Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?  (Read 15360 times)

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #60 on: April 02, 2021, 02:19:58 PM »

It seems to me that there are three different discussions going on: one with criticisms of the new systems, how they interact, and how they effect balance. There's a lot of meat to dig into with the new version and not everything is well balanced at the moment. In discussion threads where people aren't being quite so loud there's been good breakdowns of skill builds that work and skill builds that that are unsatisfying, hard numbers on overpowered mechanics, etc. And Alex is listening - as has been stated, there are a bunch of skill changes and numerical tweaks in the todo pipeline.

Theres another discussion which is that people don't want to change how they have to play, because the way they used to isn't as good as it was. I have a lot of sympathy for this because I've been bitten by it a few times... but its kind of unavoidable whenever there's a new version because there's always winners and losers with balance changes. A MAJOR part of community feedback from the last version was that small ships weren't useful in late game battles, and that people wanted them to be. Now, small ships are more useful in late game battles. Capital ships... are also still useful in late game battles. Having a capital or two or three even is a MAJOR boost to fleet power compared to all cruisers. But now its also a good idea to have smaller ships, just like the community loudly and repeatedly asked for. There's this idea that 'sandbox = play any way at all' but thats never been true in any version of the game. There have always been some ways stronger than others. But is a particular way strong enough? That brings us to...

The third discussion is game difficulty and "fairness". People feel its important for the endgame enemies to have equal DP as the player because... well there's not many reasons actually given other than "fairness" and a lot of anger/frustration and 'how could this possibly be beatable?!'. This version has a significant increase in endgame difficulty and also removed one of the primary ways that endgame became trivially easy. This was, again, a MAJOR point of community feedback, that Starsector had an inverted difficulty curve with a hard early game and very easy late game. The update is a step to address that. It means that, yes, beating endgame fleets requires playing better and pure capital ship spam is no longer the best option. This apparently is cause for screaming swearing rage.

The question I pose to people who hate this: should starsector have any endgame challenges that require mastery of the game? Where mastery is learning the game systems and how to maximize their benefit, learning how to outfit ships well, using combinations of ships that work well together, getting officers with good skils etc etc. Or should the endgame be very easy, where all that is required is spamming lots of ships and turning on autopilot?

If the answer is "there should be challenges" then removing trivial ways of beating the game is a good thing and adds a huge amount of gameplay time to each run. The challenges don't stop when they get their first capital ship.

If the answer is "no, there should not be challenges, I like a relaxed game where my fleet blows things up", then there is an easy mode that makes that true. (Side note: It might be a good idea for people to be able to toggle on easy mode during the game if they get in over their heads but don't want to abandon the progress so far.) Perhaps it would be better if instead of being called "easy mode" it were called "relaxed mode"?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2021, 02:24:22 PM by Thaago »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #61 on: April 02, 2021, 02:26:55 PM »

(Yeah, I'm down with "relaxed" mode, and, yeah, it should be toggleable in settings. Made a note about this. A way to just get through if one is stuck seems like a good idea.)
Logged

Mordodrukow

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #62 on: April 02, 2021, 02:41:45 PM »

I dunno why are you saying that ECM numbers look fine

I'm ... not?

- tone down the number of enemy officers
- tone down ECM numbers a little bit (if it will not help, then we can try more, i agree that we can make it carefully)

That's literally what I said in the part of my post that you quoted, so, yes!

- remove SP cost of build-in option, and make it cost money instead, just like the restoration. Something like the half of ships cost for the 1st upgrade, full price for the second, double price for the third. Maybe add increased supply usage per month also (but keep deployment cost the same)
- maybe remove SP cost of mercenaries, but make em cost more. Idk really, maybe it will nor be nessessary after first 3 changes

That on the other hand seems unnecessary. The reason you're not spending SP on hullmods I don't think is actually borne out by the game mechanics. They're one of the primary uses for story points, and you get tons of bonus XP (and thus some of those points back) if you use them on smaller ships/cheaper hullmods, too.

Ok, i see. I guess, i get you wrong. Sorry for that. My english is too bad.

