1. We've removed some functionality from SMD in preparation for a migration to new forum software. We expect to make the move before August.

    Game Balance DISCUSSION

    Discussion in 'Council' started by Valiant70, Dec 22, 2015.

    1. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      I think half would be far too much of a mass nerf. Armor is already VERY effective. A slight nerf (perhaps a mass reduction of .25 for standard and advanced?) would be nice, though.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • Funny Funny x 1
    2. Keptick

      Keptick Overkill titan builder

      Joined:
      Sep 26, 2013
      Messages:
      3,988
      Don't you mean a buff? Reducing armor mass would buff it, not nerf it.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    3. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      It's a nerf to the object's mass :P
       
    4. Keptick

      Keptick Overkill titan builder

      Joined:
      Sep 26, 2013
      Messages:
      3,988
      Uh... your use of the term is slightly confusing (and wrong). Nerfing implies making something less effective/powerful/good. The reduction of a value doesn't automatically qualify as a nerf. In armor's case, reducing mass would be a buff, since it makes it more efficient.
       
    5. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      No, nerfing implies reduction. Do you think that "nerfing X's cost" is an incorrect way of wording something as well?
       
    6. Keptick

      Keptick Overkill titan builder

      Joined:
      Sep 26, 2013
      Messages:
      3,988
      "In video gaming, a nerf is a change to a game that makes something less effective or desirable. The word can be used as a verb to describe that change" That quote is from wikipedia, but definitions from other sources state the same thing.

      Nerfing something's cost generally implies a price increase. Depending on the context, using that sentence could be wrong, yes. For example the NPC price of an item in an MMO being increased would be a nerf, not a buff, since it's disadvantageous for players.

      But seriously, this is completely off-topic. You just used a word wrong, it's no big deal. I was just pointing it out because your post was confusing af. You can keep arguing if you want, but it's not an argument you'll win.
       
      #46 Keptick, Jun 6, 2016
      Last edited: Jun 7, 2016
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • Informative Informative x 1
    7. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      You are failing to account for the fact that those 300 ion modules provide more protection than 300 shield caps would.
       
    8. ChibiMushi

      Joined:
      May 24, 2016
      Messages:
      14
      I'll check my math. ~98 per sheild cap module.
      98*300=29,100 hit points.

      you need 5% of the ships mass to achieve the full 60% bonus from ion systems. so its 6000 blocks. thats about 300 for 5%.
      That's the full 60% bonus! The ship has 6000 shield. So 60% of 6000 would be 3,600.

      Conclution:
      300 Cap modules. +29,100
      300 Ion modules +3600

      I know that rechargeres make the math a lot more complicated. But here is the simple version.
      The ship has a 50 module shield system. 300 ion modules give it a 60% bonus. Because of its large mass.
      The ship has a 50 module shield system. 300 cap modules give it a 650% bouns. It's now a 350 shield system. 7 times larger.

      In any case, The issue of 300 caps or 300 ion being better will always exist regardless of whether the formula uses mass or number of shield modules. Having the ion formula effect shields, but be based on something entirely different creates strange cases where it effects the shields too much or two little. The only reasons I can imagine they choose mass rather than shield modules is because, one it was rushed and easier since they use that same formula on most effects., two, less likely, they want armor ships to struggle to gain more shield through ions than an equivalently sized standard hull ship. I say that is less likely, because if they wanted it to scale off armor HP they would have choose to use armor HP instead of mass.

      Unless I've mistaken the purpose of the ion system and it's only meant for low mass, fast moving, high shield ships(doomcubes) to combat sluggishly powerful armor ships that are dominating the PVP scene. (I know nothing about pvp as I hate doomcubes) In which case, i'd like to know and would happily withdraw the proposal. But I am dead set on a useful slowing offensive system utilizing the useless effect, Stop.
       
      #48 ChibiMushi, Jun 12, 2016
      Last edited: Jun 12, 2016
      • Agree Agree x 1
    9. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      Alright, first off, shield caps run off this formula. Shields = CapacitorCount * 0.9791797578 * 110 + 220. Which means that your 50 shield caps are actually 5605 shields.
      Secondly, that's not how the math for ion works. You don't take 60% of your shield capacitor number. You multiply the shields by the inverse of the armor. So, 5605 * (100/60) = 9,341.
      Which means the "conclution" is really...
      300 Cap modules. +32,532
      300 Ion modules. +3,736


      Now that that's out of the way. What your problem is is that you have way too few capacitors on your ship. 50 capacitors on a 6000 block ship is only 0.8% of the blocks! I don't think any of my armor tanks have such incredibly low %s. Ion is not meant to be used on ships with such incredibly low %s of shield caps.
      Let's look at a ship of the same size with a more reasonable shield capacitor count. How does 10% of the ship, 600 blocks, sound? That's 64,845 shields by default.
      Now, let's add up ion vs shields.
      300 Cap modules. +32,532
      300 Ion modules. +43,230

      Would you look at that. It's almost like your ship was poorly designed for use with ion.

