| Author |
Limitations on Enh stacking |
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
|  Posted: 2012-03-13 01:21
This has probably been argued back and forth over the years.
Enhancement stacking has seen ships that have been configured for Godliness or OP-ness (depending on which end of the barrel you're on).
We've seen how an EAD or Shroom can be configured with 8 Adv Def enh to become veritable tanks, nearly impossible to kill unless to team them 2 or even 3 to 1. We've seen how Kluth Siphons equipped with Adv beam multis or Mandis with Adv Weap Multis can one shot dessies and even some partially damaged cruisers.
Thing is, these enh have no drawbacks. If you have the creds, then you have a 48% advantage in damage, speed or durability over others.
So what if we limit single enh stacks only up to 4 of that type per vessel. So you can use the other 4 slots for another type of enh.
This could serve a dual purpose.
1. Prevents overstacking and OP ships
- Players who can't afford the 800 x 8 creds for blue enh won't be heavily disadvantaged either.
2. Permits more creativity
- Should make for more interesting combis rather than an 8 x whatever juggernaut.
Thoughts?
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
NoBoDx
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 14, 2003
Posts: 784
From: Germany / NRW
| Posted: 2012-03-13 04:11
id prefer some negative effects on enchants
eg:
+10% firepower gives your max-speed and armor a -5% penalty
+10% speed results in-5% hull-hp
( the power must come from somewhere)
+48% defense nets you -24% maxspeed & turning rate ( youre basically a flying block made of armor)
_________________
The only good 'ooman is a dead 'ooman. An' da only fing better than a dead 'ooman'z a dyin' 'ooman who tell you where ter find 'is mates.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-03-13 06:24
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-13 04:11, NoBoDx wrote:
id prefer some negative effects on enchants
eg:
+10% firepower gives your max-speed and armor a -5% penalty
+10% speed results in-5% hull-hp
( the power must come from somewhere)
+48% defense nets you -24% maxspeed & turning rate ( youre basically a flying block made of armor)
|
|
That's an idea too.
But srsly, I think enh stacking shd be limited in some ways. I'm guilty of flying +48% enh'ed ships too.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-03-13 07:36
I'd imagine most people will be pissed (and rightly so) if what they paid for is suddenly not doing what it was advertised as doing at the time they paid for it, so changing the enh themselves is probably not the best idea. Just limiting it to, say, 24-25% to any one stat would probably be better.
Yes, other f2p games change things all the time, but other games can get away with doing it simply because for every person who ragequits over it more sign up and spend money.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-03-13 19:19
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-13 07:36, Talien wrote:
I'd imagine most people will be pissed (and rightly so) if what they paid for is suddenly not doing what it was advertised as doing at the time they paid for it, so changing the enh themselves is probably not the best idea. Just limiting it to, say, 24-25% to any one stat would probably be better.
Yes, other f2p games change things all the time, but other games can get away with doing it simply because for every person who ragequits over it more sign up and spend money.
|
|
Yep. That's why stack limits will probably bring less QQ than adding negative impacts on each enh.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Fluttershy
Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 24, 2011
Posts: 778
From: Fluttershy
| Posted: 2012-03-22 01:49
/buy win
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2012-03-22 07:09
Personally I've always been in favour of enhancements being more like tweaks to a ship's performance, with each enhancement trading off a benefit in one area for a disadvantage in another.
For example, a +x% defence enhancement also reduces speed by x% in exchange.
I'll add this one to my "things to ponder" list and come up with some ideas.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Mylith(alt)
Commander
Joined: March 21, 2012
Posts: 4
| Posted: 2012-03-22 09:03
Am I the only person who thinks enh is fine as it is? I don't really think it's game-breaking, and it helps a lot to those who can afford it(or those who trade dropped enh for other enh).
