Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dreyven]

Let's say a ship has a base flux dissipation of 2000. After AE, it has 500 less. Let's say AE costs 20 OP. To compensate, you need to spend 50 OP.
Let's try another ship of the same class with a base dissipation of 1000, 250 less after AE. AE costs the same. To compensate, you have to spend 25 OP.
Let's just increase the OP cost to fit the first ship and remove the percentage penalty.
The first ship has to spend 70 OP to get AE now.
While the second ship, guess what, has to spend 70 OP too!
So, let's try setting AE's OP to 25 now.
Well, the first ship now has 25 extra OP!
See, they show different results.

First of all i have to say that you are exaggerating it a bit...
1000 flux dissipation is the maximum amount of flux dissipation a current ship has, so your comparison is kinda inflating the numbers a bit
even if you take 2 ships where one has DOUBLE the amount of flux dissipation that the other ship has... with the bigger one having 1000 flux dissipation, your numbers get cut to half, this is for cruisers where AE really should be a heavy investment
also you still need to consider that you don't necessarily have to compensate the losses.... you could adjust your weapon setup to use less flux or OP, this is what balancing is about


But, that wasn't my Point...
My point was that this system is SUPPOSED to make AE a more costly investment for "High tech" ships (those have high flux dissipation rates)
the effect you are describing is actually what it wants to achieve
reason might be that "high tech" ships were extremly strong with the AE boost, also they are generally very fast to begin with so that you ended up with "too fast" ships

to make up for it you have to spend an amount of OP depending on your flux dissipation rate
this is generally 25% of base dissipation /10 flux dissipation/OP = 1-3 OP (on standart frigates 100-300 flux dissipation)


a flat increase in OP would nerf AE in an entirely different aspect
ships with more weapon mount have gernally more OP

a flat increase in OP, let's say 3... will be a more costly investment to a ship with 30 total OP (10%) than on a ship with 60 OP [for easier numbers] (5%)
this will affect ships with a lot of weapon mounts less than ships with less weapon mounts
you would balance different ships
(this would be usefull if ships with a lot of weapon mounts were too strong with AE, like... the lasher)

[Tarran]

First of all i have to say that you are exaggerating it a bit...
1000 flux dissipation is the maximum amount of flux dissipation a current ship has, so your comparison is kinda inflating the numbers a bit

Inflation does not matter for my point.

also you still need to consider that you don't necessarily have to compensate the losses.... you could adjust your weapon setup to use less flux or OP, this is what balancing is about

That does not matter for my point.

But, that wasn't my Point...
My point was that this system is SUPPOSED to make AE a more costly investment for "High tech" ships (those have high flux dissipation rates)
the effect you are describing is actually what it wants to achieve
reason might be that "high tech" ships were extremly strong with the AE boost, also they are generally very fast to begin with so that you ended up with "too fast" ships

I am not arguing against this.



You are missing my point. My point is flat OP cost cannot be compared to the percentage reduction.

[Dreyven]

You are missing my point. My point is flat OP cost cannot be compared to the percentage reduction.

ofc... we could just for the sake of it turn it into a math discussion instead of a gameplay discussion

But... we could do that
you would need to take a look at the variants and look at the amount of "customization" OP that are available to spend on vents/capacitors
when we got this number... we can get the max. possible flux dissipation of that variant
then we can go ahead and evaluate how much % of the total flux dissipation a certain increase in OP cost is for that variant
we got ourself a way to give a flat OP increase a % value...
now we can compare this % value with the impact a 25% reduction of the base dissipation has

this leads us to what i described previously
the current system gives a bigger penalty to ships with a high base dissipation
a flat increase gives a bigger penalty to ships with less spare OP/ a lower total dissipation

the current system will harm your total dissipation even if you have enough OP for maximum vents while having AE
a flat increase will not harm your total dissipation if you have enough OP for maximum vents, but it will force you to free up OP if you can't afford the higher price to begin with

[arwan]

errr... what is AE

the change to Augmented engines didn't affect the way i played the game.. i didn't consider them worth the cost before the nerf so i didn't use them then. now i just have extra incentive to not use them.

i tend to try and fit the biggest weapons i can on my ships so an augmentation has to really be good or help most/all of my weapons systems for me to consider it. and since i am using the largest guns i can my OP are at a serious premium considering how few you get at the moment in the alpha. (with no level up skills implemented yet)

[Tarran]

ofc... we could just for the sake of it turn it into a math discussion instead of a gameplay discussion

Oh really, you're trying to make me look like someone who's trying to derail the thread? When I'm just defending my points?

