Infinity: Battlescape News

Hey everybody. Before I get into the defailts of this new patch, I would like to take just a bit of time to explain where we are in the development process and where we are heading in the coming months.

As you may have noticed, we have recently released a new major update to the game. This update revamped the entire match loop, progression system and introduced asymmetry in the battles through battle staging. Each faction has to accomplish a number of objectives (attacking or protecting various structures around bases) to lead their team to victory. The feedback we have received from players on the new battle staging system has been overwhelmingly positive, but we are still fighting against a number of issues, mostly related to balance. The new update has introduced a lot of new factors to the equation and balancing has become much more difficult than before. We feel like we still have ways to go (probably until the whole 1.0 release, to be fair) before balance is in a good place, but we're doing progress every day, and that is why players feedback is very important.

We haven't posted a full patch note for the new 0.9 version, as there were too many changes to be listed. However, starting from today's patch we'll resume posting patch notes as usual. If you haven't played for a while and want to understand the big picture about what has been changed in 0.9, you can still read the update that we posted a few months ago:

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1079620/view/3181239594684206835

So where does that lead us ? First of all, the 0.9 gameplay revamp version took a lot of effort (and continuous crunch for many months) so we're using summer to slow down the pace a little bit, recharge our batteries and finish various gameplay experiments (for example, in today's patch we're introducing shield crossing penalties).

In parallel we've been working on the Cruiser's spinal weapon canon, which should be available in a patch before september (we're also aiming at finishing the carrier revamp and AI coordination/improvements by september). Once september comes, we're going to shift our focus towards shipping the game. That means a lot of development related to the database systems/backend (the progression system working accross servers for example), more UI improvements, and starting the work on tutorials/sandbox/solo mode.In parallel, our artists will start working on progression-system related rewards (medals, skins, bobbleheads, statues etc..) and we'll integrate them into the game.

We are looking at a 1.0 release some time in the first half of 2023.

Pictures of props / ground details that were added to planets in 0.9:











There are three big changes in this patch. The first one is a change in the targetting behavior of turrets, to increase their efficiency. They will now pre-rotate towards their target even if it's out of view
(below the turret's view horizon, or slightly out of range) to be ready to fire at it the instant it becomes hitable. In practise, this means that turrets deal damage sooner than before. AMS were already powerful, but this change to turrets behavior made them even more overpowered, so we had to nerf AMS. As a consequence, we also nerfed a little bit torpedoes by reverting some experimental changes we did in earlier patches. Please provide feedback on the new balance of AMS versus torpedoes and whether the bomber is in a good place versus capital ships.

The second big change introduces a penalty for attackers crossing an enemy base (or carrier's) spherical shield. The penalty instantly drains shield points (more for bigger ships) as a function of shield status, and also causes the shield generate rate to go down while staying within the shield.

For example, if a station's shield is at full capacity (100%), an enemy interceptor crossing the shield will lose 20% of its shield points, while a cruiser will lose 100% of them. As the shield gets damaged, the penalty gets weaker as well. This will give an edge to the defenders in the early stage of the battle which might help to balance the victory odds between attackers and defenders. It is possible that attackers are still favored, so please let us know if the balance of attackers vs defenders during battles is going in the right direction or needs more drastic changes as we suspect.

Finally, the rewards system was rewritten. Objective points now get rewarded for accomplishing objectives, and the player will receive a credits bonus when the battle ends. Objective points are also given as a reward for protecting objectives (by destroying enemy ships that were previously attacking the base and damaging it) or as support for repairing/resupplying allies. Here again please let us know if it is too easy or hard to obtain objective points depending on your actions.

[h2]Gameplay changes[/h2]

• Multiple turrets targetting behavior changes that should make them more reliable, and prioritize more than primary target that was selected (also: turrets will pre-rotate towards their target even if it's out of view or slightly out of range.
  Previously, the turret was resetting its orientation to idle the moment the target become out of view or range, which made a lot of turrets ping-pong between idle orientation and a new target). Overall, turrets should now anticipate their rotation towards their target before they start firing at them.
  
