X4 V X3 which game had better combat?

[Masterdude420]

I think in X4 the combat is way better looking and more impressive but X3 had way better combat Ai and deadly fukkin big ships. And in X4 I can't destroy these god damn rockets!! My turrets are still learning how to operate, too.

[nightbringr]

Speed doesn't matter to the G you feel, only acceleration

Not entirely true.

You need not change speed whatsoever, but only turn, climb or dive and you will feel the effects of gforce.

[ishmaeltheforsaken]

Speed doesn't matter to the G you feel, only acceleration

Acceleration is a function of speed, so yes, speed definitely does matter. Going from 200m/s to 0 in three seconds is going to feel a lot worse than going from 2m/s to 0 in three seconds.

Actually on-topic: I hated flying in X3. Rebirth was a vast improvement, and X4 so far is an improvement on Rebirth. So by virtue of that alone, X4 has better combat, since flying is like 90% of combat. Even the way NPC ships move is vastly better in X4 than in earlier games. I haven't witnessed any capital ship battles yet, so I can't speak to those.

[TempestZ]

Speed is irelevant. Last 2 posts speak about acceleration not speed

Going from 1000m/s to 800m/s is the same as from 200 to 0

[SteveMill]

Please, stop comparing a game with TEN YEARS of additional development onto it, with X4 which has only just been released.

It's their problems that they can't adapt code to new game and rewrite it from zero each time. And each time same behaviors like: formation follow, auto trade, pathfinding, auto exploration become broken, useless, dumbed down. Yes, code language may be different, but not algorithms! Why they forgot the algorithms of all that stuff?!

Yes. This is the key point. A series should build on what went before but every X game goes back to square one on basic features and yes, the logic is independent of the specific platform.

At a very minimum things like turret tracking, autopilot and the like, which are always broken on release, should have the crap tested out of them before release.

[gmirc2142]

For X3 Re, no For X3 AP, yes.

[ChaosShadow00x]

If you were to take a snapshot of right now, I would have to answer that X3 had vastly superior combat.

But, I dont feel the comparison is fair. X3 has years of patching, updates and mods to back it up, X4's not even a month out the gate.

It needs more time. Between the amazing modders of the X community and the steadfast devotion of Egosoft, I honestly feel that X4 has much more potential.

[Arghan]

Please, stop comparing a game with TEN YEARS of additional development onto it, with X4 which has only just been released.

It's their problems that they can't adapt code to new game and rewrite it from zero each time. And each time same behaviors like: formation follow, auto trade, pathfinding, auto exploration become broken, useless, dumbed down. Yes, code language may be different, but not algorithms! Why they forgot the algorithms of all that stuff?!

Yes. This is the key point. A series should build on what went before but every X game goes back to square one on basic features and yes, the logic is independent of the specific platform.

At a very minimum things like turret tracking, autopilot and the like, which are always broken on release, should have the crap tested out of them before release.

Algorithms are easy - there are books on it, they are well defined, already been used. They have them. What is hard is implementation of those algorithms. It has to be implemented to take into account current code base. It has to be implemented with satisfying performance (hardest part usually). Usually it has to be done in a way which will not make further changes near impossible or prohibitively time consuming...

Then there is one more problem. Balancing them.
Lets take turrets. They cannot make them too good or too bad. Too good is imho easier to implement. If turrets would always hit, hit harder and ship be able to roll to bear most turrets on enemy (all relatively easy to implement), fighters would either be obsolete, or would require inhuman skills to pull attacks off (so close to no player could execute them). So they need to be nerfed enough to provide a challenge and not be too weak or prohibitively OP. So algorithms must be adjusted, taking into account assumed player skills, how player are expected to fly, etc... And because each game has different ships and flight physics, you cannot copy-past past solutions. You need to eyeball it for that particular game. It become another hard problem not only connected with purely algorithmic skills.

[Gosnell]

I think the shields need a constant recharge rate,this would make things much better

[SteveMill]

It's their problems that they can't adapt code to new game and rewrite it from zero each time. And each time same behaviors like: formation follow, auto trade, pathfinding, auto exploration become broken, useless, dumbed down. Yes, code language may be different, but not algorithms! Why they forgot the algorithms of all that stuff?!

Yes. This is the key point. A series should build on what went before but every X game goes back to square one on basic features and yes, the logic is independent of the specific platform.

At a very minimum things like turret tracking, autopilot and the like, which are always broken on release, should have the crap tested out of them before release.

