so what path of progression you would consider is not a chock point?(btw getting to lvl X for a survival open world game is the worst possible gole) actually now I have to think how I proceed to alien structure to conquer it.. before this I just make a SV , slap some rocket launcher and wreck havoc on any alien bases.. so this progression system increase immersion for me...
Um, I liked the way it was. So that is the answer to your question. What kind of path...none. Certainly the AI is going to get better at defending itself, so the "build an SV and rocket launcher" scenario, may not work on all planets or with all AI types. I myself find that approach risky as one slip of the finger and I'm toast....and so is my SV. Of course it is! Thats why I don't like it. Yes, but its an artificial complication. If you can come up with a way to defeat the enemy on your own, you don't need some LEVEL telling you that you can't do it. Its like saying everything is FREE, as long as you pay for it. Either its an open world, or its a choo-choo train ride to wherever THEY want you to go. Again, so much for imagination. Everybody who has played this game for more than 30 mins knows how to take down a base...Several ways!...but to say...no, no, you must do it this way...is restricting, and not where I had hoped this game design was heading. IMHO. I guess one possible solution to the whole "overpowered" thing, is to increase the cost in resources and/or time ect... but keep the possibility there. If I want to spend a week building up to attack a base, then so be it. If you want to bum-rush the thing with a pistol on day one...good for you! Removing these options is just an artificial way to increase the difficulty...and an obvious one at that.
I think i understand now why you are not liking it...(correct me if I wrong) as you started to play before the 3.6 patch you know what this game has to offer and planned your game-play accordingly..now when certain restriction is in place you are thinking 'we can build rocket launcher here. why I am stuck with a puny pistol?that totally bottle-necking my freedom to chose form the wide arsenal of weapon I can chose from. If that is what you thinking, you got it wrong.. imagine if you know nothing about what this game has to offer, you crashed in a unknown planet with few supplies, so you make do with them(that survival right?).. now you started to explore the place you crashed on.. do some scavenging..you now found some more powerful weapon..more stuff you can make..you knew how to make pistol, now you know how to make assault rifle..you become powerful and survival become easier, till you make contact with a more powerful enemy,it was hard but you defeated it and get access to the technology of there race, you got more powerful.... and so on... isn't that how survival work??? more you put time in the survival more you become stronger.. its not about do some mining or collect some plant, but discovering something new and learn to use it in your favor.. If you read the above passage , that is the concept of progression.... in this game devs implemented that via a crude lvling system. Is that a good system? NO , but it introduced the concept of progression in the game which is a integral part of survival , open world gaming. the system needs to changed(my opinion) but the concept need to stay... open world does not mean you have access to everything from the start, open world mean you have access to the whole world to explore and discover new thing and use them as you please, not in a path fixed by the devs. You knew that becoz you had every weapon in your disposal from the beginning.. now you actually have to plan how to use what little thing is in your disposal, that is how survival works(in real life too), now after you conquer the base you get rewarded by the loot.. before that who cared about the loot? I certainly did not.. I just conquer them to see how the base looked like..that's all SORRY FOR THIS VERY LONG POST..