• Laser AMS turrets will now pre-oriente towards an enemy bomber before it has fired a torpedo, maximizing damage time on fired torpedoes as soon as they're launched
  
• Repair field is no longer interrupted when target is using its weapons
  
• Resupply field is no longer interrupted when target is being damaged
  
• Note that these two last changes also apply to spawns/hangars. This change should make the repair/resupply fields more reliable as they tended to easily get interrupted. This also means that you can use your weapons while you're getting repaired
  
• Missiles and torpedoes no longer detonate on death (only on direct impact or near their target) (Note: mines still detonate on death and cause splash damage). They simply explode, causing minimal damage, instead of causing massive splash damage as before
  
• Implemented shield interference system (shield points and regen rate are reduced when crossing an enemy base's shield)
  
• Revamped behavior of "G" key (select nearest threat) to priority ships attacking or targetting you (hopefully this time it'll be more in line with players feedback);
  

[h2]Rewards / Battle reports[/h2]

• Revamped reward system to give objective points when accomplishing objectives (and also a credits bonus when the battle ends)
  
• Protecting objectives (killing enemies that have been attacking objectives) now provides objective points
  
• Repairing/resuppling allies now provides objective points for support
  
• Revamped battle reports graphs (now showing attack vs defense power momentum, but there's also a graph for objective points earned, and differen colors)
  
• The battle reports dialog is now modal (takes priority over the rest of the UI)
  

[h2]Balance tweaks[/h2]

• Updated default cruiser hardpoints layout (especially the position and orientation of MK4 hardpoints);
  
• Doubled HP of station core reactor (to make it more difficult to get destroyed by attackers)
  
• Reduced HP on missiles
  
• Torpedo changes: small reduction of thrust power; decreased activation time to 3s (from 4s)
  
• Added Phalanx MK4 CIWS turret (high DPS but low range)
  
• Reduced damage of Railgun MK4 turret to 6 (from 8); reduced its turn rate to 25°/s (from 30°/s); slightly increased its lifetime to match the range of the fixed railgun variant
  
• Reduced bomber's default torpedo capacity to 10 (from 14)
  
• Increased Repair crew's mass to 10% (from 5%) and added a negative effect on energy recharge rate (-10%)
  
• Increased carrier's Heavy repair field's range to 2 Km (from 1.5 Km)
  
• Increased Flak MK4 turret's DPS (fire rate and burst damage) and reduced its mass to 30t (from 50t)
  
• Reduced Laser AMS MK3 turret's damage by half; incrreased its turn speed to 60°/s (from 45°/s) (Note: AMS became too powerful with the turrets targetting/behavior change)
  
• Increased Repair Beam MK3's turret rotation speed to 45°/s (from 25°/s)
  
• Tweaks to Heracles MK7 Turret: reduced yaw range to 50° (from 60°) and increased its DPS (also reduced heat generation)-
  
• Tweaks to Thunderbolt MK7 Turret: reduced yaw range to 50° (from 70°) and increased its DPS significantly
  

[h2]Bug fixes[/h2]

• Fixed chat box that could be opened through escape sequence conflict ctrl+m
  
• Fix for respawn countdown with large value (hours of waiting) upon ship refund, after the match has restarted
  

[h2]HUD / UI / Controls[/h2]

• Added weapons descriptions to ship menu
  
• Weapon DPS showed in ship menu now takes into account damage rate (for lasers/beams)
  
• Counter-measures count is no longer displayed on HUD when CMs are not available (like on capital ships)
  
• HUD now displays the amount of mines left below counter-measures (will also flash orange when under cooldown)
  

[h2]Misc[/h2]

• Added new Thunderbolt MK7 and Heracles MK7 projectiles effects
  

[h2]Gameplay Re-Vamp | Planetary Battles[/h2]
Last month we published our “Gameplay design plans,” this month we’ve been rigorously implementing and testing them. The “June 4th “Meet & Test” event produced a lot of valuable feedback, so a big thank you to everyone that provided comment, critique and criticism.

Up next, the Planetary Base assault loop will be re-introduced to the game. (It was temporarily removed so we could focus on Station Assault). We’ll be looking to receive more player feedback on the new gameplay loop, and further, on the state of the game.



[h2]Community Event and Testing[/h2]
We'll be hosting a livestream to cover the changes, and discuss the new gameplay. Including match progression, objectives for attacking / defending planetary bases, changes to player progression, unlocks, loadouts, missions and more.