About the last one. I m playing D&D a lot. And there are such thing as consumables (potions, scrolls, etc.). Literally: you pay money to get an advantage for few fights. In 5th edition they tell us that one potion of, for example, uncommon rarity cost as a half of permanent magic item of the same rarity (sword, boots, hat...). And it is complete nonesense. In previous editions cost ratio was much better, and even there i never spent money for consumables (well, maybe few healing wands). Starsector's SP are pretty much the same: i dont want to spent em on things which are not permanent. And thanks god, build-in mods are. But i want to spent em on Paragon or at least Odyssey, not on Auroras or something. And i want also to save a lot, because i dont know if i will need em in future for some important things.

Also, if i forced to spent consumables to win a fight, i feel like something is wrong. In Resident evil 4, for example, you can buy pretty expensive rocket launcher (it has only 1 shot), which kills every enemy in one shot (even bosses). You spend money to buy a victory. What a hero! But in RE you can beat every boss without this feature. And i want to see the same in Starsector. If i need to buy mercs to win a fight, because otherwise i ll be overwhelmed by numbers... well, it is just bad design. Today i can pay and win. Tomorrow i will have 0 SP, and what shoud i do?

Quote
The question I pose to people who hate this: should starsector have any endgame challenges that require mastery of the game? Where mastery is learning the game systems and how to maximize their benefit, learning how to outfit ships well, using combinations of ships that work well together, getting officers with good skils etc etc. Or should the endgame be very easy, where all that is required is spamming lots of ships and turning on autopilot?
Yes, there must be challenges. But it must be a challenge of skill, not an exam of how much you can stack.

I still remember one Dassault-Mikoyan fight i had. There was like 12 enemy capitals (vs 4 or 5 mine, no Paragons btw), ton of cruisers and destroyers. Total fighter spam and owerwhelming ECM. I killed em in 3 stages. The third one took me 6 hours of attempts. I lost no ships. I am still satisfied by this challenge. But i also still hate it because:
- i got around 300k for that, which is not even close to money i spend on travel and supplies
- the enemy was not smart, it just overwhelmed me with numbers
- more than 6 hours of save/load and harsh words
« Last Edit: April 02, 2021, 02:55:58 PM by Mordodrukow »
Logged
Spoiler
[close]

Sutopia

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #63 on: April 02, 2021, 02:56:04 PM »

I dunno why are you saying that ECM numbers look fine

I'm ... not?

- tone down the number of enemy officers
- tone down ECM numbers a little bit (if it will not help, then we can try more, i agree that we can make it carefully)

That's literally what I said in the part of my post that you quoted, so, yes!

- remove SP cost of build-in option, and make it cost money instead, just like the restoration. Something like the half of ships cost for the 1st upgrade, full price for the second, double price for the third. Maybe add increased supply usage per month also (but keep deployment cost the same)
- maybe remove SP cost of mercenaries, but make em cost more. Idk really, maybe it will nor be nessessary after first 3 changes

That on the other hand seems unnecessary. The reason you're not spending SP on hullmods I don't think is actually borne out by the game mechanics. They're one of the primary uses for story points, and you get tons of bonus XP (and thus some of those points back) if you use them on smaller ships/cheaper hullmods, too.

Ok, i see. I guess, i get you wrong. Sorry for that. My english is too bad.

About the last one. I m playing D&D a lot. And there are such thing as consumables (potions, scrolls, etc.). Literally: you pay money to get an advantage for few fights. In 5th edition they tell us that one potion of, for example, uncommon rarity cost as a half of permanent magic item of the same rarity (sword, boots, hat...). And it is complete nonesense. In previous editions cost ratio was much better, and even there i never spent money for consumables (well, maybe few healing wands). Starsector's SP are pretty much the same: i dont want to spent em on things which are not permanent. And thanks god, build-in mods are. But i want to spent em on Paragon or at least Odyssey, not on Auroras or something. And i want also to save a lot, because i dont know if i will need em in future for some important things.

Also, if i forced to spent consumables to win a fight, i feel like something is wrong. In Resident evil 4, for example, you can buy pretty expensive rocket launcher (it has only 1 shot), which kills every enemy in one shot (even bosses). You spend money to buy a victory. What a hero! But in RE you can beat every boss without this feature. And i want to see the same in Starsector. If i need to buy mercs to win a fight, because otherwise i ll be overwhelmed by numbers... well, it is just bad design. Today i can pay and win. Tomorrow i will have 0 SP, and what shoud i do?