Ok, apparently people like to interpret my words however they want so it looks like it's time for another rant. Guess I wasn't verbose enough. I'm VERY happy for you that you have a team that can conquer an imaginary voucher system. I regret to inform you, however, that your advice on how to manage my Fun Points was not only unsolicited, it is also unqualified. I am not playing with 3 other clones of myself. If that was the case I'd be busy devouring the content of many games, not posting on forums. I've tried to teach people how angle shoot and metagame with cost/benefit analysis many, many times before. It just doesn't work. Most people can't or don't want to think about games the way I do. The approach I've actually had success with is to guide people through gameplay mechanics and letting them make their own decisions. I've learned to keep my metagaming analysis to myself if it wasn't directly requested. (And to the guy who tried to weakly refute my comment about math while completely missing the point: I'm an engineer; I love using math to make needless complicated solutions for random things. Since you clearly can't read between the lines, I was speaking for my friends, indubitably a more accurate representation of the general population, who are not interested in linking math with games.) And it's laughable to say you're working as a team. REAL teamwork is about COLLECTIVELY using your intelligent decision making skills to CHOOSE when to come together or split up. It is not about being COERCED into optimizing how to acquire and spend Fun Points. The appropriate end-goal for managing your team's skill trees is overcome non-imaginary, practical challenges that can actually hurt you back, not being able to build something. And my group already plays a variety of MOBAs and ARPGS (or in other words NON-SANDBOX) games for that. (And if you couldn't tell, I didn't appreciate the passive-aggressive commentary on my leadership abilities.) So to make myself abundantly clear: I am not here to solicit alternate methods of acquiring Fun Points. In fact, I am not interested in you (player or developer) "teaching" me anything about this game. The whole point of not being here in the first place was to avoid exposing myself to how faceless strangers on the internet think they can improve my sandbox gaming experience. What I am here to do is provide my objective analysis as a developer (or software engineer if you prefer) on a TERRIBLE design choice. My colourful use of language may lead you to think it's my opinion but I provide logical reasoning behind everything I say. So here is my direct appeal to the developers: stop designing around people who complain that your sandbox game is too easy to "beat". You'll never even be able to satisfy them because they'll always want more; they don't truly understand what they actually want or why they want it. I know this because I used to one until I grew up became aware of the simple fact that what you "accomplish" in a game doesn't matter if you don't have fun doing it. The entire purpose of a sandbox game is allow its players to create their own challenges with maybe a few built-in tangible goals. I would say that creating a galactic empire is a sufficient enough with its own sub-goals. This system (in its current form, if you really needed that qualifier to feel better,) is a direct betrayal to that idea. It handcuffs the player into acquiring enough permission vouchers first. As I said, if I had just bought this game, I would have refunded. If I saw a sandbox game showcasing its level-locked building components, I would instantly lose interest in that game. If you'd prefer engineering terms: spending resources on fixing domain-specific problems (fine-tuning how much/little the tech tree inconveniences you) is inefficient when the problem domain should not exist in the first place. If you really insist on keeping this monstrosity, make it optional and call it masochism mode. A quick word of advice: go back and play Terraria for a day (not Minecraft) to remember what fun sandbox character progression looks like. I don't understand what it is about the idea of putting Terraria in space that invariably compels each development team to make such HORRIBLE design choices. (This would be the 4th game to do so by my count.) I can only assume it's hubris. And if you're not a developer and found being compared to a child offensive, good. It was intentional. I want you to be aware of how childish it was to want development resources being spent handcuffing you because YOU got bored with the way YOU play the game. If the game cannot challenge you any more, find another game that does. If this is not easy for you, then perhaps your priority in life shouldn't be finding challenges in video games. (And to preempt those that would tell to take my own advice: I already have 3 new sci-fi sandbox games lined up on my wishlist; some even have 4-packs. If this theme park garbage sticks, I'll probably go back to the zombie sandbox until one goes on sale. If I'm gonna exp grind in a sandbox, I'll do it in an environment that is actually challenging and never level-locks me out of building components.) I actually read through the entire thread and