Alpha Test Feedback Nov 7th 2015

Interesting, thanks for letting us know. To clarify: it was the texture colour on the surface of the model that had a monochrome fit when viewed at distance?


Yes. sehgaiowuhg uiwaehgu post must be above 20 characters.

Really unhappy i had to miss this one :’(
anyone got recordings?

The new weapon looks great. They’re not individual projectiles are they? They look like a dozen or so dots to every ‘shot’.

It’s actually 320 rounds per second (quad x80 rounds each per second, but with a single burst being 16 rounds for each of the 4 cannons in a 200ms trigger cycle). The cannons also rotate just a small bit when activated, so it behaves a bit like laying down a paired cylinder flak barrage.

We think it’s a pretty fun weapon, it certainly feels quite ‘meaty’ to fire.


I think TC shot a video but, given his Death count, I think he might be embarrassed to share it :wink:


I shaved 15 minutes out; but is still a pretty bad performance…

1 Like

Remember, strafe is your friend. So is rolling.

Alas no strafe was using a remote mouse and keyboard on a different computer via Mouse Without Borders; but I couldn’t mouse lock :frowning:

Know my lesson for next time…

-_- I thought I already discussed this with you.

I’ll tell you what, when the game is released, because you can’t seem to play in the playtest, in our starter ships, we will fight. I want you not to press q or e the entire match, and we’ll see who wins. Spawn at the system closest to the end of the alphabet. And we probably should shut up about this because this is too off topic.

Sounds to me like a space-gauntlet has been jettisoned out of the airlock :smile:

What I’m thrilled about, personally, is the fundamental clarity that raw piloting skill actually, genuinely, no-holds-barred, for sure, actually means something very significant in AoA.

These tests prove there’s no two-ways about it.

What we need to implement next (in terms of the combat skill arbiter) is a step outwards from the tactical to the strategic; where combat at an individual level is complemented by larger scale fleet decisions about fleet placement, engagement and target prioritisation: from the individual to the squad, to the wing, to the fleet. Comms and discipline, inexorably intertwined with raw piloting skill, will be the key to AoA alliance sovereignty.

Whilst I would say this… I do think it’s shaping up to be, y’know, a bit ****ing awesome :smile:

One request for the next playtest (or any previously recorded playtests by any of you with a recording, if you’re willing to go back over it)…

We’re beginning to work on the tactical NPC AI. This is the decision-making that NPCs have (which is currently entirely ‘dumb’).

I would love for one (or more) of you talented pilots to narrate their PoV combat on a video, focusing on the “whys” of decision-making.

  • Why you chose target X over target Y?
  • Why you chose to break-off the attack at point Z?
  • Why you chose to pursue this ship, and ignore that ship?
  • If you split targets, what criteria you applied in making that decision?
  • When/if you chose to run/regen, what were the precursors to that decision?


I’m really, really interested in the “why” of our top pilots’ split-second (as well as medium-term) decision-making process.

It can only help the (reasonably sophisticated) individual/tactical decision-making AI we’re building if we get some sense of your thought processes. We’re starting at the individual level; then we’ll build up to a squad/group level and then to the strategic level. I’ll share more about the in-progress AI work in The Lounge in the next week or two.

Hoping for volunteers - either from current/next VT or from previously-recorded VT!



Using different methods, I have possibly found a good video recorder. YouTube people hungry for subscribers never cease to amaze me in their research methods. Anyone tried EzVid?

I can’t make the playtests because I get off work half an hour after they end on Saturdays.

But unless something changed (and it doesn’t look like they have), rolling does nothing but change the orientation of your screen. You can see further in the corners of your screen than you can in the top or bottom. You could always have a circular shaped window though, I guess. Pitch and yaw are equal in AoA so rolling really does nothing as far as flight is concerned.

By rolling you can get a curve on a strafe maneuver, but you could do that with an joystick input instead of WSAD too. It’s not like an engine limitation or something.

The next time I manage to get into a playtest I can stream and record it. My new computer can handle it a lot better than the one I used to make the other recordings. If I don’t hate my voice too much that day, I’ll narrate my exact decision making process while doing so.

If you are using Windows 10 then the Windows Key + G should bring up a video recording bar which will record the current focused window when you pressed it? Seems to work ok, YMMV

Nothing has changed yet, but we are holding the relative velocities - both in terms of straight-line speed as well as torque (specifically defined as the rate of change of the angular momentum around an axis) as independent variables; and we will be also be holding force accelerations for each axis.

These variables will be able to be adjusted by module-fitting at the ship level. Players will be able to add additional thrust, via modules, to various torque axes - in just the same way as they will be able to add additional straight-line/main-engine thrust modifiers (eg general engine enhancements, more powerful afterburners etc).

We expect most players who wish for additional maneuverability (also modified by skills trained ingame, as well as the modules installed) to generally install all-round (ie every axis) enhancements. However, for the sacrifice of a module slot, a player would also be able to choose to enhance a specific axis further (ie more torque on the pitch axis, or the roll axis, or the strafe axis… than a generic maneuverability enhancing module would provide).

The key thing here is that the moment of force will be stored, applied and enhanced on an individual basis if players wish. Just like adding a module that provides more straight-line speed, players will be able to install engineering modules that provide faster attitude adjustments on both a generic (eg jack of all maneuverability trades/master of none) and a specific axial basis (eg I want to be able to strafe a lot faster, but don’t care about enhancing pitch rate).



So stack a few yaw axis torque modules, and we can expect to pull some crazy ivans?

Will there be any more practical difference between the axis other than visibility and geometric profile? Ships with turrets on the belly will obviously benefit more from pitching than ships with broadsides. But other than that, can we expect to incentives to do one over the other?

Still deciding on this, but it’s most likely to depend on the ship model.

The ship hitbox (shield) is currently a spherical orb around the ship. However, this is largely a function of a compact/squat ship model. Different ships may have ellipsis (spheroids squashed on the prolate and/or oblate axes) as the hitbox. Some of the models may even be rectangular (in terms of shields), and perhaps composite (for very unusual shapes).

So yes - different ships will have different shield characteristics, and therefore different axes and profiles which will be presented to a particular viewing/hit angle.

On the weapon placement front, that’s also a WIP - but it’s to be assumed that different ships will have different slot (hardpoint) locations.



I think it’d help a lot if there was a way to visually display out inputs as some kind of debug mode, so you can see our button presses as we narrate why we’re making them.

I’ll find time to go over my previous recordings and talk about my decision making process.

Release notes for today’s test Alpha Test Feedback Dec 5th 2015