| Author |
Feedback for 1.69/1.68 |
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
|  Posted: 2012-09-10 08:18
Now that 1.69 has been out for a week or so, I think it would be prudent to start a feedback thread for some of the balance changes that were introduced in 1.69 and 1.68. So, if you would mind providing feedback on any of the topics listed below, or anything in general, it would be appreciated.
1) Engines were changed to be more consistent across the board. PFE and AFE are now alternatives to IE instead of downgrades and AME received a few tweaks as well. Have these changes resulted in anybody actually using these engines? If you are using them now, do you feel they actually play to their strengths and weaknesses correctly? (PFE and AFE are supposed to be opposite ends of the "slow but better power generation vs faster but less power generation" spectrum)
2) Armor and shields were rebalanced to be more consistent with HP and resistances. Standard Armor and Active shields are now relatively equal in HP, Reflective Armor and Ablative armor are now very similar in HP and regeneration except for their resistances , Reactive shields were made more viable, Skirmish shields were introduced, and auxiliary shields received a huge boost to useability. On the k'luth side, Chit armor was moved to be an upgrade path of Organic armor instead of the AHR, for an exchange of some mass and signature penalties. With these changes made, do you feel anything could use some tweaking?
3) EMP is now a threat in the game and with the 1.69 fix to innate gadget repairing it hopefully won't be as strong as it was in 1.68 (and we're working on some number changes to gadget health). Does any changes need to be made to the EMP devices (EMP Cannon, Flux Wave, and Flux Torpedo) now that EMP actually does something? Remember that only the EMP Cannon can disable systems through armor, the other two devices must hit the hull to deal their EMP damage
4) With the "Hard" Interdictor device removed from the game, what are your opinions on the role of the Interdictor ship now and what changes do you think should be made to it (if any)? What about other ships with command auras?
5) Each faction received a new weapon (Flux Torp, Sabot, Elf Torp) in 1.68. Any info on how they are fairing in combat and if any tweaks are needed would be appreciated
[ This Message was edited by: Fattierob on 2012-09-10 08:21 ]
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2012-09-10 09:08
interdictor does not interdict the enemy.
Namechange needed
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Critus
Chief Marshal
Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 52
From: kpo8914
| Posted: 2012-09-10 09:45
Very good changes, makes the game much more balance.
Kluth: seems to be more suceptible to dmg ( probably cuz the % dmg reduction is off) and the chitinious armor ( in my opinion) is still not and option cuz u sacrifice a lot of signature and cloack time for very little armor, i find elf torpedos very interesting, many players have turn to icc cuz of the new "luth hp problem".
ICC: Very good changes, finally is a decent faction and can fight ugto and luth, the only thing is that emp seems to do a lot of dmg to icc, that is ok but u should improve the rep system, for example move it a little higer cuz at the moment is over somes systems and i have to close it to see them, and open it, that is very inconvinient specialy in combat. Last, tachyon drive should be and automatic repear priority, or make the rep system easy to access and to use it.
UGTO: I havent use this faction yet, but from many combats vs them i have to say all the changes are ok, emp is now a very interesting option for fleet combat.
Great job guys!
PD: the only thing is that the new UGTO long range laser can be a problem for icc, if icc master the long range combat there pulse beam should be equaly efective.
_________________
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2012-09-10 10:19
ive begun using AFEs on my assault destroyer now, and they provide visibly good acceleration and higher top speed. but maneuverability feels the same. energy disappoints slightly but it is balanced by the speed bonus.
flux torpedoes dont seem to do any useful damage, and their subsystem damage is generally unuseful given the loss in overall damage. the range would have been nice had they been damage-oriented, but slow speed and negligible damage makes for a sad case.
EMP cannons are alright. cant see how they could be better.
subsystem repair speed is ok now. drone subsystem repair speed should be slowed down (its insane).
using reflective armor on assault destroyer, i dont see any visible effect of the 50% mass property of reflective armor mass. resistances are more or less fine.
ELF torpedoes have too great energy drain potential. either they should have some drain converted to damage, or k'luth dreads should have some re-tweaking in their weapon loadout (devices, armor are fine).
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2012-09-10 11:51
Quote:
| On 2012-09-10 10:19, Mike Paradox wrote:
ive begun using AFEs on my assault destroyer now, and they provide visibly good acceleration and higher top speed. but maneuverability feels the same. energy disappoints slightly but it is balanced by the speed bonus.
using reflective armor on assault destroyer, i dont see any visible effect of the 50% mass property of reflective armor mass. resistances are more or less fine. |
|
Can answer both in a single answer.
maneuverability is based on Mass of the ship. Engines do not add mass to the ship, Only the Jump-drive, Armor and the Ship-noun (the type of ship itself).