Algorithms are easy - there are books on it, they are well defined, already been used. They have them. What is hard is implementation of those algorithms. It has to be implemented to take into account current code base. It has to be implemented with satisfying performance (hardest part usually). Usually it has to be done in a way which will not make further changes near impossible or prohibitively time consuming...

Then there is one more problem. Balancing them.
Lets take turrets. They cannot make them too good or too bad. Too good is imho easier to implement. If turrets would always hit, hit harder and ship be able to roll to bear most turrets on enemy (all relatively easy to implement), fighters would either be obsolete, or would require inhuman skills to pull attacks off (so close to no player could execute them). So they need to be nerfed enough to provide a challenge and not be too weak or prohibitively OP. So algorithms must be adjusted, taking into account assumed player skills, how player are expected to fly, etc... And because each game has different ships and flight physics, you cannot copy-past past solutions. You need to eyeball it for that particular game. It become another hard problem not only connected with purely algorithmic skills.

Sure. But I’d bet real money none of that was done here.

[mr.WHO]

Despite many bugs and broken features X4 combat already feel much better than X3 for me.

- Fighter dogfights are fun.
- weapon variety even if small feel that every weapon has a purpose (but missiles/countermeasures need to be rebalanced).
- you can destroy particular surface elements like turrets or engine.
- your own missiles no longer blow up into your face.
- it's actually possible to mass equip and commands fleet of fighters.
- combat music is much better.

[A5PECT]

Dogfighting, specifically, is more fun in X4 than X3. AI is generally more responsive in combat; when I start landing hits on an enemy they'll shift into evasive maneuvers much more quickly than in previous games. In X3, TTKs were far too short and individual engagements ended before any real tactics or maneuvering could take place. XR was slightly better at this, until you upgraded the Skunk's weapons so they far outmatched the ones on any NPC-controlled ship of a similar size.

Large ships are affected by a myriad of bugs that make combat with them difficult to judge. I like many of the ideas that the devs seem to be going for, e.g. making a group of fighters a viable counter to a large ship, rather than the larger ship being disproportionately stronger than the fighter group.

[stormwings85]

In X4 they forgot to add the good part of X3 plus almost everything is unbalance: ship/weapons/shield numbers make no sense at all, missiles are too good (theres also no lock on them and the turrets cant do their job at all), turrets can only do 1 thingh (and they do it bad) and ships classes make no sense at all.
- Bombers have less missile than frigate, they have no unique missile, you can replace them also with fighters, etc... Problem: frigate looks like a bricks cos of the landing box Remove it, add a vertical launching system (like X3 Minotaur) and maybe 1 or 2 only "light missiles" turrets and we can have a true heavy missiles ship. Change than the class of the 2 bombers in the game to corvet like the Nemesis
- Any missile take 1 slot so the huge missile = smallest missile in the cargo. Also every ship can use any of the missiles. 20 heavy torpedo (i dont know if this is their name in the english version) on a M5
- The fighter have a fair numer of weapons but imho they need to have a dedicated slot for missile luncher or for more flare.
- Destroyers are not able to destroy anything. Still they dont have a real main weapon.
- No real anti-fighter/missile weapons like the flack artillery in X3 (and they were even cool to watch)
- Turrets should works at least like in X3 where you gave them a priority target but the were also able to shoot to other stuff
- Some of the fighter is slower than the frigate/corvette/bomber and these ships are 4-5 times bigger and they also should have different role. There was the same problem in X3 but not at this level
- Were are the XR XL turrets?
- Shield recharge delay can be reduced with the upgrade but the problem of beeing hit by 1 hp that put the shield on full cd need to be changed
- There still no explosion blast radius damage when a ship explode. I dont know if you saw a Xenon I explode but its quite pathetic...
- Imo the weapons generator system in X3 was better than the overheat added in XR

Good thing is that the AI looks smarter than in X3 but the Kaa'ak are more stupid than ever... AI knows how to use missiles, finaly...
Surface element was a XR thing and was good and was rly needed in the game.
Still need to try the wings and some other things but they dont looks bad.

This is not a problem of a new game cos X4 is supposed to be a new X not a game that started from 0. So ppl want to see the old good stuff that were working nice plus the new things/improvement that were needed to have a better game

[cTrix]

I had a fighter that was at low hull and a xenon going into a head on collision firefight. Trying to rush there to save the friendly. When the friendly fired a point blank missile and blew the xenon out with one hit. It was awesome to behold let me tell you.