But... we could do that
you would need to take a look at the variants and look at the amount of "customization" OP that are available to spend on vents/capacitors
when we got this number... we can get the max. possible flux dissipation of that variant
then we can go ahead and evaluate how much % of the total flux dissipation a certain increase in OP cost is for that variant
we got ourself a way to give a flat OP increase a % value...
now we can compare this % value with the impact a 25% reduction of the base dissipation has

Hull, not Variant. But regardless, fine then, I'll compare the Condor and Medusa, two extremes. This is assuming they can spend all their points into flux reduction. If you want to do it with restrictions, be my guest.

No AE:
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation without AE is 460
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation without AE is 1300

If AE is percentage:
AE costs for both is 15 OP, what it is in-game.
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation with AE is 282.5 Loss: 38.6%
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation with AE is 1050 Loss: 19.2%

If AE is a flat increase:
AE costs for both is 18, so the max possible dissipation for the Condor is (roughly) the same.
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation with AE is 280 Loss: 39.1% (within reasonable parameters)
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation with AE is 1120 Loss: 13.8%

As you can see, the percentage loss is not the same. Thus, flat cannot be compared to percentage.

this leads us to what i described previously
the current system gives a bigger penalty to ships with a high base dissipation
a flat increase gives a bigger penalty to ships with less spare OP/ a lower total dissipation

I. Am. Not. Arguing. Against. This.

the current system will harm your total dissipation even if you have enough OP for maximum vents while having AE
a flat increase will not harm your total dissipation if you have enough OP for maximum vents, but it will force you to free up OP if you can't afford the higher price to begin with

You're just reenforcing my point with an unrelated point.

[Nanostrike]

This patch made it almost like a new game and I'm pretty happy with it.  However, there are SOME things that need looked at and still a lot to add.  Here's my likes, dislikes, and suggestions.  Ones in bold are the ones I'd REALLY like to see addressed.

Stuff that is awesome:
-THREE.  FREAKING.  STATION.  All with different ships and weapons.  Not only is this awesome for organization's sake, but it means that you can potentially become a Tri-Tachyon fleet and fight the Hegemony instead of being forced to work with 'em because they have the only station.  Also, it means more convoys head in and potentially bring in more rare ships and equipment.
-Due to the increased stations, it's USUALLY possible to find whatever weapon you want, especially if it's supposed to be common.  And certain weapons seem rarer, like the Salamanders, because they aren't on sale everywhere.  Meanwhile, no longer are Tactical Lasers and Light Autocannons super-rare.
-More medium missile options.  This was sorely needed.
-No more Pirate Scout fleets everywhere.  Most Pirate fleets now have at least a couple of ships and put up a fight.
-Talons seem to actually survive now.  Sometimes.

Changes I'm not liking and/or need tweaking:
-Not liking the Wasps being "Green".  As someone said, it gives penalties to their default stats.  I haven't checked, but I think this applies to Mining Drones too.
-Not thrilled with the Augmented Engines and Advanced Optics changes.  AE is fine on SOME ships (Hounds are a good example), but on most that really need the speed, the 25% flux dissipation penalty is just insane.  And most Energy Weapons turn-rate penalty with AO more than kills the ranged benefits.
-The "Speed penalty" when you lose a battle needs looked at.  Particularly if you completely destroy the enemy fleet.  I think it should only be half the speed reduction and/or duration of usual if the entire enemy fleet is completely captured and/or scrapped.  It'd represent salvage time, yet not cripple you from further fights.  If the enemy fleet escapes/retreats, however, the speed penalty is definitely needed.
-Ballistic Weapons still tend to always run out of ammo in long battles.  I realize this is a weakness for them, but some way to address it would be nice.  See my suggestions on it for a couple ideas.
-Swarm SRMs seem far too slow and are regularly outrun by the Fighters and Frigates they're supposed to kill.
-The Annihilator Rocket Launcher still seems like crap.  I cannot use it well against anything.  This could potentially be a cool weapon (Maybe allow it to fire a burst of unguided missiles that head relatively straight in each shot?)
-In most fights, Tri-Tachyon tend to DESTROY both Pirates and Hegemony in battles pretty consistently, even with smaller fleets.  The "It costs more so it's balanced" argument doesn't seem to apply to them.

