Free Allegiance Forums

While going through the aleph slowly you should not be taking the damage that you are taking at the moment though so I approve of this change

Some of these changes seem good, others seem awful — either way, I’m down to play a few games and see what happens. Hopefully you’ll have the good sense to fix the @#(!, otherwise I’ll have to deal with your incessant whining when people go back to pcore.

Vortrog wrote:QUOTE (Vortrog @ Feb 22 2018, 12:41 AM) its not a very good coordinated team effort if you cant kill one scout.

You don't know what you're talking about. All it takes is one scout hanging out at the important aleph eyeing the enemy sector and then dumping all his prox on the aleph as the bomber is getting close, and he doesn't even need to actually kill anybody - if the enemy is eyed they will expect prox on the aleph and go slow, and the time lost in slowing down to try to minimize mine damage coming through the aleph is the time needed for the team to assemble and defend, thereby making said run impossible.

this dependency on "yeah we just need to get an uneyed run and we can end the game" is absurd because in any decent sized game even if you are proactively deprobing AT ALL TIMES throughout the game it's easy for anyone with any game knowledge to pop their scout into the important sector for a quick eye, or just park their scout in that sector indefinitely. it happens ALL THE TIME. That was one of Grav's favorite things to do was pick an RT or two and they were commissioned to just sit in enemy sectors eyeing @#(! for the entire duration of the game. and there's no way to beat that if victory is dependent on managing to get uneyed run through one particular aleph - which is often what the game comes down to.

aleph res being one sided may be enough on its own. it's ridiculous that they have been 2 sided, really, because it made them mostly useless for anything but capships whose large shield can actually eat that damage.
I would consider aleph res on HTTs but I don't really think exp needs that. They will have hvy ints, they can uncamp an aleph. Especially with large cons relaying a lead indicator. push a garr con and force cap something like a man.
Sup DOES need help and that's precisely why fighter/bombers were implemented, to counteract how broken the dependency on mounting uneyed bomb runs in late game is. and even so you can prevent uneyed tp2 drops pretty easily, too.

I didn't render mines useless anyway, quit being a baby. I may end up rolling back the change in the next release, or I may change the nerf from mine damage to mine endurance instead.

and none of this addresses either how a few scouts spamming pulse probes can render SBs useless and drag out a game indefinitely, either. but i'm working on that.

Large cons relaying indicator is.... Interesting, but the pedant in me wonders why the built base doesn't relay as well.

Adaven wrote:QUOTE (Adaven @ Feb 22 2018, 10:25 AM) Large cons relaying indicator is.... Interesting, but the pedant in me wonders why the built base doesn't relay as well.

Don't tempt me

Ill wait an see how this goes then. Can i at least ask that prox cargo mass is dropped a bit. If you are gonna take away prox’s teeth then at least let the scout be burdened with less mass

Welp. Sleep-deprived theorycrafting time. To review when I'm saner.

Bye belts. Was nice flying ya.
2k range dumbs should be a ton of fun to play with. I approve. Seek1 being usable for starting fig factions may be nice too. Shame sup will still be dominated by qf3.
Reduced treasures and fast rips remind me of XC. No complaints.
Powerups though, are rather more fun for the top whores than people who more often come out of an engagement dead or desperately running away. Ex: It'll be harder to wear down P1/Babel/whoever with numbers if they can more easily get back to full. Powerups in general favor personal skill over teamwork, and I'm leery of tilting design in that direction, tiny as it may be.
Mine changes + aleph res -> less camping attack runs, hopefully. But. The attacking side will have to camp their own aleph to prevent a rush. Should be fun to try.
AB changes--eh. Depends on whether you think it's too easy or too hard to whack a techbase as is.
Nanite--love ya.
SF changes--I guess we'll see? I'm not sure I like the util/energy mods. The major issue is that no one sits right on miners as is, but maybe a second more will let an int boost from mid-sector? DEFINITELY going to try TF tac `gu.
Pods--Trying to reduce pod suicides on prox during an attack run? Generally approve of taking lifespan down to 100.
Skycap--Worried here. IIRC skycap had troubles with early explosions at 1k proj speed and 10m AOE, this might replicate that. Unless the premature explosions were fixed in a code change? I forget.
Starting/total money--Starting money changes will screw with early faction balance, even if people default to high money. Might not be a bad thing, but will be notable. Total--similar comment. Also. The setting you changed is required money for prosperity wins. I am moderately concerned that it was not obvious that the number 72000 has no relation to total money in a game. It's $120k of he3 per side at normal levels.

Other comments:
QUOTE cashboxes are highly unlikely to cluster like 4 at a time (it's ridiculous to have 4k cash floating in space in the same location - that's a free miner)[/quote]
4 x $500 = $2000 != $4000 != miner
Also, the cash changes in the log aren't in the core you posted on discord.
QUOTE I had planned on increasing the physical size of alephs as well for that same purpose but I have yet to find that option in ICE *shrug*[/quote]
Does not exist in ICE.
QUOTE and none of this addresses either how a few scouts spamming pulse probes can render SBs useless and drag out a game indefinitely, either. but i'm working on that.[/quote]
Scouts haven't been able to mount pp for years....

Core design thing: Aleph res and tech con pushes take significant amounts of money. I always thought spending money to attack was poor design. If you fail, you have nothing to do but camp while getting more.

Nightflame wrote:QUOTE (Nightflame @ Feb 22 2018, 12:49 PM) Bye belts. Was nice flying ya.