Quote
The question I pose to people who hate this: should starsector have any endgame challenges that require mastery of the game? Where mastery is learning the game systems and how to maximize their benefit, learning how to outfit ships well, using combinations of ships that work well together, getting officers with good skils etc etc. Or should the endgame be very easy, where all that is required is spamming lots of ships and turning on autopilot?
Yes, there must be challenges. But it must be a challenge of skill, not an exam of how much you can stack.

I still remember one Dassault-Mikoyan fight i had. There was like 12 enemy capitals (vs 4 or 5 mine, no Paragons btw), ton of cruisers and destroyers. Total fighter spam and owerwhelming ECM. I killed em in 3 stages. The third one took me 6 hours of attempts. I lost no ships. I am still satisfied by this challenge. But i also still hate it because:
- i got around 300k for that, which is not even close to money i spend on travel and supplies
- the enemy was not smart, it just overwhelmed me with numbers

I thought starsector is a sandbox game you do whatever you’re pleased?
I’m so far having fun planning colonies that is pirate/ludd/inspection free and still raking in half a mil each month. My next step will be burning cash to farm some redacted, to turn in cores for maxed relation with every major factions.
Isn’t end game redacted an optional challenge as well?
Logged


Since all my mods have poor reputation, I deem my efforts unworthy thus no more updates will be made.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #64 on: April 02, 2021, 03:13:19 PM »

Ok, i see. I guess, i get you wrong. Sorry for that. My english is too bad.

Ahh ok, no worries.

About the last one. I m playing D&D a lot. And there are such thing as consumables (potions, scrolls, etc.). Literally: you pay money to get an advantage for few fights. In 5th edition they tell us that one potion of, for example, uncommon rarity cost as a half of permanent magic item of the same rarity (sword, boots, hat...). And it is complete nonesense. In previous editions cost ratio was much better, and even there i never spent money for consumables (well, maybe few healing wands). Starsector's SP are pretty much the same: i dont want to spent em on things which are not permanent. And thanks god, build-in mods are. But i want to spent em on Paragon or at least Odyssey, not on Auroras or something. And i want also to save a lot, because i dont know if i will need em in future for some important things.

Right - I understand what you're saying! But the thing is, story points are *absolutely not like that*. You always get more, and if you spend them, the less "permanent" (or impactful) the thing you spend them on is, the more of bonus XP you get - which means, basically, that you get some or all of that point back.

For example (numbers kind of made up, but vaguely in the right range) if you spend 1 SP to build Hardened Subsystems into a frigate, that's 5 OP, and you'll get something like 80% bonus XP. Which means that you'll gain extra XP whenever you gain XP - enough to get most of a point back! If you build a 40-OP hullmod into a capital ship, that might give you no bonus XP. Even then, the next story points are never too far away.

Non-permanent uses - such as getting away from a fight, for example - give you 100% bonus XP, meaning you get that whole point back in a little bit. And you gain experience and levels faster, too, so you're encouraged to spend points on things like that if you need to. The system is designed with exactly what you're talking about in mind - the story point uses are either permanent, or they grant you bonus experience, meaning that they're either entirely or (in the case of hullmods, depending on OP cost, so you don't feel bad about installing them in smaller ships) partially "free".

To explain it a bit more: let's say it takes you 1000 XP to get one more story point. Let's also say you've spent a story point just now, and got 100% bonus XP for it - you now have 1000 bonus XP. For simplicity, let's say you just got into a battle and gained 1000 "regular" XP from it. Bonus XP doubles up your regular XP gains until it's used up, so you will get 2000XP - and 2 story points - where you normally would have gotten 1000XP and 1 story point. Thus, as soon as you gain this 1000XP and use up the 1000 bonus XP, the point you've spent to get the bonus XP comes back to you. This is all explained in detail in the various tooltips. I hope this helps clear up how it works!
Logged

Golde

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #65 on: April 02, 2021, 03:31:53 PM »

If shafting players with 160 DP is mere encouragement for contest objectives to reach DP parity or to force their hands to use frigates in the first place; then having two phase frigates to completely sidestep the mechanic shouldn't even be allowed.
I'm not sure what you mean. Having 2 officered phase frigates for capping points isn't sidestepping the mechanic that encourages the use of fast frigates, it's leaning into it and doing it as efficiently as possible. That's like saying having 3 Drovers with the carrier group skill just for interceptor coverage is sidestepping the fighter game.