Suggestions:
-More Medium-sized missiles.  The pods are nice, but we need some actual bigger-sized, medium missiles like the Pilium.  Medium-sized Torpedos, anti-fighter missiles, and the like are all needed.  Medium/large sized BOMBS could be interesting.  Perhaps some missiles/torpedos that do AoE damage?  Or heavily-armored ones that can get past weaker Point Defense systems.
-On that note...Swarm SRM POD for my medium slots, please.  I would love to see a crapton of those things go flying out and decimate a frigate or fighter squadron.
-Make some (Albeit inconvenient) way for Ballistic ships to resupply ammo if they run completely out.  Two ideas are a resupply ship that can dock with them in battle and refill their ammo up to 25% (Both ships would be very vulnerable during this docking and it would take time.) or having the ship able to "Retreat for resupply", be gone for several minutes (While still taking up FP!), and able to come back with 50%-75% of their ammo.  For balance reasons, I think this should be limited to only ammo-using direct-fire weapons (So it would include the Anti-Matter cannon and the like) and not missiles.
-Brawler needs adjusting.  The poor thing is slow to the point of near-uselessness most of the time in the early-game.  If anything, make people not start the game in one with the terrible loadout of 2 Assault Chainguns and 2 Annihilator Rockets.
-I know this one may be hard, but...add in SOME way to lock Omni-Shields to one direction while you aim in a different direction.  My strafing in most ships with Omni shields is crippled because I can't keep the cursor forward so I face the enemy while keeping my shields behind me so a bunch of Salamander MRMs don't EMP me.  Meanwhile, the AI seems perfectly able to do so.
-Some weaker fighter types (Wasps, Talons, ect) need some AI tweaking so they don't fly straight at capital ships and get insta-killed by Flak Cannons.

[Alex]

Minor point here - destroyers are limited to a maximum of 20 vents.

So, no AE:
Condor: max 310 (base: 110)
Medusa: max 600 (base: 400)

AE costs the Condor ~28 dissipation (9% of max)
AE costs the Medusa 100 dissipation (17% of max)

Now, there's also the Flux Distributor to further complicate things, which gives 100 more max dissipation to each ship (at double the OP cost of vents, per flux/second).

[Reshy]

The problem with the nerf to optics is that it's now just impractical.  It being 'Too good' doesn't exactly sit well with me as you still have to take penalties to other areas in order to put it in.  Same goes with augmented engines, it's already kinda laughable on capital ships and they get hurt the most by it.  It costs too much, has too high of a penalty, and gives too little.  That's the problem.  Saying that hull mods that are good should be nerfed makes me wonder that outside of a gimmick what exactly are they intended to be used for if any of them that are good for more than specialized craft.  Because if they're not intended for anything but specialized craft than why have them in the first place.  It comes across as a sort of false choice, you COULD use advanced optics, but why would you want to?  Currently it's almost as silly as if they put a turret rotation penalty or a range penalty on the integrated point defense AI.

The saves are in .xml files, you can edit them with notepad or any other text editor.

It doesn't work that way.  Usually ends up erroring.

i think that's working as intended, he wanted the process of aquiring weapons be a more meaningfull process

Except it doesn't really end up being the case for me, all it did was add another 'chore' I have to deal with when playing.  It's not like I can make a fleet out of all the random weapons I find, I'm still limited to the small selection of weapons that they can realistically use, and then find enough for the ship to fight which is rare.  Speaking of being rare, this also creates an issue in that in order to find weapons for your recently acquired destroyer you must go into battle with stronger fleets to get parts for it despite your destroyer not being reasonably functional.  Sure you could kit it out with the crappy small weapons you have lying around, but honestly with how hard ships are to gain and how quickly they can be lost it makes 'Pyrrhic Victories' more common and more frustrating.  

I mean most of these wouldn't be a problem if they had a reasonable repair or reclaim rate, but they don't.  In fact, even if they do get repaired you still lose weapons.  How about that for progression?  If your fleet was smaller but innately stronger/faster/etc. like each ship in your fleet is a protagonist versus an army of mooks than it wouldn't be much of an issue.  But more often than not they're weaker than the other ships that respawn (always stocked with full weapons, crew, and what not) and your fleet doesn't.  So while the computer can take endless losses without being phased you can hardly take any without being crippled.  This update only compounded the 'Pyrrhic Victory' problem of before.

Now, there's also the Flux Distributor to further complicate things, which gives 100 more max dissipation to each ship (at double the OP cost of vents, per flux/second).

I got a question, why not just make it so that vents over a certain number double in price and change name?  For example say you don't have enough to add 5 of these inefficient vents, but you have enough for 2 or 3.  I don't see why that shouldn't be something to be allowed.  Same with the capacitors.

[Tarran]

Minor point here - destroyers are limited to a maximum of 20 vents.

I know, as I noted here:

Hull, not Variant. But regardless, fine then, I'll compare the Condor and Medusa, two extremes. This is assuming they can spend all their points into flux reduction. If you want to do it with restrictions, be my guest.

I would have done with the vent limit, but I unfortunately did most of the calculations before remembering and I didn't want to bother doing it again since the argument is over such a small matter. Plus, I figure Dreyven should do some calculation himself rather than me doing all the work.

Still shouldn't effect my point, though.

Edit: Just tested it, didn't effect my point.

[Dreyven]

As you can see, the percentage loss is not the same. Thus, flat cannot be compared to percentage.

