| Author |
[1.7] Soft-release Feedback |
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
|  Posted: 2013-10-21 13:56
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 11:17, Fattierob wrote:
No core mechanics that are broken? No glaring flaws in ship designs? No rampant faction imbalance issues?
|
Besides my whole analysis of why UGTO is extremely hard to balance due to feast/famine gameplay (and thus is currently in a slump of mild famine), the map seems a bit unbalanced.
Firstly, Kluth get the shaft due to MI presence, and while it fits thematically due to their backstory it pressures them to take center systems. ICC can easily exert influence onto almost all of the relevant systems, and thus UGTO and Kluth constantly fight for systems nearer to the center to maintain any gameplay presence, while ICC can chill and defend their easy access systems and still be able to project force into the center. Both the above famine aspect of UGTO plus the map layout currently has the Kluth successfully taking the center with frequent incursions on UGTO and ICC border systems, but more frequently they hold UGTO systems more firmly due to path of least resistance. ICC currently can afford to lose border systems and still have overwhelming presence in game, but UGTO not so much.
The status quo is acceptable, but far from ideal, as shown by planet spread and the location of said planets. I do fear if UGTO and ICC both get very large playerbases, because it will be easy for both to choke Kluth out of the center systems and leave them with their home systems and MI infested territory.
_________________
|
Sheraton*XO*
Chief Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: January 18, 2013
Posts: 482
From: Keel Mountains
| Posted: 2013-10-21 14:31
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 11:17, Fattierob wrote:
So the biggest complaint so far is a ...numbers issue? No core mechanics that are broken? No glaring flaws in ship designs? No stupid game breaking bugs? No server latency issues? No rampant faction imbalance issues? You're telling me that the only issue is a game mechanic that always existed but is suddenly cast into the limelight because the numbers need to be tweaked on it ...?
EWAR has always existed, the mechanic of "once you're zero or below signature you're invisible" has always existed, the mechanic of "Visible distance" has already existed. The only thing that changed is some extremely easy to modify numbers related to those mechanics.
I'd say that's pretty good. When the largest complaints of a version are about numbers I'd consider that a success.
Also, I know we all love to get heated up over this game (because we all love it so very much) but I think it'd be prudent if we don't start yelling at each other. Their are some radical changes to gameplay mechanics in this version and I think both sides (Players and Developers) should be more ...open about the other side's thoughts.
tl;dr: numbers op nerf plz
|
it's not like there are no issues. I believe the fact that the ICC shield HP is a bit too high has already been mentioned. Along with the Harpex, but aside from those I have relatively few complaints. The ones I do have are mostly related to the fact that I seem to be getting an excessive amount of ghost ships appearing on my screen.
-Sheraton
_________________
Twilit Keel Mountains traversed at last we met a dragon who spoke thus: \"Sheraton am I who interprets the signs.\"
|
Walrus of Apathy
Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: August 07, 2005
Posts: 466
From: Dorans Basement
| Posted: 2013-10-21 14:40
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 13:56, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 11:17, Fattierob wrote:
No core mechanics that are broken? No glaring flaws in ship designs? No rampant faction imbalance issues?
|
Besides my whole analysis of why UGTO is extremely hard to balance due to feast/famine gameplay (and thus is currently in a slump of mild famine), the map seems a bit unbalanced.
Firstly, Kluth get the shaft due to MI presence, and while it fits thematically due to their backstory it pressures them to take center systems. ICC can easily exert influence onto almost all of the relevant systems, and thus UGTO and Kluth constantly fight for systems nearer to the center to maintain any gameplay presence, while ICC can chill and defend their easy access systems and still be able to project force into the center. Both the above famine aspect of UGTO plus the map layout currently has the Kluth successfully taking the center with frequent incursions on UGTO and ICC border systems, but more frequently they hold UGTO systems more firmly due to path of least resistance. ICC currently can afford to lose border systems and still have overwhelming presence in game, but UGTO not so much.
The status quo is acceptable, but far from ideal, as shown by planet spread and the location of said planets. I do fear if UGTO and ICC both get very large playerbases, because it will be easy for both to choke Kluth out of the center systems and leave them with their home systems and MI infested territory.
|
Most of the problem with the MI is their current disposition being to supermegatranny rush everything due to an issue with their transports rank setting and the new AI system. Issue is fixed in beta and will be out in the next fix update. Mi should be pretty rare, and hard to find outside of their home systems.
Quote:
I believe the fact that the ICC shield HP is a bit too high has already been mentioned.
|
Defense numbers have been rebalanced slightly in beta and could use testing!