What?
QUOTE Shame sup will still be dominated by qf3.[/quote]
It's been nerfed twice in the past 2 weeks?
QUOTE Powerups though, are rather more fun for the top whores than people who more often come out of an engagement dead or desperately running away. Ex: It'll be harder to wear down P1/Babel/whoever with numbers if they can more easily get back to full. Powerups in general favor personal skill over teamwork, and I'm leery of tilting design in that direction, tiny as it may be.[/quote]
Who cares, no need to chase someone off the map while they run around picking up powerups. that's not a productive use of time. Plus disincentivizing the most competitive players from playing is a major reason why games die. incentivizing them is great, especially if it doesn't have a large impact on the actual outcome of a game.
QUOTE AB changes--eh. Depends on whether you think it's too easy or too hard to whack a techbase as is.[/quote]
It's already been much too easy too kill a small base if you get in the sector and now i'm making it much easier to get into a sector. you should have to keep a bomber alive for more than 5 seconds upon entering a sector before being able to spam 3 abs quickly and having a base die after the bomber is dead. also I buffed nan1 and nanite max range?
QUOTE Pods--Trying to reduce pod suicides on prox during an attack run? Generally approve of taking lifespan down to 100.[/quote]
moreover trying to make it slightly more difficult to pk on accident upon killing someone. but it's fine if it's more difficult to pk yourself on prox being that I cut max float time in half anyway.
QUOTE Skycap--Worried here. IIRC skycap had troubles with early explosions at 1k proj speed and 10m AOE, this might replicate that. Unless the premature explosions were fixed in a code change? I forget.[/quote]
only one way to find out
QUOTE Starting/total money--Starting money changes will screw with early faction balance, even if people default to high money. Might not be a bad thing, but will be notable. Total--similar comment. Also. The setting you changed is required money for prosperity wins. I am moderately concerned that it was not obvious that the number 72000 has no relation to total money in a game. It's $120k of he3 per side at normal levels.[/quote]
Literally any money setting anybody ever plays on ever will "screw with early faction balance". Any time a different money setting is picked, it affects the balance. and there's like 5 people in the community that will need to make note if it if they want to know exactly how every credit shakes out in the beginning of the game. What the hell is a prosperity win? That's not part of any game mode that I can find. Starting money and Total money are next to each other in ICE just like they are in the game settings. It SHOULD affect the maximum amount of he3 on the map.

QUOTE Other comments:

4 x $500 = $2000 != $4000 != miner
Also, the cash changes in the log aren't in the core you posted on discord.[/quote]
And neither is everything in here the same as it was in the discord discussion that I had literally with myself
It's an exaggeration. 1 payday + 4 cashboxes into a miner and then 2 more paydays in 2 minutes as miner builds? that's basically a miner.
QUOTE Scouts haven't been able to mount pp for years....[/quote]
Guess that worked itself out while i was banned, then. sort of. except it's the same problem with ints you can just fill their cargo with pps since they don't need extra fuel and ammo when pulsing out sbs at their own base/aleph.

QUOTE Core design thing: Aleph res and tech con pushes take significant amounts of money. I always thought spending money to attack was poor design. If you fail, you have nothing to do but camp while getting more.[/quote]
You should be able to win if you have the money. That's the point. I've buffed con push viability drastically between mine nerfs and cons buffs, and made aleph res useful for the first time. I'm not sure what your point is here.

Sheriff Metz wrote:QUOTE (Sheriff Metz @ Feb 22 2018, 07:05 PM) Literally any money setting anybody ever plays on ever will "screw with early faction balance". Any time a different money setting is picked, it affects the balance. and there's like 5 people in the community that will need to make note if it if they want to know exactly how every credit shakes out in the beginning of the game. What the hell is a prosperity win? That's not part of any game mode that I can find. Starting money and Total money are next to each other in ICE just like they are in the game settings. It SHOULD affect the maximum amount of he3 on the map.

Yeah.

Not going to argue most points.
QUOTE It's been nerfed twice in the past 2 weeks?[/quote]
Seek3's in starbase. It was a prediction that this means most sup games will go for QF3 first, and seek3 belatedly, if at all.
QUOTE Literally any money setting anybody ever plays on ever will "screw with early faction balance".[/quote]
True enough, but I thought it merited a mention. And I'm one of the five. So.
QUOTE What the hell is a prosperity win? That's not part of any game mode that I can find. Starting money and Total money are next to each other in ICE just like they are in the game settings. It SHOULD affect the maximum amount of he3 on the map.[/quote]
Game settings > win conditions:
Conquest. Territorial. Prosperity. Artifact run. Flags. Required kills. Countdown.
QUOTE Starting money and Total money are next to each other in ICE just like they are in the game settings. It SHOULD affect the maximum amount of he3 on the map.[/quote]
Global 09: AmountHe3. That's the one that controls total He3 on the map.
QUOTE Guess that worked itself out while i was banned, then. sort of. except it's the same problem with ints you can just fill their cargo with pps since they don't need extra fuel and ammo when pulsing out sbs at their own base/aleph.[/quote]
PP2's also down to 3k scan range while scouts are at 2.8k. I don't disagree that PPs can lead to degenerate play, but I thought I'd point this out.
QUOTE You should be able to win if you have the money. That's the point. I've buffed con push viability drastically between mine nerfs and cons buffs, and made aleph res useful for the first time. I'm not sure what your point is here.[/quote]
Was incoherent on my part. The changes you've made are an improvement most certainly. I just prefer that it be made easier to win without pushing a 20k con, in addition to being able to win if you have tons of money, so that the game does not stall out if neither side has said tons amounts of money. More, spending money per attack discourages attacking on balance, pushing people to play more defensively.