We will never get the exact same numbers with different systems....
but, that's not what we want, do we?
to compare things they don't have to be equal
a comparison is often a tool to see what system fits the purpose better

Hull, not Variant. But regardless, fine then, I'll compare the Condor and Medusa, two extremes. This is assuming they can spend all their points into flux reduction. If you want to do it with restrictions, be my guest.

that's the reason i accused you of "math discussion"
completly ignoring gameplay elements and asuming otherwise

No AE:
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation without AE is 460
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation without AE is 1300

Condor max dissipation = 310
Medusa max dissipation = 600

If AE is percentage:
AE costs for both is 15 OP, what it is in-game.
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation with AE is 282.5 Loss: 38.6%
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation with AE is 1050 Loss: 19.2%

If AE is a flat increase:
AE costs for both is 18, so the max possible dissipation for the Condor is (roughly) the same.
Condor: Base 110, OP 35. Max possible dissipation with AE is 280 Loss: 39.1% (within reasonable parameters)
Medusa: Base 400, OP 90. Max possible dissipation with AE is 1120 Loss: 13.8%

AE percentage: (assuming you want no weapons on your condor and only 55 OP for weapons on the medusa)
condor = 282.5 Loss: 9.8%
Medusa = 500 Loss: 16.66%

AE percentage with variants:
Condor support variant: 17 OP
102.5 max flux dissipation

Medusa support Variant: 18 OP
330 max flux dissipation
Attack Variant: 24 OP
390 max flux dissipation


AE Flat: (17 OP, we can't go over that in our example... condor support only has 17)
condor support variant: 17 spare OP
resulting in 0 OP for vents
110 Flux dissipation max

Medusa Point defense variant: 18 spare OP
1 vent
410 flux dissipation max
Attack Variant: 24 spare OP
7 vents
470 max flux dissipation


now we got values where we can compare something... (although the total different ship types might be in the way [flight decks])
what do we see?
1. certain values of flat increase will achieve quite similiar results on certain variants
2. on others they won't, this is where a higher increase flat would be needed...
3. the more spare OP you got, the less will a flat increase affect you

now we can "compare" them to what fit's the purpose better...

if the purpose is to weaken high base flux dissipation ships
the % based system fits better

[Upgradecap]

Let the ae nerf go. Arguing to much about it here.

[Wyvern]

Honestly, I'm taking a "wait and see" approach to the augmented engines nerf, at this point.  It's rare for me to actually max out a ship's flux dissipation abilities, so - once character advancement is in - I figure I can probably just compensate with more vents and treat it as a (very expensive) mod, rather than an a (generally) unusably crippling mod.

The advanced optics nerf, though, still really hurts (except - as has been noted - on specific ships that didn't care about turrets anyway, for whom the nerf does nothing).
If you need more of a balance for advanced optics than its high ordnance point cost, may I suggest having it make beam weapons more fragile - easier to get knocked out by armor / hull damage and/or take longer to repair - and also slightly increase beam weapon flux generation (say, 10 to 25%)?  That would actually be a meaningful penalty for *all* ship classes, but would still allow use of advanced optics with point defense beams.

[Alex]

I know, as I noted here:

Hull, not Variant. But regardless, fine then, I'll compare the Condor and Medusa, two extremes. This is assuming they can spend all their points into flux reduction. If you want to do it with restrictions, be my guest.

I would have done with the vent limit, but I unfortunately did most of the calculations before remembering and I didn't want to bother doing it again since the argument is over such a small matter. Plus, I figure Dreyven should do some calculation himself rather than me doing all the work.

Still shouldn't effect my point, though.

Edit: Just tested it, didn't effect my point.

Ahh yes, sorry - didn't see that. I thought part of your point was that the Condor was affected more than the Medusa (which it's not, but the percentages seemed to indicate otherwise), so that's why I chimed in.

I got a question, why not just make it so that vents over a certain number double in price and change name?  For example say you don't have enough to add 5 of these inefficient vents, but you have enough for 2 or 3.  I don't see why that shouldn't be something to be allowed.  Same with the capacitors.

At some point, some hull mods will be locked away by character skills - so, you wouldn't even have access to these unless you had, say, a high enough Engineering.

[Tarran]

Let the ae nerf go. Arguing to much about it here.

Very well. I didn't care much for it anyway. And frankly I don't think I was getting anywhere explaining my point to Dreyven. I guess I just suck at explaining what I mean or something.

[Dreyven]

Very well. I didn't care much for it anyway. And frankly I don't think I was getting anywhere explaining my point to Dreyven.

I agree... we weren't really going anywhere with our discussion
let's sign a peace treaty XD



i want to thank the developers again, i'm enjoying myself a lot playing this new update