Also, this thread the past couple of pages:
_________________
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2013-10-21 14:43
domes-to-food population growth works as coded.
Sorry.
[ This Message was edited by: Azreal on 2013-10-23 16:06 ]
_________________
bucket link
|
Scorched Soul[+R]
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: November 14, 2005
Posts: 378
From: USA, NJ, Princeton
| Posted: 2013-10-21 15:41
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 10:00, Ent wrote:
Feedback would be helpful if its informative and it falls within what is supposed to happen.
You know whats worse than Developers who don't listen to feedback?
Players that refuse to give honest feedback.
So far, the only thing I've observed is players who either don't understand how the system works, refuse to try to adapt to the system. I've watched players sit there and stubbornly refuse to leave their big ships, players who absolutelly will not play as a team.
I am keep a very close eye on the detection system, and how players are using EWAR, because I am very interested in your feedback and your potential concerns about its abuse. I am not interested in people just complaining.
|
There are so many things wrong with this that it made me want to slap an infant.
you are providing a service, you are in the customer service industry, it is your, in this case volunteer, job to take customer complaints about your product or service especially when you specifically ask for them.
dropping the specific case of Ewar, the way you are speaking sounds to me like this.
the developers are like an artist who has an art gallery in their basement and we the players love your work, and cant wait for your next unveiling. so you bring us all down to your basement and pull off the sheet and it is epic except for a large strip of brown that you painted across the bottom in snap, and then you turn to us and ask us "what do you think?" and we all respond with "well, you smeared snap across the bottom." and then we ask "couldn't you just use brown paint so that it doesn't leave a rancid taste in my mouth when I walk past, and I wont be ashamed to hang it on my wall." and then you tell us that "we just don't understand" and "but that is the way its supposed to be." well you can do that, and you can even call it art if you want, but we, the people who already enjoy what you do, wont buy it, and I think its rather unlikely that very many people will just wander into your basement and say they want to buy it.
If you want to make a product that other people will enjoy you cant do whatever you want, then ask for the consumers feedback, then thumb your nose at them and look down on them for giving you the feedback you didn't want.
You can't do it.
You can't do it!
You can't do it!
In all seriousness i know that you aren't ignoring us and you are going to fix the problem, maybe not in the way we suggested, but you cant just tell us that we are giving you bad feed back
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2013-10-21 17:10 ]
_________________
|
Iwancoppa
Fleet Admiral
Joined: November 15, 2008
Posts: 709
| Posted: 2013-10-21 15:48
So what I see Ent saying -
Adapt and learn to play
It's fine that ECM turns DS into a no-skill numbers game
Stop whining
Didn't reas your post
Anecdotal beta testing that means very little
Sorry, but this latest ECM meta has made DS all about numbers and who spams more. Outnumber to win! Less players you lose. Skill based mechanics? No time for that. Uselessification of big ships? Yep. Targetted ECCM that you'll never be able to lock on in the first place? Yep.
Aa Azreal said, Ewar is now more important than anything else.
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2013-10-21 15:56
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 15:41, Scorched Soul[+R] wrote:
There are so many things wrong with this that it made me want to slap an infant.
you are providing a service, you are in the customer service industry, it is your, in this case volunteer, job to take customer complaints about your product or service especially when you specifically ask for them.
dropping the specific case of Ewar, the way you are speaking sounds to me like this.
|
I work in that industry yo, for a living. A lot customers that walk in the door not only have no idea what they really want, but are usually unhappy with what they demand. Finding solutions is part of my day job, and finding solutions sometimes means giving the customer something they need, not neccessarily something they want.
Otherwise they're going to be pissed off when they eventually realize they got suckered into a raw deal.
Quote:
the developers are like an artist
|
I had to stop there.
Developers are like developers. Okay, in order to make something like this, you have to try to account for everything a player might do in a scenario. And we do this for every ship, and every role, and try to make sure that everything is right, and beg people to test it out.
People didnt test it out, but miraculously, and through a lot lot lot of arguing, you get this version.
Feedback is important, but good feedback is even more important. We try to hope that players, when they want a change in game play, it fits within the framework of what we are going for. Otherwise, yes, it means starting from scratch. Every ship Jim designed fits an important role in the respective faction's fleets, and its up to players to adapt best to changes.
Thats the idea.. the idea we sold a year ago.. the idea we've worked on all that time.
Using your analogy, its like we looked at a painting, talked to the people who stood around it, and we told them, this is what we're going to do.
They said okay, and walked away.
Then we started modifying that painting, adding, subtracting, covering. And everything we did, we made notes, and we presented it to that group and said, WHAT DO YOU THINK?