So in-case of the engine only your top-speed & trust (acceleration/deceleration) is affected.
In-case of the armor you should see a little difference. maybe not even 10% but maybe just a degree or two.
E.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2012-09-10 15:32
ugto long range pd beam.
Kluth has the best missile defense with cloak.
Icc has pulse beams and pulse shield.
Ugto now has long range pd beam.
I understand the why. My only problem with it is that it is so effective vs fighters. But i cant think of a better way.
Can pulse shield go back to being 100% work all the time now?
Another problem from a few patches back;
a pulse beam may be able to fire four or even five times befor a salvo of missiles hits but, if it does not destroy all projectiles on its first two shots, you will be hit by splash damage. Actualy works against you when your in a cruiser or under trying to evade fire from harpexes. your pulse will hit 2 or 3 harpex but then they are in splash damage range. You could have avoided them with a juke to the right, but your trusty pulse beams have other plans.
Better to fit chems.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Chewy Squirrel
Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003
Posts: 304
From: NYC
| Posted: 2012-09-11 00:09
Quote:
|
On 2012-09-10 15:32, Defiance{CM7} wrote:
a pulse beam may be able to fire four or even five times befor a salvo of missiles hits but, if it does not destroy all projectiles on its first two shots, you will be hit by splash damage. Actualy works against you when your in a cruiser or under trying to evade fire from harpexes. your pulse will hit 2 or 3 harpex but then they are in splash damage range. You could have avoided them with a juke to the right, but your trusty pulse beams have other plans.
Better to fit chems.
|
|
Yeah pulse beams definitely do need a range bump because the splash from harpex will still wreck you.
_________________
|
Brutality
Marshal
Joined: May 25, 2009
Posts: 659
From: Alaska, USA
| Posted: 2012-09-11 02:42
1) I'm liking the engine changes. The only ship I used PFE on is my AD and I can definitely tell that you guys upped the energy production. 
2) I'm liking the new shields as well. It allows ICC to be more flexible and tank a bit more damage. The skirmish Shields also work well for range battles on ICC cruisers. Haven't really used them on anything else.
3) I was really against the EMP cannons bypassing defences till after the latest patch came out and The auto repairs were fixed. Now it seems like a decent balance between taking Systems damage and auto system repairs.
4) Well I haven't really seen the new dictors deployed to much mostly due to the fact that they soley only have the aura, and other than that, they can't do anything else other than PD. Maybe change the layout so it has some other uses other than just sitting there doing nothing? Just an Idea.
As a rap up, I would like to once again thank the staff for another awesome patch. Seems like the best Version of DS yet!! (From my ICC Point of view at least).
[ This Message was edited by: Fatal Brutality [CE] *COM* on 2012-09-11 02:44 ]
_________________
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2012-09-11 04:00
Quote:
|
4) With the "Hard" Interdictor device removed from the game, what are your opinions on the role of the Interdictor ship now and what changes do you think should be made to it (if any)? What about other ships with command auras?
|
|
The command dreads should have support based auras by nature. With the exception of the UGTO Command Dread they should not be in the middle of enemy formations. Thus, support auras would allow them to contribute more in a more safer position. Again, the UGTO Command Dread will be different as almost every UGTO combat ship will be near/in enemy formations.
Cruisers have much more freedom in approaching the enemy without dying. They can get closer to the action, so I suggest a mix of support and offense auras or just offense.
If we currently look at the current command ships, we can see what it takes to be successful.
UGTO Command Dreadnought:
Picks up where the battle/combat classes leave off. Battle/Combat/Gunboat/Heavy cruisers and destroyers all utilize a main cannon layout with fore focused torpedoes for some closer range firepower. The Combat and Battle Dreadnoughts break this trend, going all out on cannons and cores, forgoing any torps. The UGTO Command Dreadnought is in essence the continuation of a Cannon+Torpedo layout, which in itself embodies UGTO values: hard, sustained damage in close range. It also sacrafices DPS in the form of core weps for utility in build drones and mines. Overall, completely embodies the UGTO spirit of everything being close to the front line. It has both a unique role and is overall, a very successful ship. Role does not conflict with Command Station, one is a front-line assault/fire-support ship while the other is a longer range engy, fire support, and carrier.