Because the new DP system is nothing but a nuisance that hinders gameplay. AI piloting has never been good to begin with. Fighting remnants now just devolves into fighting outnumbered zombie pilots with stacked debuffs lest you have some sort of min maxed burst damage build that passes the frigate stat check.

5 cruisers and some frigates gets the upper hand in every possible way against an endgame fleet because of what? Say it louder because I can't hear you.

@Alex, nobody asked you to go make a pity mode.

The previous release had its own fair share of problems; spending 20 minutes spawnkilling 50 odd atlases at top map was too easy and too long,

So now somehow being forced to trickle in your endgame fleet one ship at a time into a massive remnant armada that consists all of one cap and 5 zombie cruisers due to some conveniently placed artificial limitation is supposed to be less ad tedium??

You still haven't told us how many mercenary officers we're gonna need to hire to get a leg up in this fight, because if 7 alpha cores ontop of officer cap can't do it, then I'm out of story points for the next 10 cycles.

Care to explain your deep wisdom and chain of logic involved in this new system, so that even the mentally challenged me can understand?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2021, 03:35:58 PM by Golde »
Logged

Mordodrukow

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #66 on: April 02, 2021, 03:32:28 PM »

Yes, you told that in blog post. And after you get 15 level, you will keep getting storry points just like you could if there be more levels past 15 (if i get it correctly). But if the exp-to-next-level progression is the same it was in 9.1, you will get like 18-20... may be 25 "level", if you are very motivated man. And thats it. The story points are limited, you need just too much exp to get more and more. And even extra exp will not save you. While merks need the same amount every time.

Maybe i m getting it wrong. I still cant understand: it gives me, for example, 100% bonus. 100% of what number? It can double exp i m getting, ok, but how long?
Logged
Spoiler
[close]

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #67 on: April 02, 2021, 03:38:25 PM »

Yes, you told that in blog post. And after you get 15 level, you will keep getting storry points just like you could if there be more levels past 15 (if i get it correctly). But if the exp-to-next-level progression is the same it was in 9.1, you will get like 18-20... may be 25 "level", if you are very motivated man. And thats it. The story points are limited, you need just too much exp to get more and more. And even extra exp will not save you. While merks need the same amount every time.

The latest hotfix, RC12, has reduced the number of XP required for story points - and to get to level 15 in the first place. Once you get to level 15, the XP required stays the same - it *does not* keep going up as if you kept gaining levels. If the XP required kept going up, then yeah, I'd totally agree with you about them being limited as you say. But it doesn't!

Based on feedback so far from people that have gotten there, the story point gain seems to be in a reasonable place at max level.

Maybe i m getting it wrong. I still cant understand: it gives me, for example, 100% bonus. 100% of what number? It can double exp i m getting, ok, but how long?

Aha - yes, that question makes sense! The answer is "100% of the XP required to gain an additional story point". So it'll last exactly long enough for you to get back an extra point - the point you spent. If the bonus XP is 80%, then it'll last long enough for you to get 80% of an extra point back.
Logged

Mordodrukow

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #68 on: April 02, 2021, 04:11:42 PM »

Oh! Thats good! Need to check how much % merc gives then. In fact, it means, that you should assume how much XP you will get in one year (without bonuses), compare it to XP needed to get 1 SP, and then calculate how many mercs you can sustain. Now thats an interesting task, i like it!

So, yeah, it turns out that you r right, and it might be enough to tweak only enemy's numbers.

I also took part in this conversation, because right now i m in mid game (Legion + 3 Champions + Fury + Apogee), and things can work different here. I mean: in endgame everything might be OK (idk yet), but what i see in my position is slightly different.