And they were pleased. We kept telling them come to take a look, to tell us about any changes, of whether they thought the vision fit.
But few people came to look.
Eventually, now its finished, and now its suddenly its as if that group has been betrayed and tricked "This isn't what I wanted!". Well its what we told you were going to get.
Now, fortunately, we have the opportunity to make changes, but nobody rebuilds a house because they're not happy with the wall color. We'll make what we have as fair to everyone as we can and as you said yes. We do care.
We are players too.
_________________
|
Sheraton*XO*
Chief Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: January 18, 2013
Posts: 482
From: Keel Mountains
| Posted: 2013-10-21 16:06
[quote]On 2013-10-21 15:56, Ent wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 15:41, Scorched Soul[+R] wrote:
People didnt test it out, but miraculously, and through a lot lot lot of arguing, you get this version.
They said okay, and walked away.
But few people came to look.
Eventually, now its finished, and now its suddenly its as if that group has been betrayed and tricked "This isn't what I wanted!". Well its what we told you were going to get.
Now, fortunately, we have the opportunity to make changes, but nobody rebuilds a house because they're not happy with the wall color. We'll make what we have as fair to everyone as we can and as you said yes. We do care.
|
Personally I kind of did see that Ewar was going to be important in the new version of darkspace when the chanegs were made. In particular the fact that planetary Ewar can now hide both fighters and missiles from being point defensed and it can hide entire dreads and stations. A practical example of this Ewar was when an SCB, a Line station, and a Strike Carrier, were under siege at Trace in Andosia. Full disclosure I was in the SCB. We were being pelted with a plethora of missiles from the gate and the Point defense was not stopping all of them. So I built up six ECM bases to hide the stations and everyone else from those missiles so we could not be hit.
The UGTO then promptly moved closer to the planet, which was the proper and logical thing to do in such a situation IMO. Then they found themselves being pelted with invisible fighters in an interdictor field. Torpedo fighters, F-29s and a line stations missiles demolished 3 stations and a few dreads. The cannons from the Battle Stations still signfiicantly damaged us since those can be manually targetted but we were able to hold our own because of the new EWAR mechanics. Previously this would not have been possible to do. Had more people tested in numbers in beta we might have found that using, EWAR in this way was possible. In fact, Walrus of Apathhy and I did find that out because we constantly dueled in various ships with and without EWAR.
The lack of individuals testing the ewar mechanics and giving feedback to the developers leaves developers in a strange place. Should they accept the limited feedback as the feedback fo the community writ large? Or should they disregard that feedback and take the silence of the majority of the community as disapproval? It is an utterly untennable position caused mainly, in my view, by the lack of individuals willing to go into beta and thoroughly test new game mechanics on a macro scale.
Now that i have finished you may, as always, take or leave what you wish.
-Sheraton
[ This Message was edited by: Sheraton *XO* on 2013-10-21 16:09 ]
_________________
Twilit Keel Mountains traversed at last we met a dragon who spoke thus: \"Sheraton am I who interprets the signs.\"
|
Walrus of Apathy
Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: August 07, 2005
Posts: 466
From: Dorans Basement
| Posted: 2013-10-21 16:12
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 15:48, iwancoppa wrote:
Uselessification of big ships? Yep.
|
Which is why 80-90% of the kills on the killboard are still from Dreads and Stations, right?
_________________
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2013-10-21 17:00
On this detect-ability of ships, such as scouts having 20gu (10 as it takes a second to kick in and there moving at 35gu/s) and dreads having 400.
Shouldn't those values go up across the board, a scout has no business being within 400gu of a dread let alone 20.
ECM or not, 400 range is plenty and scouts can still dodge easily within that range to drop beacons.
A dread is too damn large to still be hiding at 400gu, this should be 900-1000 at [u]least[/u].
You can fill the numbers, but I don't understand what kind of balance would rely so heavily on the detection being so low across the board.
Next EWAR~
I feel like this could be balanced by generating more signature at higher speeds, stopping ships running high (Local) ECM and going at max speed.
I've already suggested this, earlier in the thread but it was entirely ignored along with the experience of some of the posters in this thread... for some reason.
Personally I'd also like ECM to be removed from scouts, they shouldn't be covering fleets signature, there scouts... for scouting.
even with 2 ECM's the Stealth Corvette on ICC can go max speed and shoot 5 out of 6 torpedo's.
So why the Recon scout is called the Recon scout with the ability to mask everything within a silly amount of range (Like why isn't it at least Local ECM, it's reconning only needs ECM for itself anyways.)
