The EXP problem

mcwarren4 · Post by **mcwarren4** » Tue May 06, 2008 12:15 pm

I think making everything else more powerful to counter ints is a bad idea. You can't keep upping everything's strengths because eventually you have all ships being the same thing. Years and years ago supremacy was stupidly overpowered for awhile. Now expansion is stupidly overpowered. Why don't we just find that midway point?

madpeople · Post by **madpeople** » Tue May 06, 2008 12:58 pm

person A: "i think X is broken and needs fixing"
person B: "i agree, let's change everything else except X until X works"
person C: "why don't we just change X since that's the thing which is broken?"

...

Grim_Reaper_4u · Post by **Grim_Reaper_4u** » Tue May 06, 2008 1:20 pm

takingarms1 wrote:QUOTE (takingarms1 @ May 6 2008, 01:35 PM) .... The fuel nerf I think is the safest way to go........

......That said, the fuel nerf isn't so bad, since rarely do I ever run out of fuel in an int except when I'm 2 sectors from base......

Ahem, so you propose to balance ints by nerfing something that you rarely need /rolleyes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":roll:" border="0" alt="rolleyes.gif" /> /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

This is exactly the way that most int ho's think : "Mmmmm which part of my ueber int don't i need, OK lets let em nerf that to make em happy while i keep my ueber int just the way i like it" /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

ints don't need the agility to kill bombers or scouts, how about we remove some of their agility?

Youngmoose · Post by **Youngmoose** » Tue May 06, 2008 2:11 pm

Can I repeat myself? Nerf miniguns against cons and miners, and people will not want to use ints to boost to adjacent sectors to rush them.

theTroy · Post by **theTroy** » Tue May 06, 2008 2:16 pm

Youngmoose wrote:QUOTE (Youngmoose @ May 6 2008, 06:11 AM) Can I repeat myself? Nerf miniguns against cons and miners, and people will not want to use ints to boost to adjacent sectors to rush them.

Point is to allow ints to rush adjacent sector, but make it a big trouble to rush the next sector to the adjacent. But my guess is that only one idea is being discussed here..

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Tue May 06, 2008 2:19 pm

Grim_Reaper_4u wrote:QUOTE (Grim_Reaper_4u @ May 6 2008, 09:20 AM) Ahem, so you propose to balance ints by nerfing something that you rarely need /rolleyes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":roll:" border="0" alt="rolleyes.gif" /> /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

That's not exactly what I said. What I said is that I run out of fuel *only* when 2 sectors away from base. So basically nerfing int fuel won't nerf ints for fighting close to home. It will remove the ability for ints to be fun and viable 2 sectors from home.

QUOTE ints don't need the agility to kill bombers or scouts, how about we remove some of their agility?[/quote]

Because if you did that me and very many others wouldn't play your core, because it wouldn't be fun anymore.

@McW I agree with the philosophy that making everything the same would be a bad idea. But restating my concept as "X is a problem, so change everything else" is really misstating it. Balance is delicate and changing a small thing can often have a big impact overall. If sup had a better economy than exp, that might be enough to bring things into balance. poe-tay-toe, poh-tah-to.

@moose, have you ever noticed that miniguns are substantially less effective vs con and miner hull than gatts? It's because they've already been nerfed vs util hull. Ints have to be able to kill cons and miners, or they will be useless, so going to far in the direction of nerfing mini vs util hull isn't a good idea.

Grim_Reaper_4u · Post by **Grim_Reaper_4u** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:18 pm

takingarms1 wrote:QUOTE (takingarms1 @ May 6 2008, 04:19 PM) Because if you did that me and very many others wouldn't play your core, because it wouldn't be fun anymore.

The problem is that current ints don't make it fun for peeps to fly figs, sf, scouts or bombers. Wouldn't it be a lot better if all ships had the same "fun" factor? Isn't it silly to keep ints the way they are because peeps love the way they handle and how easily they shred anything they encounter? We might as well make 1 big DM core with only ints and only play DM. /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

If the only reason you play Alleg is to fly ints and whore down easy targets then maybe it would be best if all peeps who feel like you left or only played on DN while the rest of us who like balanced games and like to fly different craft play on the community core /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I'm not attacking you Taking but your argument is representative of what I would call the "int ho" faction within Alleg, who have historically opposed all Exp balancing/nerfing, no matter how much the majority of the community felt it was warranted. I really hope in building the community core that sanity for once will take precedence over loudmouthness /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> We'll see if Aarm has the stones to implement changes which are opposed by this very vocal minority.

Just my 2 cents.

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:30 pm

Grim_Reaper_4u wrote:QUOTE (Grim_Reaper_4u @ May 6 2008, 11:18 AM) If the only reason you play Alleg is to fly ints and whore down easy targets then maybe it would be best if all peeps who feel like you left or only played on DN while the rest of us who like balanced games and like to fly different craft play on the community core /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

My 2 cents is that, like Battlestar Galactica, "All this has happened before, and it will happen again."

A few years ago, we had A+ core, and Spunky decided to impose the fuel nerf (among other changes). The int ho faction, as label them, was incensed. Then DN came into the picture. DN and A+ competed for a while, but within a short time the masses chose DN and A+ games were rare (even before the bugs that plagued that core cropped up). So if history is to guide us, I believe the int ho faction is in the overwhelming majority, and the small minority perpetrating "loudmouthness" is the faction that you represent.

Now to be fair to what I have been saying in this thread, I have not opposed balancing EXP at all. Recall that I in fact made this topic, and I made it because I felt that EXP as a tech path was overpowered. But balancing EXP as a tech path is NOT the same thing, to my mind, as balancing interceptors versus all other ships.

People hate flying belter ints. If you make all ints like that, you're going to really take a lot of fun away from the game, and nobody will play the core. I would much rather see the tech paths as a whole being balanced. I think one of the main reasons that EXP is so damn dominant is that it is economically the best tech path. I don't think the fuel nerf is really going to make a huge difference with that, but I could be wrong, so lets see what happens.

Death3D · Post by **Death3D** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:50 pm

I'm hoping for a result in which every game isn't a race to Adv Exp and hence Hvys.

I REALLY hope Alleg becomes a game in which you have to mix and match techs, even Enh ones. After all, maybe it's just me, but I feel as though Exp -> Adv Exp jump means the most instant-domination of them all (compared to Tac and Sup, which I find them to mean just one extra missile per slot each, and maybe galvs and hvy booster for adv figs if you are willing to give the opposing Exp team sparse boost3's).

Maybe it is only me, but I'd like to see a day for Alleg in which the interaction of the techpaths leads to awesome diversification of gameplay (which, in my opinion, doesn't happen often enough).

Lykourgos · Post by **Lykourgos** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:54 pm

Grim, I'm aware that the developers had a different vision in mind for ints- I don't think we need to be bound by their vision at this point, though. Arguments about exp winning too many games and being used too often are much more convincing then "this is what devs originally wanted ints to be like, before they had any idea how the game was going to turn out."

And yes, I have the most fun flying ints- because they are the most maneuverable ship, and that turns out to be a very fun part of Allegiance. Make figs more maneuverable and they will be more fun to fly; isn't it better to add to the fun in a core instead of reducing it for the sake of balance?

And saying to TA "if you don't agree with me about this then you should just go play another core/quit Allegiance" is also pretty hard against the spirit of the community core.

Incidentally, I'm going to command about 50 Sup/Tac games this week and win them all. You gentlemen are all invited to command against me.