saw that everyone who liked being handcuffed remarks on how "easy" it was before if you did what you were "supposed" to do like rebuild the escape pod in order to get to space ASAP, and some even claimed that there was a bonus of being "forced" to consider options they previously considered useless. The absurdity of this statement from a sandbox community is so incredible that I'm currently wondering how many of you are autistic. It's serious question, not an insult, because it would explain so much. What is the rationale for ASSUMING everyone wants to play like that? Did I miss some quest tracker urging me to leave the planet within X time? I'm pretty sure I didn't. So it's logical to conclude that the only you're "supposed" to do in this game is: build things kill things with the things you've built not die while doing it The concept of leaving an area still abundant with things to plunder and murder is completely foreign to me and even if I wanted to do it, I wouldn't be using a vehicle that someone else designed if I had the option not to. I'm not interested in inheriting someone else's mistakes when I learn from my own mistakes more efficiently since I understand why I make them. Refactoring someone else's design is a waste of my time if both parties are not actively participating in the decisions being made. (Again to preempt, don't bother mentioning open-source tools, legacy products, etc. I'm talking about playing a game, not real life. Learn how to read.) The difference is, though, that I don't actively fantasize about forcing other people play like I do. I would find no value in making the escape pod unsalvageable or unbuildable. Nor would I find any value in incentivizing full-clears because: I am a functional adult that doesn't need mommy and daddy game developer to pat me on the back with artificial mechanics when I achieve my own goals I actually understand that withholding a reward is functionally equivalent to a punishment and therefore has no place in a sandbox Let's go back to the idea that being able to build a CV "early" is a problem. So a player sets out to do something no one told them to and is then disappointed once they achieve it. Explain how this shows "game is too easy for player" rather than "player is playing wrong type of game". And let's say that it is a problem. Why is Fun Points a viable solution for it? The game has sapient non-human gun-wielding beings in it. Why aren't some of them in ships waiting to blow me out of the sky if I decide to fly out in a garbage can? And while we're on the topic, maybe some of them can come down and pick a fight with us? I mean we do it to them all the time so let's see how it is on the other side. Or how about having a physics engine in the game so if you try to fly a ship built with unsound engineering principles, it blows up and you lose everything? I know why these things aren't in the game RIGHT NOW, but does Fun Points make having any of them in the game obsolete or redundant? Nope. Does it make any of them easier to implement? Nope. I'm actually quite certain that balancing around Fun Points makes it more complex. On the topic of "useless" items. It seems that the majority thinks the HV fits and rationale is that it doesn't let you GAMERSCORE as well as the SV does. (For the record, Fun Points and GAMERSCORE are not the same thing). I don't expect people that enjoy telling other people how to sandbox so much to appreciate this but: the simpler flight mechanics and lower component requirements make it a more appropriate tool to introduce to a new player the mechanic of designing and implementing a vehicle from scratch, the mechanic of operating a vehicle they just built and since you're close to the ground it's quicker to alternate between piloting and navigating as a bonus you can replace passenger seats with turrets if you want to (Looks like I have to cut this short again. Sorry no TLDR this time. Just don't reply to me if you don't want to comprehend my words; I actually took more time to remove venom from my words instead of writing them. Like if you think what I just said means I think all items are useful in this, then you are not worth my time to respond to.)
Sorry otterbear but i will have to agree with Navonil. If u are really in a survival situation priorities: 1. Water / O 2 2. Food 3. Shelter 4. Maybe some weapons to defend 5. Sustainable food source (farm) 6. Transportation So as u can see the none of the first few objectives is to attack an enemy outpost with your poketknife. Imagine beeing in such a situation yourself: U see an outpost it is armed with rockets and other bad ****. Would you go there just armed with a pistol ? No. U would need a vehicle that is armed (HV or SC). The way i see the leveling system is that it sets the right priorities. it is not perfect yet of course but that will come in time. True. BUT you need the right tools for it. Not some puny pistol.....
@HM POWERED please do read the reply I gave to @Otterbear just before your last post, I am curious to see your opinion about that because by your reply I understand you wanted a pure sand-box game on the other hand you gave example of Terraria which have a clear progression system..so I'm bit confused...