As i said: too much ECM. Sometimes (like 50% times or so) too much officers. Border camping dont work anymore (idk if it is because of officers or you changed the code).
On the other hand: bounties look much more reasonable. I really like it, despite the fact they actually lower. I mean: a bounty for pirate base for example. It cant harm you, and it is pretty fair, that it costs 30k. 120k in 9.1 was... pretty generous  :D.
Also, after this discussion, i checked comm relay capture mechanics. It actually works, and extra 2 ships on the field actually make a difference.

About Champion: really like this ship. It is my flagship now (because Legion is trash). Turrets have good angles, a lot of guns, big mounts, nice armor. But there are 4 minuses:
- really low flux capacity
- its engines made of paper. Guess, even my cat can break them
- shield arc (it might be less important, but read the previous paragraph)
- system works for, like... 1 second, or so... it is really small time
And while 1 and 3 paragraphs are ok. It is good that ship has upsides and downsides. But 2 and 4 make me sad.

About Fury: maybe, my new favorite cruiser. I gave it to officer with Systems expertise, and he is an absolute beast. Worth every single DP.
Logged
Spoiler
[close]

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #69 on: April 02, 2021, 04:42:34 PM »

*thumbs up* - I'm glad stuff makes more sense now!

(Re: ECM, someone in another thread had a suggestion I really like - making the +ECM bonus from Gunnery Implants the Elite effect of the skill. That alone should knock enemy ECM values down a ton, since not very many enemy officers would have the elite version of GI. Remnants still would, but then them being great at electronic warfare is also very thematically appropriate.)

- its engines made of paper. Guess, even my cat can break them

Hmm - they're not any weaker than engines on other ships. I wonder why it feels that way?

- system works for, like... 1 second, or so... it is really small time

It's I think 3 seconds or so? But the system has multiple charges.

About Fury: maybe, my new favorite cruiser. I gave it to officer with Systems expertise, and he is an absolute beast. Worth every single DP.

Nice! Glad you're liking it.
Logged

Mordodrukow

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #70 on: April 02, 2021, 05:19:44 PM »

Quote
ECM, someone in another thread had a suggestion I really like - making the +ECM bonus from Gunnery Implants the Elite effect of the skill. That alone should knock enemy ECM values down a ton, since not very many enemy officers would have the elite version of GI. Remnants still would, but then them being great at electronic warfare is also very thematically appropriate.
I ll wait till you make changes before making any conclusions. Maybe you r right and it will help.

Quote
Hmm - they're not any weaker than engines on other ships. I wonder why it feels that way?
Idk really. Sometimes it breaks down from a simple sneeze. But yes, all engines are too squishy imo. I think, you should give em like 50 or may be 100% more HP. Players will still have their advantage if they will want to cripple an enemy, while players engines will break less often. It is important, because right now having shield is way better than having armor (well, it is even better to have both, but anyway...). You added extra armor to Heavy armor module, and yes, there are Insulated engine assembley, but you cant solve every problem by installing hullmod. Because, again: not enough OP.

Quote
It's I think 3 seconds or so? But the system has multiple charges.
Idk really. For me it expires pretty fast. Yes, it has charges, but imo, better to make 2 instead of 3 and increase the duration a bit.
Logged
Spoiler
[close]

Dex

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #71 on: April 02, 2021, 05:52:02 PM »

For what its worth, Alex. I like that frigates are so much more useful now, every ship class has a niche and consistent use at start to the end game. Weve had frigate spam meta, cruiser spam, AND capital spam in the past. They werent as fun.

TO put simply, in my mind, the DP restriction is simply a translation of 'you cant just throw money at this problem, you need to understand it and solve it'. Brute force being the best option just.... lacks finesse.

Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #72 on: April 02, 2021, 05:55:25 PM »

Thank you for chiming in - I'm glad you're liking it overall! I do think that perhaps it swung a bit too far in the other direction, and there are some other rough edges, but, well - that's what the .1 releases are for :)
Logged

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #73 on: April 02, 2021, 06:50:50 PM »

I lost all my supplies to one of those 30,000 ore bombs in less than a second - didn't even have time to open my inventory to dump it.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: pathetic DP balance, is QA and playtest not part of the dev cycle?
« Reply #74 on: April 02, 2021, 07:03:58 PM »

(Guessing you meant to post this in the release thread?)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7