Brood:
The Brood is basically a Krill scaled down heavily with utility forced into every corner of the ship. It has a few weapons to deal with enemies, but unlike most Kluth ships it mainly stays in the back supporting with build drones, mining beams, and fighters. Some ships who have archetypes that conflict with factional themes turn out successful, as evidenced by ICC's melee range AD and Kluth's current premier fire support ship, the Ganglia. However, the Brood lacks any focus in any direction. It can build, but if all you want is a durable engy that spams fighters you will take a Colony instead. If you want fire support, take the Ganglia or even Krill. If you want to do both, again the Colony outclasses the Brood. Durable, rear guard support ships don't need speed, thus the Colony beats the Brood in every way except for fleet mobility.
Command Carrier:
Like the Brood, unless I'm missing some crucial utility benefit, the SCB easily outclasses the Command Carrier. It is in the same position as the Brood. Might be a bit better considering the Command Carrier is arguably the best engineer in game. However, that is the extent of its role: a glorified engineer.
(Note: If rebalancing the ICC and Kluth command ships, keep in mind that the CC should not be out fightering the Agincourt which is the supposed ultimate carrier with no utility)
The main part of creating sucessful ships is to make sure they are not outshadowed. The EAD might seem to outclass the Torp cruiser, but the Torp cruiser can more easily slip behind enemy lines and wreak havoc. However, by nature command type ships normally do not need speed. UGTO fixes this by making it a combat oriented support. ICC and Kluth have watered down command type stations.
Similarly we should aim for more diverse roles with these interdictor cruisers. We should not aim for an ultimate support ship as this conflicts with the cruiser's more mobile and frontline nature. Why make a super engineer the size of a cruiser rather than a slower but more utility potential dread if it shouldn't be fighting in the first place?
For example, if the ICC Border Cruiser did not exist, a similar layout might have been good on the ICC Interdictor. It would synergize with ICC philosophy, and as the Border cruiser usually fights in the 800-1000 range, a 1000 range aura would have not been useless. Since ICC has a huge plethora of cruisers, finding yet another unique role can be hard.
A Kluth interdictor could be completely focused on torps. This would allow it pack a punch, but would require the interdictor to face the enemy close range. This also allows it to participate in fleet disruption if it changes these to ELF torps. It will not encroach on the Scale, which is longer range, or the Parasite, which is a shorter range mop-up ship, but it might encroach on the new Scarab. Both are will be utility torp boats, but the utility should be different enough for people to not always choose the interdictor over the Scarab, other than the fact that combat mining is near impossible now. A Shell-like layout with more cannons is also possible, but probably not as useful.
UGTO will have some trouble with finding a dictor layout, but an all torp, all cannon, or all beam layout could work. It will definitely incorporate EMP/Flux if possible to again lend to the enemy disruption theme. A UGTO all torp ships will be very unwieldy as they lack cloaking, but if switched out to flux torps these interdictors can help mop up. On the other hand, an all cannon ship will allow it to catch enemies in an EMP crossfire from closer up, but there is nothing stopping players from just using an all cannon layout as a huge particle gunboat. An all beam layout will be more regulated as flux cannons and chems are not interchangeable.
I would go as far as to make Destroyers with auras. These will be short range auras that have larger negative effects on the enemy. This will make them high risk, high reward ships that play heavily off piloting skill. As they are short ranged, aura stacking is less of an issue as a whole but these ships can still render a small cluster useless. Similar to a smaller ship getting in close to jam the sensors of the enemy, like a true ECM ship. May or may not have substantial weapons.
_________________
|
Mylith
Grand Admiral
Faster than Light
Joined: July 19, 2011
Posts: 507
From: Hivarin, CD+36*15693
| Posted: 2012-09-11 08:57
Quote:
|
On 2012-09-10 08:18, Fattierob wrote:
Now that 1.69 has been out for a week or so, I think it would be prudent to start a feedback thread for some of the balance changes that were introduced in 1.69 and 1.68. So, if you would mind providing feedback on any of the topics listed below, or anything in general, it would be appreciated.
1) Engines were changed to be more consistent across the board. PFE and AFE are now alternatives to IE instead of downgrades and AME received a few tweaks as well. Have these changes resulted in anybody actually using these engines? If you are using them now, do you feel they actually play to their strengths and weaknesses correctly? (PFE and AFE are supposed to be opposite ends of the "slow but better power generation vs faster but less power generation" spectrum)
I've been using PFE on AD and stations even before the buff. They do seem a bit better though- I replaced all the IE on the AD with PFE(as opposed to what I had before, 2IE/2PFE)
2) Armor and shields were rebalanced to be more consistent with HP and resistances. Standard Armor and Active shields are now relatively equal in HP, Reflective Armor and Ablative armor are now very similar in HP and regeneration except for their resistances , Reactive shields were made more viable, Skirmish shields were introduced, and auxiliary shields received a huge boost to useability. On the k'luth side, Chit armor was moved to be an upgrade path of Organic armor instead of the AHR, for an exchange of some mass and signature penalties. With these changes made, do you feel anything could use some tweaking?