Two quick things I want to bring up. One, Level 5 for a constructor? Perhaps switch Constructor and Food Processor, and I'll say that's fine - You can survive off Akua Fruits or Corndogs (Or even Raw Meat) until then. Two: Current iteration has HVs as completely useless. I had hoped Tech Trees would make me want to build an HV but as it is I'm better off waiting for an SV to conserve points. Perhaps a simple reduction in HV parts UP cost is in order, or something more... drastic. I'll spoiler the wall of text so I don't scare people off: Spoiler Perhaps there needs to be a rethinking of level brackets, or perhaps a total increase in levels, but I think that if you allow HV unlocks relatively early on, let's say lv3,5,7. Then make us work up to an SV later on like maybe 11,13,15. And then subsequently make CVs something like 17,19,21 (to keep with the theme I've done for this example). XP values would need some exponential adjusting for this to work. First 5 levels should be pretty quick, but 6-10 should take considerably longer, and 10-15 moreso than that, etc. This would give a natural progression to things. Investing in/Building a HV would be worth the time/points in order to be able to get around on your starting planet, allowing you to go take on POIs and Mine things far away. All the while watching your XP bar get closer to where you can start getting SV unlocks. Similarly you'd have the same sort of thing once you have an SV unlocked, but the gap would be smaller since you already need to spend a lot of time gathering materials to make a CV, so adding MORE grind to it would just be redundant and most certainly not adding to the fun factor, or a natural progression. This method would make HVs relevant as you would almost certainly need one in order to travel enough to get the XP for getting SV parts. It wouldn't be impossible, but chances are you'd run out of Fuel if you weren't close enough to a Promethium Deposit. It'd make exploring your starting planet, and clearing POIs there worth doing, as it acts as a gateway to space travel. Furthermore, a way to incentivise this would be if you made it so that if you have HV parts, you get a discount on similar SV parts. So HV thruster -> halves SV Normal Thruster UPs, etc.
Most of us don't like the current tech tree not because we suddenly can't build everything anymore, but because it doesn't do anything except gradually introduce people to all the options we have. 1. It doesn't change how I play. Before the patch I'd decide what items I want, start building all the components (I'd be sure to make the build queue as long as possible) and I went on my merry way for about 10-15 mins (digging, killing, gathering, exploring). Right now, I'm doing EXACTLY the same thing. Only difference is, upon arrival back at my escape pod, I need to click a few icons (tech tree) so I can build the items for which the components are now lying in wait. Note for those who call the system too grindy: I disagree with anyone who's calling the new techtree too 'grind heavy' because it's not. It's really not. We unlock points by simply doing what we already were doing before the patch. However, the devs should take away that quite a lot of people perceive the system as grindy and that's not a good thing. 2. But Alo, it does still introduce everything gradually to new players. For everyone who thinks a tech tree is needed to help new players I have 1 word for you: tutorial. Not tech-tree. But let's run with the assumption that the tech tree did get implemented to help out new players orientate their way through all the items. So, does it introduce everything gradually to new players? Sure, everything is no longer available from the go but you can still look at all the items you're going to unlock. It's actually wise to look through the tech tree so you know which techs you want to start investing in, to reach those sweet items deep in the tech tree. So does it guarantee new players are gradually eased into the large itempool we have? Yes, providing they don't read through the tech tree too much. If they're like me they'll want to know what the trees eventually lead to and they'll end up reading through it all, like I initially did with all the available items (which also didn't bother me, nor did it suck up a lot of time for me) But now I'm forced to follow the fixed order of unlocks created by the devs and no longer have the freedom to do exactly whatever I want. So you ARE crying about the fact that you can no longer build everything from the start Alo! No, I'm crying about the fact that I can't build everything from the start and I've not been given an actual reason by the devs. What I would like to know (and I think we'd all benefit from it) is WHAT the tech tree is supposed to do for us. If it's to help out new players I'd say we have tutorials for that. If it's to slow us down from reaching certain tech too soon that's fine but in that case (and in my opinion) it needs to be adjusted because it doesn't do anything for me right now. For now though, it feels as if we're left in the dark. I know I've said this before but currently, I don't know what they devs are trying to achieve with this. So we can go ahead and provide the devs with all kinds of feedback on the tech tree but I can't help but feel it's like shooting in the dark. Unless I know what the point of the tech tree is, I can't really tell the devs what to change in order for it to work properly. So help us out here devs!
EXACTLY! So the "System" tells me WHAT, WHERE ,WHEN , and HOW, I should play the game...Thanks but No-Thanks! No, I bet it could be done, and some might like to do that...thats the whole point. Stop taking away the imagination, and choices of the player and LET THEM DECIDE, Who, what ,where, when and how, they want to approach each situation. I look at the constructor as a tool box...I have something I need to do...I look at the toolbox to see what tools I can create to help me achieve MY goal(Not theirs), and then spend the necessary time, and energy to get those resources put together. To tell me I have to get across a river with a wooden spoon, is just mean and patronizing. Marathon running is challenging, but to smack people in the shins with a baseball bat and tell them its for their own good, (to slow them down, and HELP them enjoy the experience) is silly. And yet we have people EAGER to come up with ways to do just that...My head hurts.