Your feedback is important to us. We'll continue to track how the game plays, and how intuitive objectives are for new players. We're interested in hearing your thoughts on refining the Station Assault loop, Planetary Base assault loop, and team play mechanics. Let us know on the Discord Server #feedback channels - Discord Server Invite Link Here

[h2]Event Details[/h2]
Participation in the test will require activating the "Beta Branch" on STEAM - See Below for Details

It will take place on our "Private Test Server" (PTR) "US East"
Saturday, June 18th 2022 : Meet&Test 2 : Community Gameplay Re-Vamp, Public Event
19:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)
ATTN: Exact start time may be delayed if we encounter last minute technical issues.



[h2]Switch to "Beta-Branch" for this Event[/h2]
Participating in this test, will require the "Beta Branch" build on Steam.
To Change, Right-click Battlescape in your Steam library > go to "Properties" > and in "Betas" select "beta".
After the event, be sure to switch back to the default ("None") branch.
Once updated, and in game, join us on the PTR test server.

If you require assistance, or encounter issues, we will be available on the Discord #Tech-Support channel.

See you in game!

[h2]Gameplay Re-vamp[/h2]
Last month we made our Gameplay design plans public. Dubbed the "Gameplay Re-vamp," intended to communicate our development direction, and receive some initial feedback from the community on those plans. Since then we've conducted multiple internal tests, implimented most of the new gameplay features, and are ready to begin testing on a larger public scale.

[h2]Community Event and Testing[/h2]
We'll be hosting a livestream to cover the changes, and discuss the new gameplay. Including match progression, objectives for attacking / defending bases, changes to player progression, unlocks, loadouts, missions and more.

The Server will only be publicly available during the event weekend.
From Event Start time on June 4th (Saturday), and closing on June 6th (Monday) end of day.

Your feedback will be important to us. We'll be tracking how the game plays, first look feedback, your thoughts on refining the game loops, base assault, and team play mechancis. Let us know on the Discord Server #feedback channels - Invite Link Here.

Following the event we will continue to collect your feedback and engage in discussion. Another public test event will be scheduled shortly thereafter.



[h2]Event Details[/h2]
Participation in the test will require activating the "Beta Branch" on STEAM - See Below for Details

It will take place on our "Private Test Server" (PTR) "US East Location"
Saturday, June 4th 2022 : Meet&Test : Community Gameplay Re-Vamp, Public Event
19:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)

In game VOIP is available within squads, alternatively, Join Discord (link in game menu / in this post) for general comms.

[h2]Switch to "Beta-Branch" for this Event[/h2]
Participating in this test, will require the "Beta Branch" build on Steam.
To Change, Right-click Battlescape in your Steam library > go to "Properties" > and in "Betas" select "beta".
After the event, be sure to switch back to the default ("None") branch.
Once updated, and in game, join us on the PTR test server.

If you require assistancem, or encounter issues, we will be available on the Discord #Tech-Support channel.

See you in game!

Join us for some PvE and PvP gameplay on the USEast Server.


Saturday, April 30th 2022 : Meet&Fleet Community Event
19:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)
USEast Sever, unless otherwise posted prior to event

In game VOIP is available within squads, alternatively, Join Discord (link in game menu) for general comms.

Greetings everyone. We’ve previously mentioned that we’d start off 2022 with a major gameplay design revamp. In this update I'd like to provide some more details on what to expect, and what we’re planning for the revamp.

I'd like to start by saying that we're pretty happy with the core loop gameplay, our "30 seconds of fun". The feedback we've received from players is pretty unanimous: the huge chaotic battles involving hundreds of ships, exciting dogfights, and visual effects of explosions lighting up the battle smog have made some fairly unique experiences in gaming. This is clearly the strongest part of our game, so we don’t intend on changing the core experience much beyond balance tweaks.

However as we scale game systems up, the experience has tended to break down. This includes gameplay features that distract from our core combat experience. Our general conclusion is that we need to re-enforce what’s been working (build on our strengths) and clearly define the broader gameplay loops.