      Ion is better than shields, block per block, except at incredibly low shield capacitor to mass ratios, and it only gets better as you add more shields to your vessel.

      Yes, you have definitely mistaken the purpose of the ion system. However, it is not meant only for a class of ship you have insultingly implied can only be doomcubes. It is useful on any ship that isn't a pure armor tank.

      Learn how systems work before you try and change them.
       
      • Funny Funny x 3
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • Informative Informative x 1
    10. Master_Artificer

      Master_Artificer Press F to pay respects

      Joined:
      Feb 17, 2015
      Messages:
      1,588
      I think we should remove the power softcap on stations.
      And remove the ability to have swarm logic on them. (build turrets damnit!)

      Might bring us spaceforts that are viable and super tanky without being super laggy.
      Shoot just forgot you cannot have passive effects on stations.

      COUNCILORS, FIX THAT!
      Then we can talk about stations that can actually defend stuff.
       
      • Agree Agree x 6
    11. Valck

      Joined:
      Jun 27, 2013
      Messages:
      892
      Counterproposal: Buff warheads to actually make them useful, and implement countermeasures for the stated use case; ie.
      • declare war upon being hit by a warhead (or just detecting an active warhead within scanner range)
      • make scanners work on stations/with logic activation
      • implement better station protection mechanics
      There have been multiple threads for each and every one of these suggestions.
      --- Updated post (merge), Jun 15, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 15, 2016 ---
      With kind permission I'll replicate this private conversation here:

      -----------

      Undeniably so, you're right about the short term bandaids, but I think it's better not to move in the wrong direction first, even only as a bandaid, because these are basic gameplay issues that need to be addressed, and soon.

      -----------

      I understand your frustration, but since it's not within the scope of a simple config change to selectively disable warheads against stations, I think a full-on approach with a broad scope is required to address the underlying problems.

      In the meantime I'd suggest discussing this with the respective server owner(s) and see if they will nerf or completely disable warheads if that is a common issue on your server(s).
       
      • Agree Agree x 2
    12. Master_Artificer

      Master_Artificer Press F to pay respects

      Joined:
      Feb 17, 2015
      Messages:
      1,588
      So what are councilers opinions and stuff they are pushing for right now?
       
    13. Ithirahad

      Ithirahad Arana'Aethi

      Joined:
      Nov 14, 2013
      Messages:
      4,113
      Irrelevant, apparently.
      </snark>
       
    14. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      Wrong thread, dude.

      Anyway, no, it's not really that high, since one tick can only break one armor block, and it's still got the same DPS, just spread out more.
       
    15. Master_Artificer

      Master_Artificer Press F to pay respects

      Joined:
      Feb 17, 2015
      Messages:
      1,588
      But the game struggles when people use explosive cannon cannon waffles, this will still create issues.

      We need a different mechanic like on how beams work.
      Maybe when they hitscan an object, they count out how many blocks they drew a line through and divide the beams damage equally amoung blocks touched by it, no ticks just one raycast.
      It would certianly give the feel of beams slicing through ships.
      Issue arising that it would just totally be overpowered but its somethin'.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    16. Lecic

      Lecic Convicted Lancake Abuser

      Joined:
      Apr 14, 2013
      Messages:
      5,101
      Considering how the game can handle dozens to hundreds of salvage beams all ticking at 40 ticks per second at once without issue, I think we'll be fine.
       
    17. Gonzalo

      Joined:
      Feb 1, 2016
      Messages:
      299
      I don't know what kind of NASA computer you are using, but when I mine my fps is almost always cut to a quarter.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
    18. Master_Artificer

      Master_Artificer Press F to pay respects

      Joined:
      Feb 17, 2015
      Messages:
      1,588
      Huh, my craptop doesnt have any fps issues when mining unless it is like a planet eater
       
      • Agree Agree x 2
    19. Ghent96

      Joined:
      Mar 15, 2014
      Messages:
      235
      Game balance, eh? This is really easy...

      1) let the players tweak it however they want.
      2) fix beams
      3) fix NPC / AI factions outside just -1 and -2
      4) let the players tweak it however they want

      See how easy that was?
       
      • Funny Funny x 2
    20. Master_Artificer

      Master_Artificer Press F to pay respects

      Joined:
      Feb 17, 2015
      Messages:
      1,588
      unfix Shield Supplies :u
       
      • Like Like x 1
      • Agree Agree x 1
    Loading...