Alright, i hear you all. But i for one think this thread is more important than the normal casual gamer would think. At the moment Empyrion is intended to be an sandbox survival game as far as i understand. The question that we are discussing here is more about the topic: "Should Empyrion be a SANDBOX-survival game or a sandbox-SURVIVAL game" if you get my idea. It is about balancing these two aspects. A good solution in my eyes would be to make the survival aspect optional also including the tech tree.
I am merely pointing out that there's plenty of people who dislike the tech but for many of us, the reason for disliking it isn't the one you described. And didn't you ask us to correct you if you were wrong? Now I didn't say you were incorrect but merely described a different reasoning (one I've seen others describe as well) for disliking the tech tree.
I'm not opposed to character progression in sandbox games. I just don't want it tied to artificial mechanics. In Terraria you find hearts and loot better gear than anything you can craft. That's an appropriate place to put progression because it's clear that the game is about digging tunnels and finding things. Even the leveling system in the zombie game I mention is appropriate for THAT context. It is about surviving hordes of slow-moving targets coming at you. It makes sense that you can't instantly make the best gear. The reason we've stopped playing it is (besides the HORRIBLE database architecture that routinely corrupts saves) that once someone has a sizeable exp lead (usually me) there is no compelling not to have that person craft all your important items and further increase the exp gap. And the reason why I didn't bother posting about it on THEIR forums is that I WAS having too much fun with Empyrion to care. I just want them to use the appropriate tool for this context. Doing random busywork until the ability to press a button pops up is the very definition of artificial in this game. But I wouldn't be offended by looting constructor schematics, even if it was unlocking what was previously available by default. The game is unquestionably about looting things. I wouldn't even be offended by a skill tree in this game if what I said about using to overcome a real threat was actually true.
That post was meant for Otterbear ..not for you.... as English is not my first language I can't be certain that people are understanding what I,m saying.... becoz I think I made it very clear that I don't like the current form of tech tree but I want a progression system some sort to get a greater depth in this game.... So basically we are saying the same thing.... current progression system is bad.. we need a better one...right? Because most of the people who are protesting about the lvling system, they are saying 1. it is grindy 2. it hinders the freedom of choice but no one talking about how this tech-tree implemented a very crude and very bad progression system, which need to refined very extensively but need to stay in the game So my main problem with most of those who are against it, is they are only saying that it is very bad, but not anything about how they want to see it implemented in the game
@Navonil Mukherjee @Otterbear From what I gather from both of your posts is that (and do correct me if I'm wrong): - You both don't like the curren tech tree - You both believe the current tech tree needs to be changed (extensively) - Neither of you is opposed to a tech tree/character progression, providing it serves an actual goal as opposed to the current tech tree which feels artificial and limitting. You guys are discussing something as if you're of different opinions but what I'm reading tells me you guys basically agree. As for how I would like to see it; I've answered the questions the devs initially had for us, on page 7 quite extensively I think. I agree with you though that a lot of people tend to share their dislikes about the current techtree but aren't taking the time to explain to the devs what they would prefer
we did have different opinion but as discussion progressed we are nearing a mutual agreement, as with you and @HM POWERED , Isn't that the point of discussion? pour every individual ideas and combine them to make one which is better than all individual ideas.. read this too : http://empyriononline.com/threads/option-to-disable-xp-techtree.3097/page-2 there are some good ideas for techtree improvement in there too EDIT: Also guys plz contribute to the wiki in gamepedia, it is very bare-bone now and has lots of pages need editing, there is a posting guideline about how a page should look like, if you get confused you can ask @Hummel-o-War or me for help