So, in January, we took a step back, and looked at Battlescape from an unbiased and broad perspective (as much as we could). In order to better understand what parts of the game work, and how to expand and improve its gameplay at a larger scale. As part of this “reflection” we looked at other games with similar concepts in scope, such as Planetside 2.

We still want the game to support hundreds of players per server, but the gameplay needs to be more engaging when the number of players on that server is low. All current game systems need to complement each other, and any extra complexity that does not bring value to that gameplay needs to be trimmed down. Reducing gameplay complexity and streamlining current game systems will have a direct impact on the development time required long term. This reduction in complexity will enable us to spend more time on improving game systems, and further refine the gameplay experience.

Please note that none of the following has been “set in stone” yet, and the gameplay revamp plan that we're presenting here is wholly hypothetical. We still need to implement new features, conduct internal tests, make revisions, and test some more until we’re satisfied enough to push the design to our game servers.

So, now is the best time to provide feedback, before we venture too far down the rabbit hole…





Currently, matches are structured around the total destruction of your opponent's bases within a match. We plan on keeping the “destruction” condition for bases (no capture mechanics) but change the flow of battles as they move from base to base in the larger match.

Battle flow is currently directed by the AI Commander, and determines which team goes on offense based on the outcome of the previous battle. Battle wins keep an attacker on the offensive from battle to battle, whereas the loss of a battle places the losing team on the defensive. In this system, Team A could (and often does) snowball victory after victory on Team B, as each victory is rewarded with another battle on offense.

The new design is a turn based system that tracks team wins and losses. Instead of victory resulting in another offensive battle, the next battle’s offense / defense roles are reversed. In this proposed system, a battle begins with Team A on offense, and Team B on defense. Upon conclusion of the battle, Team A will go on defense, and it’s Team B’s turn on offense.

In the current game, multiple battles can spawn on the same base over time, so long as the base has not yet been destroyed. In the new design, battles will only happen once at each location. However, the outcome of those battles will contribute directly to team victory points.

Which brings us to “victory points”. We'll start by keeping things simple, with each base worth a point or two for a victorious attack. Larger bases may have more points than smaller bases (yet to be determined via testing). A successful defense will prevent the attacking team from achieving their primary objective (destroying the reactor) and prevent the attacker from gaining the “Victory points” associated with that objective.

Once either team has some # (10) of accumulated victory points, a “decisive” (sudden death) battle is triggered. If the attacking team wins that battle then they win the match. If the attacking team loses, then the defending team will have another opportunity to attack. This continues until a “decisive” battle is won by the attacking team.

[h2]Hypothesized outcomes:[/h2]

• The match will become more predictable in terms of progression, duration and how many bases are left to attack or defend.
  
• Team objectives become more clearly defined
  
• The game is more accessible to new players and everybody knows at any point in time what the current state of the match is
  

Addressing the economic side of the game has been a major challenge. Unfortunately, we've never really found the ideal balance. In terms of design, the major issue is the conflict we have between the nature of match progression (bases get destroyed so there are less and less active bases as the match progresses) and economy.

More specifically, team “credits” income is highest at the beginning of a match and dwindles towards the end. This means that the longer the match goes on and the more it snowballs in favor of one team. After the mid-game it becomes near impossible for the losing team to make a comeback and players have diminishing motivation to remain on the losing team.

The new design separates the team’s economies from in-game match progression. A way to think of this, is each corporation funds their military campaign from outside the battlescape (or star system). Instead of tying team resources and currency directly to the number of factories and successfully docked haulers within the match.

This means both teams' economies are fixed at the start of the match, and will maintain balance throughout the early, mid, and late game phases. We feel this could solve the match balance and “victory snowballing” issues, and provide the losing team a chance to reverse momentum.

For the player, we’ve decided to separate the in-game credits used to purchase new ships, and career “credits” which will be persistently tied to your personal account or pilot progression.

The in-game credits will be referred to as “ship points” or (SP temporary name):

• Starting # of SP will be high enough to afford a capital ship
  
• The SP will increase at a fixed rate over time
  
• SP reset at the end of each match
  
• SP are capped, at cost of the “most expensive ship” in game
  

Our expectation is that capital ships will become more accessible, while becoming more valuable. As the decision to spawn one depletes available SP, and the cost to re-spawn another one requires time to wait for SP to re-accumulate. Ideally, this will reduce “Cruiser Spam” wherein players amass massive quantities of in game credits, and produce a never-ending supply of buffed out cruisers spawn after spawn… snowballing along with team credits etc.