Frigates can be the class that helps to cloak fleets, and can decloak them along with scouts. (Which would be an awesome use of the word "Scout")
ECM is suppose to be used for a stealth style of play, at the moment it's being used to be un-targetable at max speed circling players under 50gu.
ECCM won't deter Frig/Scout level ECM ships from being used as they still have maneuverability and the JD recharge.
This brings me onto my next point, for what purpose does the faction with cloak, get a metric tonne of Ewar, including a Frigate with 7 Ewar slots.
I know ECCM drains energy out the wazzoh, but giving that one extra Ewar slot, in a game of numbers in terms of Ewar...
In a game where time and time again, Kluth has proven it can fight effectively with less numbers.
And you can use the ECM under cloak and help those around you, with a ship that has 8 ECM slots.
(ICC and UGTO don't have a frig or scout with 8 ECCM to counter, they need two ships)
Testing in Beta~
Game is already small.
A smaller amount will Beta test.
Small scale Beta test will not scale to Release-Scale (You can be wrong).
Not everything will be tested in Beta test as less people will be testing, thus less minds and less creativity in abusing changes to which can be balanced too.
No one expected everything to be perfect at a big release, we're not the morons you hold us to be.
The length and the thought put into the posts would already be proof of this, but I feel the need to reassert this point.
Some of us have been here a suitable amount of time that the "Adapt or Die" response appears as little more then an automated response to avoid an answer.
_________________
|
Scorched Soul[+R]
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: November 14, 2005
Posts: 378
From: USA, NJ, Princeton
| Posted: 2013-10-21 17:10
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 15:56, Ent wrote:
Eventually, now its finished, and now its suddenly its as if that group has been betrayed and tricked "This isn't what I wanted!". Well its what we told you were going to get.
Now, fortunately, we have the opportunity to make changes, but nobody rebuilds a house because they're not happy with the wall color. We'll make what we have as fair to everyone as we can and as you said yes. We do care.
We are players too.
|
you are understandably in a difficult state because not many people play the beta servers. To my understanding that is why 1.7 is being soft released. I don't hate what you have done, in fact I quite like this release. I don't want you to tear down the house, I just want you to patch the small hole that the door jam poked in the dry wall in the basement. I mearly want to state my opinion that
1) the game would be more enjoyable for everyone if you changed a small value. If you don't thats fine it doesn't break the game for me and I will play it anyway.
2) that the rhetoric that you are using to reply to the feedback does not encourage people to put in the effort to give you more of that feedback in earlier stages of development. If people believe that the development process is being railroaded in a specific direction and that their feedback will not make a difference they will not give you feedback a second time.
I will share a quote that I saw while playing shogun2 the other day.
When someone is giving you his opinion, you should receive it with deep gratitude even though it is worthless. If you don't, he will not tell you the things that he has seen and heard about you again. -Maxim from Hagakure (In the Shadow of the Leaves), Yamamoto Tsunetomo (1659 - 1719)
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2013-10-21 18:41
I just commited a change to beta in regards to visibility of ships. Now velocity of the contact is taken into consideration. So now a scout at negative sig going 32+ gu/s at 50 gu away isn't invisible. This should keep all players happy, keeping visibility a decent tool to use, but not too powerful.
Please test.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2013-10-21 18:47 ]
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2013-10-21 19:01
Warning, I'll be purging this thread soon so that all valid complaints can be re-posted, and all old ones can die a happy death. Don't take it personally, just re-post if something hasn't been addressed (a reply stating that it won't be done still counts as addressed).
_________________
|
Scorched Soul[+R]
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: November 14, 2005
Posts: 378
From: USA, NJ, Princeton
| Posted: 2013-10-21 19:36
Quote:
On 2013-10-21 18:41, Pantheon wrote:
I just commited a change to beta in regards to visibility of ships. Now velocity of the contact is taken into consideration. So now a scout at negative sig going 32+ gu/s at 50 gu away isn't invisible. This should keep all players happy, keeping visibility a decent tool to use, but not too powerful.
Please test.
|
Even better than what i was expecting, I am most pleased. Internets for you.
sheraton is putting words in my mouth and when i tried to quote your jacked up quote it broke the format of the whole forum page
[ This Message was edited by: Scorched Soul[+R] on 2013-10-21 19:59 ]
_________________
|
Musiqsoulman
Grand Admiral
*Renegade Space Marines*
Joined: November 26, 2005
Posts: 209
From: Italy
| Posted: 2013-10-21 20:16
I heard that Ugto ships have been reworked in Beta. I am pleased to hear that as although the new designs are great, it's really hard using them to inflict any damage to other ships.
Thanks Devs.
[ This Message was edited by: Musiqsoulman on 2013-10-21 20:55 ]
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
