealistik]

Aaron Hall, author of the Space Empires series. Kept the hard-coded limit of one space port per planet until Space Empires V, and only then in a fairly late patch. This was despite repeated requests, including from me. And I wouldn't call Aaron "hopelessly self-absorbed". He did answer to my mail.

Eventually he made the change though, and perhaps he did, in fact, qualify as self-absorbed at some point prior to it. At any rate, I'm not sure if a response to your mail is in any way de facto proof that he isn't or wasn't.