EDIT: I feel player progression and tech trees are two different things for two different purposes Player Development Experience points Unlock Skills/Abilities Weapon skill ( can't use a gun until you learn it) Hold Breath Skill (prolonged suffocation x seconds) Botany, makes plants perish slower Cooking, makes perish time of Food ... Tech tree - you start with tier 1 basic gear already to build a bare bone BA/SV/CV/HV) Research Points New tiers of basic gear New gear (armor plates .. other thing not needed to build a basic BA/SV/CV/HV) RP could be a timer with an option to scavenge items to decrease the timer using the research station Too make it more challenging you could make it that you cant get every skill so do I want to learn RPG or how to tweak power output of a generator With this each game can be different, player in a mp game can have some individuality. For an Added bonus we could add Profession/Traits Picked at the start of a game could effect starting/gear and natural abilities for a further challenge you could add negative traits / professions Professions - Geologist, more drill ammo - Guard, Starts with more weapons - Civilian, Galactic Default - Engineer , ??? - Survivalist, Starts with more Rations - Botanist, Starts with more plants - Pilot, Escape pod has less damage - Cook, ??? - Convict, starts with no weapons - Red shirt, more creatures are hostile to you ... Traits - Keen Eye Sight, Can identify POI at a greater distance - Poor Eye sight, Can identify POI at a shorter distance - High Metabolic rate, Food burns quicker but healing from food increase - Low Metabolic Rate, Food last longer but healing from food is decreased - Tough , Can jump Higher - Athletic, Can run using Less O2 - Unfit, Ruining uses more 02 - Strong Immunity, Poisons duration reduced - Weak immunity, Poisons last longer ...
After paying a couple rounds with experience levels I have to say I’m not a fan of the current set up. It does not seem to naturally fit into the game. I don’t see how me killing a bunch of dinosaurs would grant me the knowledge to build a small vehicle thruster. I do like the idea of a tech tree. I like the idea of research. I like the idea of Exp. My suggestions involve breaking Exp into skills. So the Exp you gain from hunting and fighting (with hand held weapons) grain points into a skill tree for body armor and hand held weapons and mods for those items. A different Exp skill tree for mining and refining. Perhaps one for piloting and driving. One for construction and item creation. That way in a multiplayer game players could specialize. And if you are playing alone it gives the player more to do. Regardless in the end I would make leveling a game mode in survival. At game creation you could choose if you want to have leveling or not.
- What do you think about the current system? It is a good start and a good idea, but right now it is almost useless and not logical....at most in coop-multiplayer game. Why can i research a refrigerator for a base earlier than for the hover? It has great potential, but needs a lot more of tuning and workover. - What could be improved? More logical tech-tree, more balancing for multiplayer....right now it's not worth for coop-multiplayer, it's a only race for XP's. "Maybe" it is a little challenge for single player in survival....maybe....... - Is level progress too fast / slow? hard to say. in this state -where a lot of unlogical bugs in it- it's "maybe" only fun for single player. overall it is a point of view....i am used to the classic amiga games which they are very difficult/hard and that has made the fun, because it was a challenge....but in my opinion this game gets from patch to patch more and more casual and too easy for a "survival" game. ....so for me it's too easy and too fast. [ironic] when i want to play a casual/easy game, i play super mario with my daughter [/ironic] - Tech tree and unlock points? it needs a lot of tuning, balancing and other more work - Other feedback? ok, before i open a few other threads i post it in here --> - the research-/tech-tree is a good initial attempt, but needs a lot of further tuning and workover .... for single AND specially for multiplayer mode - i'm sad that the difficulty of the survival-game is getting from patch to patch easier and easier.....where is the challenge right now? in my opinion, at this point it has nearly no difference from sandbox- to survival-mode. My conclusion - listen further to the opinions and suggestions in this forum, but keep your basic ideas and keep your own way...you cannot make it right to everyone! ... a really good game has his own way!! - please stop it making easier from patch to patch..... real gamers need a challenge! - please add new things only, when they are finetuned....more importand is the bugfixing ...specially for the multiplayer bugs!!! ...because sorrowful i recognized the lower and lower place in the steam-sellers-list, after the new patches and last point -> keep up the hard/good work for this potentially epic game!!! regards cle
I get pretty bored at times...I've read ALL of the post. Even the very long winded ones, as I find them especially in-depth explanations. I may not always agree, but they do tend to be more interesting reading.