Skirmish shields are nice on smaller ships, and I use them on border/heavy cruisers when I do fly them(due to the sabot changes, AC is now my favorite cruiser).
I feel that reactives could use some tweaking, their lack of sig when on is not really useful. Maybe they should reduce sig when off even more than it reduces it normally.
3) EMP is now a threat in the game and with the 1.69 fix to innate gadget repairing it hopefully won't be as strong as it was in 1.68 (and we're working on some number changes to gadget health). Does any changes need to be made to the EMP devices (EMP Cannon, Flux Wave, and Flux Torpedo) now that EMP actually does something? Remember that only the EMP Cannon can disable systems through armor, the other two devices must hit the hull to deal their EMP damage
I think it's pretty much balanced now with the 1.69 fix.
4) With the "Hard" Interdictor device removed from the game, what are your opinions on the role of the Interdictor ship now and what changes do you think should be made to it (if any)? What about other ships with command auras?
At this point, with the dico layout but no dico(only aura), it's pretty much useless. They need weapons.
5) Each faction received a new weapon (Flux Torp, Sabot, Elf Torp) in 1.68. Any info on how they are fairing in combat and if any tweaks are needed would be appreciated
SABOT rockets work excellently.
ELF torps work well on siphons, I think that the siphon is kinda balanced now.
Flux torps are okay. They aren't awesome, just...okay. Maybe a speed buff?
[ This Message was edited by: Fattierob on 2012-09-10 08:21 ]
|
|
_________________
http://twitter.com/DarkSpace7
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2012-09-11 09:21
defiance, padma, point, persi, and a few others where hunting a ugto ss last night. After tracking him a few times, he logged out mid combat with less than 20 hull. Upon logout he became invincible, and my missiles would not fire.. All other weapons had no affect. Thought this was not possible
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Mylith
Grand Admiral
Faster than Light
Joined: July 19, 2011
Posts: 507
From: Hivarin, CD+36*15693
| Posted: 2012-09-11 09:39
Quote:
|
On 2012-09-11 09:21, Defiance{CM7} wrote:
defiance, padma, point, persi, and a few others where hunting a ugto ss last night. After tracking him a few times, he logged out mid combat with less than 20 hull. Upon logout he became invincible, and my missiles would not fire.. All other weapons had no affect. Thought this was not possible
|
|
I've had this happen to me many times, but only with ugto.
_________________
http://twitter.com/DarkSpace7
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-09-12 22:10
Aux shields are still bad as they're single arc fixed to whichever arc the gadget is on. Several ships have full arc armor, so why is a full arc shield a problem especially when you have to give up an aux reactor for it?
Having Skirmish use more power than Reactive and Active use more power than both is not so great, it makes them a bad choice for the Border Cruiser, Frigates, and Scouts. Those ships are pretty much relegated to using Reactives simply for the lower power use even if you don't want to have to deal with a weakness to kinetic.
Also, the in game description for Reactive Shields still needs to be updated, it's the same description it had before the changes and gives no hint about it's resistance/weakness. This is confusing for new players and people who don't keep tabs on the development forum.
The new Interdictor could use some weapons, the auras don't have a big enough effect on battles on their own.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Flux Capacitor
Marshal
Joined: July 30, 2010
Posts: 305
From: the place
| Posted: 2012-09-16 05:05
the interdictor aura using an example:
reduce weapon damage aura: reduces weapon damage of ships by 10%
I fly an interdictor near my group, someone shoots a bunch of missles from 2K range. will the damage be reducted on that gets hit, as long as he she in range of my aura
or
i fly an interdicotr near the enemy group, they all shoot missles at my friendly group 2K gu away. will the damage be reduced for the people that gets hit by the missles fired by the ships that are within range of my dictor.
(and if yes, do i need to stay in range of the missle ship that i want to have dealing reduced damage or is it enough to be there only for the moment of firing the missles?)
in short: do i need to stay close to my friendlies or my enemies for the aura to work?
_________________
my signature is awesome
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-09-16 07:22
You need to affect the host ship.
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