In addition to player rank, a player’s “career” will advance via the accumulation of “personal credits.” They will be earned in-game based on individual actions; collecting bounties, accomplishing battle objectives, maintaining kill streaks, etc.

These personal credits or (PC temporary name) will be used to permanently unlock weapons and upgrades. Once unlocked, the item will be available to mount on any ship it can be fitted to, without impacting SP cost to spawn that ship.

This will allow players to predictably unlock items, build custom loadouts, and consistently have those unlocked items available to them in future matches. Additional factors, such as rank, may also have an impact on which items are able to be unlocked.

We'll also be introducing a third personal “currency” cosmetic points (CP temporary name) which you'll receive as rewards for various achievements. CP will eventually be used to unlock cosmetics like ship skins, tags, bobbleheads and other in-game goodies.





One of the core issues with the game is the chaotic, unstructured and primitive nature of the battles. We currently throw two fleets at each other in proximity to a ground base or space station, and “let it play out.” Ships fly chaotically toward each other, pick off targets, and without any clear objectives, wind up duking it out until the last ships have been ground down to spare parts…

Our new design will introduce asymmetrical team objectives. Once a battle starts, the attacking team's goal will be to destroy the core reactor of the enemy's base. The base is protected by a large base shield, which can be taken down by destroying the base’s shield generators. Shields also protect the base integrity, defenses and other modules from incoming capital ship's fire. Secondary optional objectives include base defenses (including strong AMS), hangars (that can be temporarily destroyed) or warp interdiction towers. Once the shields on the reactor go down it can be attacked directly and destroyed, marking a clear victory for the attacking team.

We’ll expand on the Base Assault “loop” as we further develop it through testing.

The defending team's objective will be to protect their base from the incoming assault, destroy the incoming fleet and target the enemy's carrier(s).

We'll rebalance the carrier around its deploy abilities (both for players and AI squads) to further define its role as “momentum maintenance” for the attacking team. After a great deal of discussion, we’ve decided to remove the “Take-Over-AI” feature. This should further increase the carrier's tactical value (as a forward spawn) for the attacking team; we can reintroduce it if needed.

This new battle staging plan will require major AI improvements. AIs will need to be able to attack tactical objectives just like players, and learn how to fly in squads, form up and regroup after an attack.

Ideally, battles should feel less chaotic and more structured with clear objectives. Players will see those objectives highlighted on the HUD, and will be rewarded for accomplishing those objectives through battle progression feedback, and career progression through in-game actions taken.



The changes made to our in-game economy has made factories, and the haulers, somewhat purposeless. We'll be able to re-use the factory assets for ground bases, by merging them with the existing military bases, and expanding military base layouts.

We aren't sure what to do with the hauler yet, though, as we had been considering it as a player-flyable ship. It is possible that we'll simply cut the hauler from the game entirely, we’re open to ideas here.

We are also removing the “tech levels” and the “scouting/scanning” mechanics. This was already handled by the AI Commander, and makes the early match a hide and seek nightmare, especially for new players.



Despite some simplifications, and removing some features, we still have plans to add more content to the game. In particular, we’re continuing to work on new weapons systems, passive mines, spinal mounted weapons for the cruiser, and nukes for orbital bombardment.

From the beginning we’ve had plans to broaden the scale of the solar system to include multiple Battlescapes. This is still something we’d like to do, however it could re-introduce the same complexity problems, and extend match time. While we haven't decided to cut this feature completely, it may yet be. Especially if the new match loop works well. In this case, we'll still add more planets and environments to the game for match variation.



I’ll conclude, by restating the hypothetical nature of this new design direction. While nothing has been “set in stone” yet, we do have an established general direction. We regularly take player feedback into account when discussing new design elements / features, and will often spend time reflecting on proposed solutions offered by members of our active player base. So while this post is not complete in scope, or completely detailed, do let us know what you think.

We’ll be testing internal builds of the new design soon, and will have more information on public release timelines / schedules once we’ve tested the larger design elements, and game progression.

-Flavien Brebion