SmallKiwi
Members-
Posts
19 -
Joined
Reputation
10 Good-
I mean, sure you have performance problems. Of course you do. You're running an extreme budget video card. What do you expect? WoW's system requirements have evolved as the game has. So should SWTOR's. You can't expect to get by on a $50 video card. You do realize you could double or triple your performance for less than $ 100 right?
-
It is one thing to say I don't mind moving slow. It is another thing to say moving fast is impossible and that's ok. If you believe that there is a technical limitation that is currently limiting mount speed, thats fine. The problem is in apologizing for Bioware when they have not, after 2 WHOLE YEARS, improved upon the pathetic speed of mounts in the game. There are a lot of things I love about this game, mainly the setting and story. Combat is a bit underwhelming but atleast it looks and feels like Star Wars. But the mounts don't feel star warsy, and I would say that vehicles and technology are pretty core to any scifi universe. Get them right!
-
Everyone who says faster mounts aren't necessary are missing the point. The size of the explorable map is not relevant. I think we can all understand that what we are seeing is tiny slice of each planet. The point is that its not Star Wars when we're flying speeders that inch along as they do. I'm pretty sure that we've NEVER SEEN a speeder or pod in any of the movies move as slowly as the ones in game. The vehicles in the movies literally accelerate far beyond these speeds instantaneously. Its a joke to be crawling along the surface of Hoth.
-
But the reasons aren't valid? That's my point! Bioware says "We can't do that because of technical reason X". But anyone with a little knowledge of the problems youre talking about (client side lag) can tell you that there are ways around this. What causes client side lag/fps loss when traveling? Assets being loaded into memory. Is there a way to significantly reduce the number of assets being loaded into memory when, say, riding the taxi, or piloting a high speed mount? Yes, by making use of placeholders in those situations. It's a hack, but it works. And it's only necessary for a portion of the player base.
-
I am aware of these issues, but personally experience none of them. It's such a shame to be held back by folks running the game on dated hardware. Still, there are hacks that could be implemented to make high speed travel work on even crap systems. I know this, Bioware knows this. The real reason for slow mounts is NOT technical, its game pacing. Bioware won't change it unless players are willing to push the issue, but first you have to stop buying into the very first excuse they throw at you.
-
If the decade old tech that runs WoW can make flying mounts work, then surely TOR could handle ground mounts moving at a reasonable clip. I'm just not buying the "technical difficulties" line, it's a complete cop out. Why doesn't it bother people that their blistering fast speeder bikes move at a stately jogging pace? It's shameful what we have now.
-
This is not WoW, we're not riding horses, and there's really no good reason at all why our speeders go so frustratingly slow. Perhaps my #1 biggest request for this game would be more reasonable speed caps for mounts. Why are us players settling for speeders with none-existant handling characteristics and a top speed just above a recreational jog?
-
Some Actual Suggestions to make GSF More Tactical & Fun
SmallKiwi replied to SmallKiwi's topic in Galactic Starfighter
If your pursuer is worth a damn you wont have time to complete a full 180 before he is back in weapons range. This puts you at more of a disadvantage, and is more than likely going to lead to another tail chase after you've boosted. The point of the changes I'm proposing is to introduce a system of trade-offs that will lead to interesting decision making in game. Speed becomes an advantage, but building speed requires you to fly more or less straight, and that's dangerous. I think it would also lead to some really interesting chases and making more use of the environment to try to elude pursuers and make them crash. -
Some Actual Suggestions to make GSF More Tactical & Fun
SmallKiwi replied to SmallKiwi's topic in Galactic Starfighter
1) Slow down acceleration. This includes boosters. 2) Pitch/Yaw rate should be affected by the speed of the ship 3) Maneuvering reduces speed. 4) Limit maneuvering when boosting. Basically, ships that get into turning fights will find their ability to turn reduced the more they turn because (3) and (2). Boosting to maintain maneuvering speed will be limited by (4) and using short boosts in bursts will be less effective thanks to (1). This would essentially put a stop to protracted tail chasing spins and create situations where the pursuing ship builds on their advantage rather than producing a stalemate. -
Some Actual Suggestions to make GSF More Tactical & Fun
SmallKiwi replied to SmallKiwi's topic in Galactic Starfighter
You obviously miss the point of this thread. As I said, in evenly matched 1v1 dogfights, stalemates are inevitable. That's anti-fun. The idea is to make the GSF flight model a little bit deeper and more rewarding, and eliminate silly tail chasing turn fights. -
Some Actual Suggestions to make GSF More Tactical & Fun
SmallKiwi replied to SmallKiwi's topic in Galactic Starfighter
Yes this is my main concern w/ GSF. I think that the following mechanics could fix this particular issue: 1) Slow down the acceleration 2) Pitch/Yaw speed should be affected by the speed of the ship 3) Maneuvering reduces speed 4) Limit maneuvering when boosting Basically, ships that get into turning fights will find their ability to turn reduced the more they turn because (3) and (2). Boosting to maintain maneuvering speed will be limited by (4) and using short boosts in bursts will be less effective thanks to (1). Best of all, these mechanics are all organic and should be easily grasped by players.