(too lazy to log out of my noobie alt)
_________________
|
Ravendark
Marshal
Sanity Assassins
Joined: July 01, 2010
Posts: 443
| Posted: 2012-03-22 10:15
+1 to enh stacking "law(L)s". giving them downsides, also reasonable, but as it was said before. it might piss off some 'mighties'..
creativity with enhs is very lovely idea. maybe give them a bit bigger % values? they would be a little more 'felt'. just a tought... limit them to 3 and it will not reach the OPness and still provide more creativity.
it really lame attacking ugto station with adv def.. i belive other factions also feel the same when adv.wep/beam kluth dread just happens to be on their arse.
_________________
|
-(kha-ti the silent watcher)-
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 12, 2011
Posts: 185
From: the land of silent watchers
| Posted: 2012-03-22 11:04
yeah i think so to, a ugto stat with defense enhancements is almost unkillable without overpowering it with other stats and/or dreads though i admit i'm running my hive with almost full adv. def enh.
_________________
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2012-03-22 11:50
Backy and I were discussing ways to limit this and I suggested having "slots" for enhancements. Basically, every enhancement has a certain slot type (Weapons, Defense, Engines, Misc) and then we change how enhancements are allowed on ships so basically every ship has
4 General slots (any enhancement can fit here)
1 Weapon Slot
1 Defense Slot
1 Engine Slot
1 Misc Slot
This was just a random idea that was thrown around, I don't know if we're going to do anything with it. But yes, I have to agree that 8 stacks of one enhancement is pretty unfair.
_________________
|
Fatal Perihelion
Chief Marshal
Fatal Squadron
Joined: April 15, 2010
Posts: 308
| Posted: 2012-03-22 12:12
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-13 01:21, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
This has probably been argued back and forth over the years.
Enhancement stacking has seen ships that have been configured for Godliness or OP-ness (depending on which end of the barrel you're on).
We've seen how an EAD or Shroom can be configured with 8 Adv Def enh to become veritable tanks, nearly impossible to kill unless to team them 2 or even 3 to 1. We've seen how Kluth Siphons equipped with Adv beam multis or Mandis with Adv Weap Multis can one shot dessies and even some partially damaged cruisers.
Thing is, these enh have no drawbacks. If you have the creds, then you have a 48% advantage in damage, speed or durability over others.
So what if we limit single enh stacks only up to 4 of that type per vessel. So you can use the other 4 slots for another type of enh.
This could serve a dual purpose.
1. Prevents overstacking and OP ships
- Players who can't afford the 800 x 8 creds for blue enh won't be heavily disadvantaged either.
2. Permits more creativity
- Should make for more interesting combis rather than an 8 x whatever juggernaut.
Thoughts?
|
|
I dont agree for just one reason, i like extreme set ups.
Meaning i like the idea to enhance a ship all 8 enches to max just one purpose, though i agree that some ships are forced to use def enches over anything else.
It is a little boring that there is no other way for some ICC and most large UGTO ships, but def enches.. still i dont want a limitation on enches, maybe a nerf but no restrictions.
So i dont see the problem with going all 8 enches one way, but that for many humans all def enches are most effective.
Just my 50 cent.
-Here is a little hint how to save redits: Take the 5% enches, they cost half the prize and are more durable, this way you will lose "just" 8%
compared to all blue enches.-
_________________
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2012-03-22 13:32
Quote:
| On 2012-03-22 11:50, Junior Dev Punching Bag Fattierob wrote:
Backy and I were discussing ways to limit this and I suggested having "slots" for enhancements. Basically, every enhancement has a certain slot type (Weapons, Defense, Engines, Misc) and then we change how enhancements are allowed on ships so basically every ship has
4 General slots (any enhancement can fit here)
1 Weapon Slot
1 Defense Slot
1 Engine Slot
1 Misc Slot |
|
Quote:
| On 2012-03-22 07:09, Gejaheline wrote:
Personally I've always been in favour of enhancements being more like tweaks to a ship's performance, with each enhancement trading off a benefit in one area for a disadvantage in another. |
|
I prefer a combination both of these ideas: category slot for enh and new enh.
We can apply a new regulation for enhancement.
Say, an enhancement now has its level value and a limit of combination effect.
- minor total value is 1pts, 2 effects limited, maximum each effect is 1%.
- limited total value is 2pts, 2 effects limited, maximum each effect is 1%.
- standard total value is 3pts, 2 effects limited, maximum each effect is 2%.
- improved total value is 4pts, 3 effects limited, maximum each effect is 2%.
- enhanced total value is 5pts, 3 effects limited, maximum each effect is 3%.
- advanced total value is 6pts, 3 effects limited, maximum each effect is 3%.
Each effect has different value. Example:
- +1% engine turner adds 1pts; -1% engine velocity minuses 1pts.
- +1% projectile accelerator adds 2pts; -1% projectile condenser minuses 3 pts.
- +1% beam multiplexer adds 3pts; -1% beam accelerator minuses 1pts.
- +1% defense upgrade adds 3pts; -1% damage reduction minuses 2pts
We want to restrict the time of the enhancement instead of the mistake of the user. Hence we don't count durability by death. An enhancement has its life counted by using hours. So, when you runs a ship for 5 hours, enhancements on that ship will lose 5 hours life and they will be destroyed when they're out of life.
Now we mix aforementioned element to create a new list of selling enhancement:
- Minor Misc: +1% projectile accelerator; -1% engine velocity; 20 credit; 36 hours.
- Limited Engine: +1% engine velocity; +1% engine turner; 40 credit; 66 hours.
- Standard Misc: +2% defense upgrade; -1% beam multiplexer; 80 credit; 90 hours.
- Improved Weapon: +2% projectile accelerator; +1% projectile condenser; -2% beam accelerator; 160 credit; 108 hours.
- Enhanced Defense: +3% defense upgrade; +1% damage reduction; -3% defense power; 320 credit; 120 hours.
- Advanced Weapon: +3% projectile condensor; +1% beam multiplexer; -3% projectile accelerator; 640 credit; 126 hours
I also there are seperate list of enhancement for
- Killing Elite.
- Killing player.
- Killing normal AI.
- Buying
Enhancement on each list is unique - it is not duplicated. Therefore, players are more eager to hunt multiple objects.
We can open an making your own enhancement contest and choose nice enhancement to sell in game. Old enhancement no longer available to buy. Personally, I think we can operate a refund opportunity in order for the new enhancement system. Step-by-step procedure:
- Old enhancement system no longer works and is not selling.
- Player submit a ticket asking for refund.
- Staff only check all enhancement equipped on player's ships in garrage. Enhancement that does not attach is not counted. Then refund and sweep all ships in garrage.
- Players buy new enhancement and enjoy.
Thus player'd better equip all old available best enhancements in garrage to his ships before submiting refund ticket.
[ This Message was edited by: chlorophyll on 2012-03-22 14:13 ]
_________________
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-03-22 13:59
Changing it from durability to time would be a total disaster. It'd be like punishing people for sitting in game waiting for something to happen, which would result in less people logging on, leading to the game dying.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2012-03-22 14:23
Quote:
| On 2012-03-22 13:59, Talien wrote:
It'd be like punishing people for sitting in game waiting for something to happen, which would result in less people logging on, leading to the game dying. |
|
I think player should stay in a genuine ship when they're waiting. In case queueing for repairing, they should pick the correct moment to save time.
I don't think it's like punishing people. In facts, when we buy a consumable stuff, whether we use it or not, it expires. The point is you must take advantage of the stuff before it expires. Currently, enhancement expires due to death. Clearly, the more skillful and lucky a player is, the longer extra 48% may expire. It's not only fair but it also denies deduction meaning. Performance can not be calculated in thus case.
In facts, some players just buy 8 advanced one time and enjoy them almost playing lifetime. In economic aspect, looks like DS does not take business seriously. Although DS has been free to play, I believe a better commerce strategy ought to be implemented. In general, we usually measure the success of the game via the income of that game, don't we?
[ This Message was edited by: chlorophyll on 2012-03-22 14:48 ]
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
